Latest Boss Info

[ON D BIT]

350whp is possible and not at huge rpm either. Now is it smog legal or possible for the factory to repeat? Probably not, but if guys can get 300whp with bolt-ons (many not smog legal I know) then with work on the heads, etc., the factory can do that within emissions constraints. Sure it is not 380 or 400 flywheel, but 350 flywheel is not bad for a 4.6 liter V-8 with moderate compression, emissions equipment, and small heads.

you have lost me. so 350whp is possible, the you say its not 380/400 but 350 crank is not bad? are you talking about the same motor in this statement?

my original statement said only that ford could not produce a 380hp(crank) 4.6l engine without putting a blower on it. with this short statement i assumed a few things: emissions, durability, cost, production restraints were among the reasons ford chose to go with a iron block + blower with the 03.

i said nothing about not being able to mod a 4.6 mustang engine to the tune 400hp crank with the aftermarket and engine work. :rockon:

 

[CobraRed01]

You've heard a good bit of BS. In fact I'm pretty sure you're thinking of BBR, who claimed 415rwhp with a stock shortblock 3v. I slammed them on the Corral over a year ago for making false claims and I don't think they've recovered yet. The fact is a $15,000 Pure Street 4v 4.6 with ported 03/04 heads, billet cams, FR500 intake, and ~12:1 C/R won't make too much more power than that; more importantly it occurs at 8500+rpm.
Lately we've seen a few reputable builders with H/C packages for 3Vs make ~340-350rw, add a little compression from a forged bottom end and you'll maybe make 360-365rw that's it.
The amount of power a motor can make is all decided in the cylinder head, and a 3v head is incapable of the type of flow that's necessary for such power.

A question...the new BOSS motor is supposed to be a 2V design... won't that limit potential output of that motor? The cubes are sorely needed, but the 2V is a step backwards, no? Do you think they'll eventually be doing a 4V head or just throw on a S/C?

 

[Dave07997S]

Major turmoil over at the Ford camp is causing major changes as I'm sure you can imagine.
As of now the 5.8L Boss engines are slated for Mustangs but not until MY '10 earliest maybe '11. 6.2s are now relegated to truck only duty.
The new push for the Boss, and most at Ford don't even know about it, is back to a 5.4 4v using GT/GT500 heads and a new intake. Obviously this would be the most cost effective route for a SE that's supposed to come to market in the near future. Evidently they've made 380hp (not sure if its rw or flywheel) with off the shelf cams and this motor.
There is still zero chance of a big bore modular 5.0 ending up in the Boss SE.
Sorry for all the changing info but it's the price you pay when you want the most current info vs. waiting.

That would be sweet actually IMHO. If they keep it light weight for a Stang and can squeeze 400hp N/A out of this car it would be nice. Especially when you consider that Saleen wants $60K for his PJ version of this car.

Dave

 

[Fourcam330]

Duh. Just quoting what I have seen. I have seen the BBR shit, but have heard things from other sources. Looking at the flow gotten from these heads http://www.nmraracing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46006, with a bump in compression (not huge mind you) and proper camming, etc. 350whp is possible and not at huge rpm either. Now is it smog legal or possible for the factory to repeat? Probably not, but if guys can get 300whp with bolt-ons (many not smog legal I know) then with work on the heads, etc., the factory can do that within emissions constraints. Sure it is not 380 or 400 flywheel, but 350 flywheel is not bad for a 4.6 liter V-8 with moderate compression, emissions equipment, and small heads.


I do have a couple of friends making 300whp with their 3Vs N/A with bolt ons.

I hear you and I agree. The main reason the LS Chevy motors are so popular is the head flow. Plain and simple, but also cubic inches has a lot to do with their potential. What I was getting at is it can be done with a 4.6 and today's technology. But why? Got with the CID and make it easy on yourself. I am all for this 5.4 idea if it gets a nice high powered N/A Mustang to the masses (like I stated in an earlier post).

Duh no one's made 380rwhp.
Livernois is another BS company. Look at the stock dyno graph (if it's still supplied) and tell me you've ever seen such a pathetic curve for a stock 3v. Per the flow #s, those heads are hogged and would have one hell of a time making any power because of the lack of velocity. A sewer pipe can flow 1000cfm but you don't want that feeding your motor.
Reputable porters are seeing around 250-255cfm after porting, quality VJ, and aftermarket valves with better shape. Again, you can hit 300cfm with them, but you're going to be sorely disappointed with the HP/TQ results if you do.
400rw is just a dream.

 

[Fourcam330]

A question...the new BOSS motor is supposed to be a 2V design... won't that limit potential output of that motor? The cubes are sorely needed, but the 2V is a step backwards, no? Do you think they'll eventually be doing a 4V head or just throw on a S/C?

They are 2v mainly for weight and cost reasons. While 4 valves are still advantageous you don't need them as much on a large bore motor because the valves/seats can be so large. Valve/seat size are the ultimate flow restrictions of most motors, as they are the "choke points" for incoming air.
2V Modulars first debuted in MY '91 with the 4Vs following in MY '93. I haven't heard anything about a 4V Boss but I don't see why it's not possible at some point, or if need be.

 

[CobraRed01]

They are 2v mainly for weight and cost reasons. While 4 valves are still advantageous you don't need them as much on a large bore motor because the valves/seats can be so large. Valve/seat size are the ultimate flow restrictions of most motors, as they are the "choke points" for incoming air.
2V Modulars first debuted in MY '91 with the 4Vs following in MY '93. I haven't heard anything about a 4V Boss but I don't see why it's not possible at some point, or if need be.

