Hurricane snuffed out
- Thread starter jwfisher
- Start date
AbusiveWombat said:
No, more bore would allow for larger valves. Stroke has nothing to do with it, as it can also be manipulated (even with the larger bore) to create a shitty B/S ratio. Again, B/S ratio is a useless statistic in this debate.
fordification said:
In all fairness, the new '05 4.6L 3v Mustangs put down 260-265rwhp/275-285rwtq SAE stock. The last gen LS1 F-body's put down 305-315rwhp/325-335rwtq SAE stock.
earl lee said:
Not sure where you are going with this but at 2000 units per year, the viper is a specialty product and DCX treats it as such. Vehicles with "halo" value tend to escape conventional marketing, engineering and design wisdom. I will say that increasing the displacement of an engine that already had 488 cubic inches seems less than intelligent. But that market segment expects this type of engineering from Chrysler. Not being privy to DCX's market studies, I speculate that reducing the displacement to 7 liters and transforming the engine into a DOHC whould have been disastrous to their sales (...for example, although how much lower than 2000 can your sales drop?). I am not sure how you could fit such a monster into the engine bay anyway.
So there you have it: they gave them what they wanted. Everybody is happy.... except maybe jwfisher :cryying: .
On a side note, I found the viper to be extremely difficult to drive and completely different than, let's say, an AC Cobra. I am sure it is very gratifying to those who can master it.
Last edited by a moderator:
There you go again....
Everybody except whatever company you work (and that claim is in doubt) for is less intelligent. Everybody who disagrees with you and calls BS is less intelligent than you. And any company that has a leg up on Ford seems to be evil somehow.
Everybody except whatever company you work (and that claim is in doubt) for is less intelligent. Everybody who disagrees with you and calls BS is less intelligent than you. And any company that has a leg up on Ford seems to be evil somehow.
jwfisher said:
Actually there's nothing wrong with the rod length of a 5.4L, the stroke is relatively long (4.165") but then again not nearly that of a Chevy 454--which as we all know can be built to rev. I agree that we need more bore and better bore spacing, but such are the limitations of the current block design--which in and of itself was a compromise based on many different considerations; performance wasn't at the top of the list. As I've stated before, the words "N/A Modular" and "high performance" are not in fact mutually exclusive. It takes some modifications: Head work, valve job, aftermarket valves, real cams, a quality intake, etc. but these motors can put out.
Ford has unleashed four "new" 4v head designs (all perform better than their predecessors) in the past 4 years (FR500, '00R, '03/04, '05GT), to me that seems like some decent headway with regard to cylinder head development/improvements. IMO, 5 valve heads are a waste of time, 4 valves are more than enough to cover most of the chamber in valve seat area. Also, Audi/Lambo seems to be the only major manufacturer sticking to their 5v guns. Everyone else seems to be making record amounts of power (Ferrari, Porsche, etc.) with 4vs.
Regarding the V10, besides the fact that there are no 4v heads available for them, they are basically 4500rpm truck motors. The 90 degree cylinder angle isn't conducive to smooth running, especially if you were to try to spin it to 7500rpm. I don't think the stock balance shaft would be up to the task either. In the future you'll see decent performance from 3v 6.8L V10s, but nothing to write home about--especially since they mostly come in work trucks/vans.
jwfisher said:
First, the last bit in the section above about the heads being identical is way off. FR500 heads share the same mouth dimensions as 99/01 C, 03/04 DOHC heads, but have much smoother transitions and better casting quality in the short turns than the old 99/01 heads. The FR500s also have a slighlty smaller intake port vs. the C/03/04 heads, and they have a dry exhaust port divider (vs. wet for all previous heads save the '00Rs) though it has the same size port mouth. You also have to remember, that the '03/04 DOHC head is basically the next evolution of the FR500 casting. The 03/04s have basically the same intake port/shape/mouth (slightly worse casting quality than the FRs, but after porting its all the same) and slightly larger intake ports--they needed a tad more volume as they were used on both 4.6 and Aussie/Navi 5.4Ls. The '03/04 exhaust port is essentially a combination of the '00R/'05GT and FR500 exhaust ports.
A 9000rpm 3.55" stroke 4.6/BB5.0L will last one race season with billet steel/Al connecting rods or forged Ti rods before needing to be rebuilt. At 9000rpm+ the stock forged crank can actually deform by 2-3 degrees--causing ring problems among other things. Valvetrain components are usually also replaced after a single season if spun that high. Basically, rpm is a good thing, but just like anything else that's fun, too much can kill you. If you want a 75-100K mile Modular motor cap it at 8200-8500rpm for 3.55" (4.6L) or 7500-7700rpm for 4.165" (5.4L); also you'll need billet rods (Manley billet ultralight I beams are the lightest standard steel billet rod and are rated to 1200hp and have been used successfully at 9000rpm), custom CP/Diamond pistons, F2M bearings, billet oil pump gears, ARP everything including ARP 2000 rod bolts, and most importantly a quality builder :rolling:
Some Ford DOHC heads have a high rpm oiling problem, which doesn't affect most of us, I'm talking 8000rpm+. The 5.0L Cammer big bore motor should have been much more than it is--mostly due to the cams (lack of duration) and relatively low compression for an N/A motor. Regardless, there's a reason you don't see big bores in production cars, Ford has been testing them for 10 years now, again that's mostly due to the shitty bore spacing...
The 3v heads are definitely a compromise, and you're correct in that Mercedes is moving away from 3v designs and back to 4vs. The next gen AMG E55 is reported to have a larger displacement TT 32v DOHC V8--talk about killer. The reasoning behind Mercedes switch back to 4vs has IMO a lot to do with the fact that BMW has made nearly the same HP as the turbo/blown Mercedes 3 valves, with their N/A 4v high tech motors (direct injection/higher comp, lighter rotating assemblys, VVT, etc.). Granted the torque isn't even close, but to Mercedes I'm sure it was kind of insulting.
