FPC V8 power estimates and tuning potential

[Ry_Trapp0]

It sounds like the 5.2 pistons will be riding on Plasma Transfer Wire Ark linerless cylinder boars :nonono: Will it come with PM rods and 100 mm bore spacing as well? Couple that with the problems Ford was having with harmonics with the FPC and I'm not feeling it with this engine in a boosted application.

Something tells me Ford is slowly writing the modder out of the picture to the point where the only updated you "should" do on the car is intake and exhaust leaving the rest alone. This is already happened to a degree with the 5.8 GT500 engine as not many are modding them anywhere near what 4.6 and 5.4 guys were doing.

this post holds zero water. feel free to list the problems that the PTWA bore lining has caused, because i have yet to here of any. you can't over bore it? get over it and sleeve the block if you're a part of the 1% that's REALLY going that far. i asked MMR(IIRC) how much trouble it was to cut the PTWA liners in their sleeved blocks and they said it was no more difficult than cutting an iron liner. feel free to post some examples from the GT-R community as well, seeing as how they were the first to push a PTWA lined block.
PM rods? i'm not a fan of them either, but when they're holding up to 800+RWHP in GT500s - in all GT500 years, from the original 500HP '07s up through the 662HP 7000RPM '14s - and 600+RWHP in boss 302s, you can take your strength/durability complaints out of here.
100MM bore spacing? that's been unchanged since 1992, yes, in those 4.6s and 5.4s that you talk about. complain about it all you want, but the investment into machinery to manufacture a block with a larger bore spacing would be into the multi-millions. and, as far as putting a version of the boss 6.2l in there, this entire chassis was designed from the outset to hold the physically smaller 5.0l.
and, as far as the harmonic 'problems' are concerned, these are firstly blown WAY out of proportion by people who don't know what the hell they're talking about but like to pretend that they do by quoting the latest car & driver article. and, second, they're "problems" that ANY flat plane engine experiences. you realize that inline 4 cylinders - every inline 4 cylinder - experience these same harmonic "problems", right? that's why they are inherently "rough" engines by NVH standards, and why so many of them come with balance shafts today. and, for the record, there have been a LOT(!!!) of inline 4 cylinders produced in the history of the automobile(including in the '80s and later) that don't have a balance shaft or any other equipment to mitigate the inherent harmonics of the design.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

Not many people understand how changing the bore spacing affects the tooling required to build an engine. Cranks, cams, cylinder heads, blocks, gaskets, v covers, oil pan, assembly fixtures etc etc. Throw in the testing and you're looking at tremendous dollars.
All that being said, a re-purposed Hurricane line with scaled up coyote 4V heads would be an animal that would simply destroy anything the general could build with pushrods, and would shave significant cost from an all new unique engine platform. Can't but in my wildest dreams see them ever doing it though.

 

[SlowSVT]

this post holds zero water. feel free to list the problems that the PTWA bore lining has caused, because i have yet to here of any. you can't over bore it? get over it and sleeve the block if you're a part of the 1% that's REALLY going that far. i asked MMR(IIRC) how much trouble it was to cut the PTWA liners in their sleeved blocks and they said it was no more difficult than cutting an iron liner. feel free to post some examples from the GT-R community as well, seeing as how they were the first to push a PTWA lined block.

PTWA and nikesil surface is only a few .001" thick and will be hard on cutter tools since it its almost as hard as diamond. Unfortunately a seized piston will have no problem broaching either cylinder coatings. Boring what little material that is left between the cylinders and adding sleeve this is what you get for $3600

Fine for NA but not something I would want for big boost which is what I was getting at all along. Your one lean injector or bad batch of gas away from writing big checks. Score a PTWA block chances are a majority of them will be going straight to the dumpster. Most hot rod guys would not want anything to do with this type of block, it's not really serviceable. This is not a good trend for all of us!

PM rods? i'm not a fan of them either, but when they're holding up to 800+RWHP in GT500s - in all GT500 years, from the original 500HP '07s up through the 662HP 7000RPM '14s - and 600+RWHP in boss 302s, you can take your strength/durability complaints out of here.

