(quoted from post at 20:22:17 12/13/13) Saab V4 was from the Ford Taunus front drive, was also designed for a midship/rear engine design that didn"t make it to market- but some styling features of Mustang. The V4 design meant a "longitudinal" mounting similar to Renaults, same transaxle pattern instead of the BMC mini cross engine mounting that had some spacing issues for radiator, transmission, drive axles. V4 got short nose of a cross mount, inline drivetrain. Lancia had a similar narrow angle V4, design is known advantage of size, known vibration issue, known induction advantages and exhaust location. The V6 Taunus/Capri derived from it- same cylinder angle, same high mounted camshaft, same short pushrods, same shorter , more even induction path- the 4.1 Ford Ranger pickups engine is a long stroke derivative.
SAAB was looking for a engine that could fit in the 3 cylinder frame/body and meet EPA standards in some markets(US) at the time and near future(Common Market) while getting the newer body figured out. The Ford V4 tucked in nicely, Ford was willing seller to a not major car competitor that gave some aircraft research to Ford Defense. The Chrysler slant six designers had a minor problem with their proposed OHV replacement for the old flathead 6- the new car bodies of the compacts were sized for the old flathead and tooling, molds had to be paid for first before newer higher hood body could be made, lots of sheet metal already being stamped. Some other users of the flathead 6 also said they couldn"t afford to change engine compartments if Chrysler quit making the flathead and didn"t have one to fit- was a Gleaner(?) model combine that otherwise would have to buy Continental flatheads or Studebaker. SO, slant the new OHV over until it can fit under hood of Darts, tuck into Gleaners. While you have it slanted- put the starter toward upper left of bellhousing for fair access, do the long U for intake manifold for more even induction compared to "log" manifold and get center cylinder less rich fouling, end cylinders less lean out compared to tucked in manifold. Water pump, power steering pump less crowded on left side also. It worked good at 170 cubic inches and little bore and 4 inch stroke got to the 225 inch size that had good torque, decent RPM from light piston, and good flame front of smaller bore meant slight advantage on EPA testing. a minor advantage in Illinois/Chicago when I was driving delivery there was the hp tax was under the big sticker price- a 225 Dodge got a under 35hp sticker, a 250 Chevy, 240 Ford got a over 35hp sticker and cost another $20.00 or so and insurance class followed the tax class. For the Jeep people with FC170 frames- the 225 OHV could be tucked into the engine compartment. It was tight, needed some shoehorning and hammer the side panels- but the longer, higher Ford and Chevys 7 bearing crank, big bores wouldn"t fit without the cutting torch and welder work. some other hot rodding with the slant 6 was done in some similar tight clearance situations- the small V8 for the Chrysler compacts had same size problem and the 273 had low manifolds, reduced airfilter size, tight exhausts--and was tucked into the Roots bodied Sunbeam Alpines as competitor to the Ford engine AC Bristol conversions that lead to the Cobra. The adapter plates to swap in the slant six had already been made for the hot rodders doing slant 6 into Triumph Heralds, Studabakers and the 273 V8 had bolt pattern compatibility.
RN