Anyway, we did learn a lot from the 3v Merc's. Basically when paired with forced induction they can make good/great power, however, N/A there is no question that 4vs still rule. For a true streetable powerplant, with as much area under the curve as possible within OEM rpm constraints, there's nothing wrong with 3V VCT V8.
jwfisher said:
The last gen Mustang 2v 4.6L made 260/302 flywheel, the truck version sucks ass no doubt about it. The reason the new 3v 4.6L Mustang V8 only makes 300flywheel HP has to do with literally hundreds of variables. Some of the most important being: Corporate bean counters worried about driveline warranty issues, emissions certification, insurance costs, fleet MPG standards, etc.
The real beauty of owning a Mustang is that you can basically stuff anything you want under the hood. If 3Vs aren't your bag, drop a GT motor in there and be done with it :beer: Let's all hope for Al 5.4L VCT DOHCs in the near future
epper:
Last edited:
serpentnoir,just curious I noticed you own a 1999 cobra. However,you listed all the negative points of the "mod" motor. Are you happy with your car? What made you purchase the car? If you had to choose again what would you buy?
serpentnoir said:
I was just wondering what your opinion was on that engine thats all, sorry to take this topic a lil off topic. Oh and true, with the sheer amount of torque that engine makes in 1st and 2nd gear it does take some finesse to master without just blowing the tires up. I hear dodge is gonna soon stop making that motor and put in a v10 hemi.
jwfisher said:
....but I work in the industry and like the rest of my co-workers we feel the effects of it's tribulations (that entitles me to critique if I feel like it). What about you? Can't get the toy you wanted? I feel so sorry for you. You may have noticed that we can't design with jwfisher in mind. We have to design for "joe blow everybody". That includes:
1. The 50 year old guy who fondly remembers the "good old days" of the muscle car era.
2. the 18 year old who wants performance and also technology but it has to be kept under 20 grand because his summer job doesn't pay.
3. the 30 year old woman who wants the look but couldn't care less about a 500 hp motor and IRS or 14" brakes.
4. the 35 year old father of two, who wants all of the above and is willing to pay 30~35k but 40k is streching it.
5. the guy who's hobby is to race his toy on the weekend. He typically doesn't care about looks. He wants 500hp, a chassis at 50Hz rigidity, all aluminum suspension, IRS, racing seats and harness, racing brakes, etc...
6. #1, 2, 3, and 4 also want the convertible option
7. the drag racer
and on and on.......
No F...n Nissan does that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Force4.6 said:
I bought it because it had IRS. The only other solution back in 1999 was a Corvette. That would have set me back an extra 15k. I refuse to touch an import or even set foot at a dealer. I am content with doing benchmarking when they show up in the lab. Great cars.
So maybe I'm not reading this right. Are you guys saying the mod engines are close to being tapped out for performance/efficiency?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=104572
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=104572
fordification said:
Absolutely not. We have yet to see 4.6/5.4L VCT 4v motors in either N/A or FI form. Paired with a blower or turbo(s) either of said motors could make as much power as Ford could/would ever want to put in any car.
The 03 Cobra in the link has a 14lb twin screw upgrade, and FR500 heads/cams/valvetrain. It's a nice solid example of a streetable package with moderate improvements in HP/TQ, however, they left a ton of it (power) on the table. "SVTDubs" (from modularfords.com) car is a great example of a truly worked '03/04 Cobra motor; 725/700+ rw corrected on pump gas.
Last edited:
Hurricane is coming. Same publication said no V6 Powerstroke either was even being THOUGHT of for the 150, but you can stop by and order the LCF work truck with the new 4.5L V6 right now. :rollseyes This 'non-existant' Powerstroke engine will be out on the road by June. Magazine writers are just as stupid as any other person, its just some fat guy who likes cars, don't kid yourself as this being any sort of gospel. These idiots never knew the GT40 existed either.
Last edited:
KevinB120 said:
If you don't mind me asking, where do you get your info? I've discussed the "Hurricane" with two Ford engineers at the Windsor Canada engine plants and they both said the project is now dead. :shrug:
Last edited:
As for the suspension part of the argument, I'll add that I've had the MM live axle w/coilovers in my 5.0 and now the stock IRS in my new 04. The IRS is definitely better as far as stock vs. stock and still better for street driving than the MM full-on setup (TA/PHB).
I haven't tried to make the Cobra handle yet, so I can't comment there, but my 5.0 was lots of fun to drift out of corners on the throttle (had a blower/big brakes, etc). The manageability was excellent.
I want to hear what our local critics think of the LS variant chevy engines. I've read a huge report on the design philosophies they incorporated and it overwhelmingly seems to have paid off. They're getting great output for relatively easy (I found a lot of HP tuning my modded '00 w/LS1 edit) and the engines are relatively simple and small enough to put headers on. Aside from the piston slap issue that plagued(s?) these engines, what, if anything, would you be unhappy about with them?
I haven't tried to make the Cobra handle yet, so I can't comment there, but my 5.0 was lots of fun to drift out of corners on the throttle (had a blower/big brakes, etc). The manageability was excellent.
I want to hear what our local critics think of the LS variant chevy engines. I've read a huge report on the design philosophies they incorporated and it overwhelmingly seems to have paid off. They're getting great output for relatively easy (I found a lot of HP tuning my modded '00 w/LS1 edit) and the engines are relatively simple and small enough to put headers on. Aside from the piston slap issue that plagued(s?) these engines, what, if anything, would you be unhappy about with them?
Users who are viewing this thread