I think the owner of this 5.8 has a few "complaints about strength/durability".

100MM bore spacing? that's been unchanged since 1992, yes, in those 4.6s and 5.4s that you talk about. complain about it all you want, but the investment into machinery to manufacture a block with a larger bore spacing would be into the multi-millions. and, as far as putting a version of the boss 6.2l in there, this entire chassis was designed from the outset to hold the physically smaller 5.0l.

In other words we are just getting the next generation mod motor first produced 22 years ago not a "ground-up" new engine which means the engineers were tied to the old engine geometry. Having been a design engineer for over 30 years I know better than anybody how many compromises have to be made when the bean counters limit your design freedom and I'm sure the engineers at Ford were not happy about it. Adding just a 1/4" between the bores now you can beef-up the integrity of the block, add sleeves and get it repaired several times without worry at 1/4 the price. Imagine all the things Ford could have done if they were working from a clean sheet of paper ........ or display :nonono:

and, as far as the harmonic 'problems' are concerned, these are firstly blown WAY out of proportion by people who don't know what the hell they're talking about but like to pretend that they do by quoting the latest car & driver article. and, second, they're "problems" that ANY flat plane engine experiences. you realize that inline 4 cylinders - every inline 4 cylinder - experience these same harmonic "problems", right? that's why they are inherently "rough" engines by NVH standards, and why so many of them come with balance shafts today. and, for the record, there have been a LOT(!!!) of inline 4 cylinders produced in the history of the automobile(including in the '80s and later) that don't have a balance shaft or any other equipment to mitigate the inherent harmonics of the design.

The fact Ford had difficulty with the integrity of the block with the FPC is just one of those things but it's a problem that was not there before and they had to resort to adding components to counter it. Flat plane crank V8's have been around for decades but are not widely used and there are good reasons for that. The GT350 is going to make all that hp with revs so a FPC makes sense in that respect. It was stated this crank would not be used in a boosted application. I'm sure the new crank will work well wherever they put it.

My intention on my first post was not to piss all over the GT350 engine (nor the 5.8) they are quite impressive just raising a red flag on a few aspects which you seemed to take quite personally. To be honest reading your post was basically someone expressing strong views, being dismissive with a few inflammatory statements thrown in for good measure. Try toning your rhetoric down and respond like an adult. It would have been much more interesting to hear your views in a more balanced and respectful manner and not all that flame. "Debate" is way more interesting

 

[tt335ci03cobra]

I don't think the sky will fall regarding this combo of bore, liner, and fpc (fpc's have been around about a century actually. First v8's were all fpc's).

The liners are very strong. Also, I think many aren't going full tilt on trinity' because they've already built a 1000whp machine and now want a super reliable 750-800whp bolt on machine. That's the case with 4 of the 5 13+ gt500 owners I know. They've all but one left them stock or bolt on because they have huge whp cars already, and or don't need/want the hassle/reliability issues of a huge whp build.

If you build a 1,000whp combo, you have to pay to play if you have a failure. It's not fords fault or concern if a customer blows up a ford engine after decidedly modifying it. I don't want the price of the car to reflect a redrafted block/setup with a likely $5-8k bump in price. The mk4 supra, 03 cobra, and a few others were members of a very narrow set of factory freaks from a durability standpoint. Another would be 4.8-5.3 gm v8 mills. But in general those types of gems are not the norm. We all know an rb26 will crap it's valvetrain around 550whp (though built 1000whp is "reliable/attainable"), viper v10's need some serious talc to sustain 1000+whp, etc. My point is the aftermarket and builders usually find the walk arounds to make something work much better than factory if the mill in question isn't decidedly robust off the getgo. Not everything is an aluminum 5.4 ford gt mill that's happy to handle 1500whp on a stock long block, but that doesn't stop hennessey and others from making 1200hp from a 6.2L ohv (venom gt) either.

