• Welcome to SVTPerformance!

5.0l vs. 6.2l

Discussion in 'Boss Series Engines' started by americansteel, Oct 5, 2013.

  1. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    6.2l 4.02x3.74 379" un ported factory head's, sheet metal intake 105MM TB, free Boss injectors, short tube headers, factory lift .510 lift cams shorter duration, 10.1:1 CR factory twin plugs stayed. 2003 crown Vic PCM used with CNC'd cam timing sprocket 4.6l sensors retained with new harness. PCM calibrated for engine size. 6500RPM 521.4HP
    all together I paid a little under 4K.

    5.0l 3.63x3.65 302" MMR intake, 86MM TB, boss injectors, factory PCM stock 11:1 CR, stock un ported heads, forged rotating kit, stage 2 cams
    7450RPM 541.2HP sole intention was to use this 5.0l in a track car for use here in Delaware. the 6.2l was my engine built for use in my 03 crown Vic that I shortened. a street driven car only. my tuner decided to try one spark plug he un plugged the wire, the engine ran fine two plugs were used no gains in power.
     
  2. RaceRedSnake

    RaceRedSnake Member Established Member

    Messages:
    168
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Interesting comparisons. How well does the 6.2 fit in the Crown Vic ?
     
  3. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    like a glove. plenty of room.
    notice the RPM differences? the 5.0 was built for high revving on the street course. if factory induction and stock cams or bigger cams were retained in the 5.0, that engine wouldn't even be making 460hp. the 6.2 made 521hp with ease at a very street able RPM. if I were to use the 6.2l in the same car with the intentions of spinning it high the 6.2l would be making at least 630hp.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2013
  4. cottondoc

    cottondoc Member Established Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    north augusta, sc
    I really wish Ford would make a 4 valve head, performance version of the 6.2L. I know the coyote beats GMs LS motors pretty well, but I'm tired of always being down on cubic inches to the LS and Hemi motors. What is the bore spacing of the 6.2L? I think I remember reading something somewhere that said it had plenty of room to go to 4.125". A 4.125" bore x 4.00 inch stroke 427 cubic inch motor based on the 6.2L would have incredible performance potential, even with the 2 valve heads. If Ford made a 427ci, 4 valve head version, nothing else currently made could touch it. Oh well, I'm pretty sure Ford will never do anything like that though. I guess we will just have to be happy spinning coyotes to 8K rpm or using forced induction with them to make big power.
     
  5. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    there isn't a need for a 4 valve head when the engine has a sufficient bore size at 4.00". the 4 valve head ford has produced was a quick way to make more power with out having to build another engine. yet the 4 valve head and 3 valve head only showed what the problem was not fix it.
    with a set of 4 valve heads on the 6.2l that motor will easily make 640HP no problem under 7200RPM. the bore spacing I cant remember. ford isn't going to do anything with the 6.2l performance wise that is, its not feasible to them to do such thing because its a truck only engine for low end torque and power. you are right about cubic inches though! remember the coyote mustang only beats the Camaro because of the weight difference. in reality a 6.2LS would demolish anything coyote. you can only take the 6.2l out to 4.050 and a max of 4.00" stroke
    with a big bore kit you can put a 4.125" sleeve in the block I have 2 I built for a guy near me. that engine made something like 920HP? I think.
    aftermarket parts are not cheap a stroker is around 4K ported heads are $2.500 and flow 343 pistons aren't too bad and so is rods, better oil pump and gears you will need. this is from livernois motor sports.
    I port my own heads, the cam kits are $1.300 and with 9.8:1 CR and a stock head that flows 302cfm it got me to 521hp with a bigger throttle body and a manifold I fabbed up. I can make more power and for cheaper what you can do to a 5.0l coyote.
     
  6. fs308

    fs308 4v noob Established Member

    Messages:
    745
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Location:
    KY
    would coyote heads work on the 6.2 like with the older 4.6/5.4 where you could interchange 2v and 4v heads?
     
  7. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    no they don't interchange! how ever stock heads the 6.2l outflows the 5.0 head. I think the most you can get out of the 5.0 heads is 335CFM. the 6.2l flows 304. ported they flow 340 and welded/ported I get 400CFM.
     
