Supercharged 5.2 discussion

LostM

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
813
Location
Delaware
Didnt i see one of the brochure leaks a few days (day) before the release that said 772hp?
 

SlowSVT

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
8,272
Location
Los Angeles
Like the Trinity engine I don't think too many people are going to boost this engine much beyond what the factory delivered I wouldn't count on seeing too many 5.2's topped off with a Whipple 3.4. Wadding that expensive plasma coated block by scorching a cylinder will bring a grown man to tears. 700 hp is nothing to sneeze at this one will be better off left "as is" or you will be writing big checks.

Can't wait for Ford to re-enter the "fray"

I was reading Ford has applied for a patent adding to dual front in-board electric motors to a V8 making the car AWD when the motors are turned on. That will put it close to 4500 lbs.
 

biminiLX

never stock
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
13,253
Location
Toledo, OH
No different than the ‘11-14 GT500 and current GT350 blocks, so these will be modded like any other.
It’s hard to speculate too much until we gain more details, but the potential is exciting based on what we know from the Coyotes, GT350s and the TVS2650.
With the block fortifications they’ve mentioned and how much the GT350 and Coyote GTs are holding under boost, 800rwhp should be easy going and then combine that with a DCT.....might even have been worth the wait.
-J
 

Joe Buchanan

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22
Location
Thunder Bay
No different than the ‘11-14 GT500 and current GT350 blocks, so these will be modded like any other.
It’s hard to speculate too much until we gain more details, but the potential is exciting based on what we know from the Coyotes, GT350s and the TVS2650.
With the block fortifications they’ve mentioned and how much the GT350 and Coyote GTs are holding under boost, 800rwhp should be easy going and then combine that with a DCT.....might even have been worth the wait.
-J
Ford if your listening heads up display tach would be awesome
 

biminiLX

never stock
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
13,253
Location
Toledo, OH
I think they call the GT350 an 87mm ‘roval’.
It looked in that same range around 90mm.
-J
 

93 347 Cobra

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
2,463
Location
Denver
SID posted a host of close up photos in a front page article, here.
https://www.svtperformance.com/thre...g-pics-from-naias-2019.1170339/#post-16107320

Something I noticed during the intro right away and asked him if he could get some close ups of the engine and DCT on their respective stands.

The balancer. Some here may remember the balancer debacle from the 2007 GT500's. I'm getting old and starting to forget but I believe the Ford GT's suffered from this issue as well. Ford used an extremely heavy balancer (~26lbs or so) and found that when power got bumped ever higher, keyways got stripped and crank snouts could fail.

Catastrophically.


Ford changed to an elastomer balancer starting on the 2008 GT500's which were a bit lighter. And while I never confirmed it, I believe the potentially problematic balancers were viscous style, silicone filled with an inertia ring. It was highly recommended to swap to the newer style when upgrading superchargers. Justin from VMP posted this a decade or so ago...

View attachment 1545817

Another view that illustrates the difference between the two balancers...

View attachment 1545818


Ford Racing wouldn't warranty your TVS unless you replaced your 2007 GT500 damper with the lighter elastomer unit from 2008 and later cars. Note the highlighted text at the bottom of one of the instruction sheets...

View attachment 1545823


Anyway, Coyote engines (including the GT350's Voodoo engine) have continued to use the elastomer style. So my eyes were wide open when I saw what looks to be a viscous damper on the 2020 GT500 engine...


View attachment 1545819


Look closely at both the text and at (this kills me to say this) the lousy welds...

View attachment 1545820


Failure of the damper "and engine compartment" means get the **** out of the inertial path if you damage this thing such that it goes out of balance or you ting it in a way that the inertia ring inside is no longer free to move.

A diagram to better illustrate the innards. Notice the concentric welds on the damper face done to seal up the assembly (along with some small plug welds)...

View attachment 1545821


An example of a cutaway Fluidampr (their spelling not mine) below that operates on the principle laid out in the above diagram.

View attachment 1545822


Ford needs to be pressed on this one hard. Not saying they haven't figured it out but rather why was it necessary to go with this style of damper.

Great post, Tob. Ironically my last in depth engine conversation with my B-I-L who designs very high end engines was about the damper on the VooDoo 5.2. He said a fluid filled would take care of a huge range of harmonics, then he thought on it more and said it would cost a bit more in a large-scale production engine and that Ford engineers would know exactly what frequencies they're trying to attenuate so they wouldn't absolutely need a fluid-filled if they wanted to save money. So hopefully this means that Ford didn't cheap out on the damper, OPGs, and connecting rods on this engine.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top