It's easy to build a stronger motor than any factory offering when or if that failure mandates it.

If you buy a ~$55k car, turbo and set it up for 800-1xxx whp for likely another $10-20k, I'd imagine a $3500 short block-assuming it actually gets decidedly marred/damaged (through the liner) would be a drop in the bucket. Plus you'd have likely saved the $3500 and more in the first place vs a higher asking price for a gt350 with the theortical new cast engine.

I also read at lengths yours and many others concerns about 5.3's, teksid, al cammer etc combos and based on my driving habits went the route i did.

I do thank you for informative talks about stress on wrist pins and assembly components. It's a large reason of my choice to use baby t4's vs big t3's as it reduces a substantial amount of back pressure relatively speaking.

In general, very good points, and as always, thanks for bringing an honestly rational basis of discussion into the dialogue.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

I care. I read it.

 

[Alter Ego]

Fine for NA but not something I would want for big boost which is what I was getting at all along.

FYI, you are in the gt350 section of the site.

 

[SID297]

It's going to be interesting.

 

[93 347 Cobra]

My brother in law designs extreme engines so I picked his brain about the new 5.2. He said the piston package would have to be extremely light with such a long stroke. He also mentioned barreled wrist-pins to save weight without sacrificing rigidity. Also that the harmonics would be easiest to control with a fluid-filled harmonic damper but it would be costly. Being that they know exactly what harmonics they're dealing with they may well have chosen a less costly option.

With such little material in the piston don't expect forced induction.

 

[SID297]

The pistons look like something out of a NASCAR engine.

 

[HISSMAN]

This is a F1 turbo engine piston from this past season... Very light and hold up quite well. Ford's will not be anywhere near as light or small as these for their FPC engine. It's already been acknowledged by for that they know what their customers want to do, and they have proven in the past to always overbuild with that in mind. Do they have 1,000hp cars in mind..? No, but they build quite a bit of tolerance into their more modern designs. I have a feeling that this engine will like around 700hp quite well.

 

[04svtsnke]

The pistons look like something out of a NASCAR engine.

Interesting. At first I bought into the light=weak argument but I'm starting to think ford will be making somehin light and strong enough to handle some power thrown at it. It IS an SVT car and they've been known to overbuild their cars.

 

[LostM]

Im really excited to see how this plays out. 5.2L, 12.1 CR, 82+ redline=awesome car

If you've never driven an 8 or 10 cyl that revs over 8k, you should, you will be hooked.

if the 350 can have a curve like mine, but N/A, and allow for more power from basics, im all over it

car is 4.0L, 12.1CR, 25* timing, 6.7PSI

 

[DSG2003SVT]

By your name, the engine size, and the stock power numbers, I'm guessing that you have an E90 M3. I love that engine.

 

[LostM]

By your name, the engine size, and the stock power numbers, I'm guessing that you have an E90 M3. I love that engine.

E92, the coupe and supercharged its an amazing car. I call it the european mustang.. until actual mustangs now outperform it. If the 350r were truly serious, it would have a DCT trans

Im 99% selling the M and getting a 350, and price over for a 350R will decide if i get that

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Many road racers still prefer a manual, and I do as well. I do love that 4.0, even if it's not the absolute top tier motor from BMW.

 

[Voltwings]

Drivers prefer a manual, magazines and manufacturers prefer an auto.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Drivers prefer a manual, magazines and manufacturers prefer an auto.

I've said it before, but it's hard to clutch kick a DCT.

 

[Lemers]

Drivers prefer a manual, GIRLS, magazines and manufacturers prefer an auto.

Fixed

 

[RaceRedSnake]

If the FPC 5.2 V8 produces 550 HP I will be extremely pleased. That would be awsum for a naturally aspirated engine.

 

[LostM]

well yea, manuals are great, but if your buying a performance car, and want an edge and to go faster than the other guy with a manual, DCT will kill it every time, in a straight line or a roadcourse. Then there is the fun factor, drive my car for 30 minutes and ill gurantee you'll be in love