A big bore 4V would be sick...but cost's gonna be a major factor. We'll have to see what the comps going to do. I think I'd trade the 4V bragging rights for an aluminum block though. Thanks.

 

[Fourcam330]

A big bore 4V would be sick...but cost's gonna be a major factor. We'll have to see what the comps going to do. I think I'd trade the 4V bragging rights for an aluminum block though. Thanks.

It's going to be nice having displacement on par or close to the competition for once. :beer: We'll also still have the advantages that OHCs provide, like more precise cam/valve timing, no pushrod in the intake port, etc. I'm sure Ford learned something from the downfalls of the Modular.

 

[JETSOLVER]

The jewelike intake that fourcam referanced for the Manracer is a VERY high tech magnesium casting. Tough stuff to work with. The other intake commonly shown on the Cammer is the FRPP part and was designed to be used with the FRPP four valve heads. They don't look as good as they used to now that the GT castings are in the pipeline, and hence the price/performmance debate within and without Ford.


As for the number of valves, get yourself two quarters, two nickles and two dimes. Now draw a circle of about an inch and a half on a peice of paper, and experiment with the possible two,three, and four valve combo's.

Please remember that total surface area is as important as the diameter, and things like swirl, plug shrouding and each stem as a path to heat transfer and combustion management. Not to mention the cost of casting all those interesting little crannies.

 

[eci]

wow late 2010 or early 2011? Oh well i guess im going to save up for the new challenger then. Ford really needs to step up to the plate.

what the hell is wrong with the 4.6? Are terminators slow?

 

[eci]

It's amazing that Mustang enthusiasts care about factory horsepower. Did we not like the 5.0's? 225HP stock in 1992. Factory HP is meaningless. Engines can be worked.

 

[Boomer v3.8]

I wouldn't say its meaningless.

There ARE people out there that want factory horsepower regardless of how much potential an engine has.

 

[ALLNTRL]

What about the Boss 351 V10 prototype that Ford did a few years ago and had on display at the 40th Anniversary at Nashville? :shrug:

 

[CGoeschel]

My guess is the 5.8 is coming.........soon! But not as a Boss.

 

[Fourcam330]

What about the Boss 351 V10 prototype that Ford did a few years ago and had on display at the 40th Anniversary at Nashville? :shrug:

Custom block, crank, heads, cams. Mind as well throw together a new larger motor.

 

[ON D BIT]

My guess is the 5.8 is coming.........soon! But not as a Boss.

the new 5.8 is one of the new boss motors. we still do not know what motor ford will stick in the boss mustang.

 

[Fourcam330]

what the hell is wrong with the 4.6? Are terminators slow?

Terms would have been w/out a blower. Now think Boss (again N/A) and a heavier S197 platform.

 

[CGoeschel]

the new 5.8 is one of the new boss motors. we still do not know what motor ford will stick in the boss mustang.

What Im saying is that the 5.8 is coming to the next gen mustang, just watch. Whether it is or isnt the Boss 5.8 im not sure, but I, along with you dont know what is going to be in the next "Boss mustang".

 

[ON D BIT]

What Im saying is that the 5.8 is coming to the next gen mustang, just watch. Whether it is or isnt the Boss 5.8 im not sure, but I, along with you dont know what is going to be in the next "Boss mustang".

when people say boss we have no clue what they are talking about. motor or mustang? specifics can go a long way.:idea:

My guess is the 5.8 is coming.........soon! But not as a Boss.

i was just confirming that the 5.8 is one of the new boss motors. the statement above could lead many people guessing.:beer:

 

[BlackBolt9]

Fine, you all want a hugh CI aluminum block motor. Ford needs to go back to WWII and resurrect this beast (the GAA), even thought it wouldn't fit in a mustang anyways. It was originally intended to be a V-12 aircraft engine (hence the aluminum block) but was cut down to eight cylinders for use in tanks. At 1100CID and double overhead gear shaft driven cams this thing is a monster. Even though dimensionally it isn't much larger than a 460 due to it being a 60deg V instead of 90deg. I believe it was rated at over 1000lb-ft of torque anywhere above 900RPMS and tops out at about 500HP at 2600RPMS with the stock cams and intake. As the pics show it has been modified now to accept 3 4-barrel carbs and even twin 6-71 Blowers. Don't know what those modified versions are making for power but I'm sure its acceptable

Pic of the front showing rod with worm gears to turn the cams.

Couple pics of newer engines that have been redone including one of the twin 6-71s

 

[eichisama]

As for the number of valves, get yourself two quarters, two nickles and two dimes. Now draw a circle of about an inch and a half on a peice of paper, and experiment with the possible two,three, and four valve combo's.

Please remember that total surface area is as important as the diameter, and things like swirl, plug shrouding and each stem as a path to heat transfer and combustion management. Not to mention the cost of casting all those interesting little crannies.

But also bear in mind with this experiment that heads are not flat - there's a bit of a dome, isn't there? That means there's a little more surface area to play with for the valve size/placement than if you had to stay within that flat circle.

For example, take an orange and slice it in half. There is much more rind surface area than the exposed (flat) juicy inside.

Fourcam, how much of a dome is there really on the 2v, 3v, and 4v motors? Any idea on the new 5.8L motors?