  8. SDDL-UP

    SDDL-UP New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Location:
    Montana
    Thanks for posting the comparison! No doubt the 6.2 has tons of performance potential... Even with the 2 valve heads.
     
  9. GCubersoldat

    GCubersoldat Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    1,004
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Location:
    Miami
    Inb4 Ford fan boys rage.

    IMHO Chevy has always relied on cubes for power. As it stands now the 5.0l spins to the moon but the 6.2l draws its power from displacement.

    When I was in the market for a car I extensively looked into the Camaro as well as the mustang. Both comparisons were with an M6 setup. The raw power from the 6.2l down low was undeniable but once you go top end past 5k it just falls on its face. The 5.0l after 3.5k rpms just kept pulling to redline..only complaint I have is that the 6.2L is cheaper to mod and sounds x500 times sexier
     
  10. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    no prob! you're right the 6.2l has a lot of potential. and in naturally aspirated form, that engine is nasty and torque wise? very nice.
     
  11. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    you're right however the problem with ford was since 95 they have relied on the tiny bore mod motors which every knows what happened when they went up against an LS1! it was stupid for ford to make a V8 engine with a 3.555 bore. its stupid! the LS3 in my opinion is a by far better engine in performance terms but in sense of reliability no pushrod engine can beat a OHC engine. now the current Camaro only loses to the high revving mustang because of the weight difference. im a ford guy but I despise ford's 4.6l and 5.4l engines as with the 5.0! the 6.2L SOHC is bad as hell. the 5.0 in stock form makes 445HP at 6600RPM who spins their car that high on the street where? my crown vic makes 481HP at 6000RPM and 521HP at 6500RPM. this is what cubic inches does for ya especially the torque it gives you. street driven cars rarely see 6K.. down low the mustang is awful. think about this, I build engines as a hobby and for extra money because its something I love to do, people come to me and my tuner asking about cams headers tunes etc. etc. now what I tell guys is that if you spend $1500 on 4 cams from comp easy $350-$700 for headers $300 plus for a tuner you have invested nearly $2500 and the labor alone is $60 an hour that's a lot of money spent on just labor! nearly 3K will be spent on a mustang and all you get is a measly 54HP if that yet you raise your RPM to 7K to 7400K depending upon duration of cams selected. guys turn away when they find this out. you will never see that kind of gain up top when you don't spin your car that high in the first place its a waste even considering buying such bolt-on's. if you want more power buy a blower add a little boost and you have 550HP at stock RPM level.
     
  12. SStampede

    SStampede New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Location:
    Oh
    AmericanSteel, I sent you an email also, but can you post some pics of the intake? And what do you mean by a shortened?

    Thanks.
     
  13. americansteel

    americansteel Banned

    Messages:
    281
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Location:
    delaware
    I shortened the crown vic by 5 inches so its a 2 door now.
    ill upload a couple this weekend.
    I didn't get any email btw
     
  14. SStampede

    SStampede New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Location:
    Oh
    I thought so!!! Can't wait to see it.

    SStang.
     
  15. SStampede

    SStampede New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Location:
    Oh
    Just a reminder for the pics.

    Thanks.
     
  16. SDDL-UP

    SDDL-UP New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Location:
    Montana
    I think this years Engine Masters challenge could include the SOHC 6.2. If so we may have a new winner this year.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2014
  17. uedlose

    uedlose Member Established Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Location:
    MiddleWay/Charles Town WV
    know of any new edge 6.2 swaps out there I have though about trying this in my 99 Cobra but just never really looked much into it.
     
  18. SmokeGreyHatch

    SmokeGreyHatch Member Established Member

    Messages:
    544
    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    Gilbert, AZ
  19. uedlose

    uedlose Member Established Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Location:
    MiddleWay/Charles Town WV
    Thanks for the link I will be following along.
     
  20. lhill1995

    lhill1995 New Member Established Member

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Location:
    Trinity, TX
    I have an 03 super duty 4x4 and was going to look into this swap. I can fab but not much experience with wiring. I noticed you have a custom sheet metal intake, used the 4.6 sensors with new harness, and reprogrammed the PCM for the increased engine size. Does this mean you just plugged up your old sensors and were ready to run with new programming or was there still a good bit of rewiring to do?
     

Share This Page