I am looking for the power curve or at least peak hp and torque with RPMs for the '95 Escort with a 1.9 L four-popper. (I am asking here because MotorHaven still seems unavailable).

 

Does yours have automatic or 5-speed? I will find both in my old magazines. Gimme a day or two though.

 

It is a 5 speed. Thanks.

 

Well, havent found peak hp @ rpm, I have over a thousand magazines and there not well organized. I did get hp figures for the 1.9L-88hp. The 1.8L DOHC makes 127. I'm still digging.

 

I don't want you to knock yourself out too much (it is not critical that I find out), but chances are, like me, if you know it is somewhere, you can't stand it until you find it. Besides, going through the old magazines brings up many other interesting old articles. I know the hp on the 1.8 was a lot higher. My understanding is the 1.8 is a Mazda engine with DOHC, whereas the 1.9 is SOHC. Actually, I would expect the 1.9 to be a more durable engine because of its lower power output and likely lower RPM range. They do put hp (and maybe torque) on the carpoint web page, but without the RPMs. Ideally I hoped to get a curve with power at several RPMs across the band, but those are generally hard to find.

 

TallPaul: 108 ftlbs of torque. But at what RPM? I could never find any rev data. I like the 1.9L My 93 wagon has 155,000 and runs great. Easy to work on and reliable. Reminds me of the old VWs except better. 5spd, heat, a/c and good mileage.

Chris

 

I just retired my 95 Escort 1.9L Auto and picked up a 2001 Ranger. The Escort was a good car and mine still has all of the original body and paint but the Trans. decided that I didn't need 3rd and 4th gears any more. It secided this at 72/74mph while the cruise control was driving BIG surprise suddenly going into 2nd at 70+. Anyway they said that the trans was a Mazda unit and would cost around $1500 plus labor to replace it (about $2K total) and seeing it had over 175,000mi. I said it's time to retire it. But the engine still runs just fine. I really got to like that little car.
But I like the Ranger better.

 

Carpoint has the 108 torque and 88 hp, but no RPMs. They give RPMs for the '97 2.0L 110h@5000 and 125tq@3750. I would expect the 1.9's RPMs at the peaks are not all that far off from the 2.0. Anyone remember the first Pinto with the 1.6L inline pushrod four banger? After that everything in four bangers was overhead cam.

INLINE SIX POWER!
300 Cubic Inches of Low RPM Truck Torque! And twin-I-beams too!

 

I don't believe that I ever saw any engine in a Pinto aside from the standard 1.7L (English Formula Ford Race Engine or Kent motor) and the 2.3L. That's not counting the odd ones that people stuffed 351's in (Dino Don Nicholson remember him). Also the 2.3L had an odd cam arrangement in that if you wanted to change it. You first had to take the head off because the cam bearings were different sized. They were progressively smaller toward the front so you had to take it out from the rear. Does anyone know if the current production 2.5L has the same arrangement?

 

Well I could be mistaken, but they had a pushrod 4-cyl around that displacement. 1600 cc and 2000 cc stick out in my mind (the early days they rated them here by cc, not liter), with the 2000 being OHC. I can look it up tonight as I have a 1970ish edition of Peterson's Complete Ford Book. That engine may have been German from the early Mercury Capri.

 

You might be right. You reminded me of hearing things about the German engine having metric bolts or something. At the time it was considered a new thing. Many domestic dealers mechanics didn’t have metric tools at the time and it caused a lot of nasty comments.

 

My neighbor up the road had a Capri when they first came out. What a great running little car that was!

 

Fun facts to know & tell...

The EAO 2.0L OHC from the 71 to 74 Capri
was used in the Pinto from the same era,
hence the "Pinto" moniker.
The push rod 1.6L is still being made today,
for industrial power plants, as a 1.3L and
1.6L. The "Pinto" 2.0L was available in
Europe as a 1.6L also, and is the basis for
Formula 2000 in this country. The "Lima"
range of OHC engines include the 2.0L, 2.3L
and 2.5L from the Ranger PU's have nothing in
common with the EAO's, other than they were
both OHC Ford engines...

Confused yet?? Don't get me started on Lotus
Variants of the EAO's...

Steve & the Rockette

 

Uncle! That's enough I give up!!!
Confusing isn't it.
OK which one was the basis of the Kent formula Ford race engine?
Formula Ford was at one time the kindergarten for formula 1 Racing in Europe, kind of like an upscale Formula Vee.

 

That would be the 1600 pushrod engine,
Which happens to be the base block for
most of the Lotus variants, ie; the
Lotus twin cams... Then there is the
EAO based Cossie DOHC 2 and 4 valve
engines...

I better quit while I'm ahead...
But I will say that a Mk3 Capri with
a Cossie 1.7L Turbo engine won the
German Touring Car Championship back
in the early 80's, and was making in
excess of 700HP...

Steve & the Rockette