Who has details about the new 'hurricane' engine?

[jwfisher]

It's new to Ford Motor Company, but not to other manufacturers. It's found on several engines in Europe and Japan. Both naturally and unnaturally aspirated.

The reason it hasn't been seen here before is because our gasoline is so poor... it tended to clog the injectors. New injector technology makes that less likely.

This is one of those technologies that is good for everything: efficiency, performance, mileage, emissions, drivability.

One side note:it does require engineering work in the cylinder head since the injector is in the head rather than in the manifold. On the latest generation Audis, this required them to move back from 5 valves to 4 in order to have room for the injector.

 

[Naste50]

I'm sorry to HiJack the forum but does anyone have an idea of what the Mazdaspeed6 is gonna cost? I AM VERY INTERESTED in that car. Like I said, not trying to hijack, just interested. Keep on truckin with the Hurricane thread, its great!

 

[Naste50]

nvm, found it: 2. Mazdaspeed6

MazdaSpeed 6
Photo: Paul Williams. Click image to enlarge
If you desire Mazda RX-8 performance, but have four friends who want to tag along, Mazda has a car for you. The Zoom Zoom Company claims the new Mazdaspeed6 delivers 0-100 km/h acceleration times of 6.6 seconds. That's faster than the RX-8, plus real room for those buddies. With standard all-wheel drive, a turbo-charged 270-horsepower, 2.3-litre four-cylinder engine, standard six-speed manual transmission, and sport suspension, Mazda's newest sport sedan certainly has the equipment to back up that speedy claim. Pricing that will be similar to the RX-8's means the Mazdaspeed6 will offer unparalleled bang for your buck.

ON SALE: Spring, 2005
ESTIMATED PRICE: $39,000
FUTURE COMPETITORS: Subaru Legacy GT $36,495, Subaru WRX STi $46,995

 

[jwfisher]

Just to close off this detour: http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=mazdaSpeed6&bhcp=1

...and it's under $30,000 US Dollars.

 

[ShelbyGuy]

after 12 years of the windsor pushrod engine, there wasn't much evolution either. I dont count the tunnel port 302 heads becuase they never made production and the boss302 heads dont count as windsor heads either. the mod motor is still young. it took until the mid 80s before windsor pushrod engines took off. before that it was a small block chevy world.

Ford's main interests with an engine are CAFE and EPA standards, not the horsepower wars. And, with the company in the tank right now, we're lucky they're fixing the exiting broken stuff. forget about new stuff for a while.

 

[jwfisher]

Good to see you are doing events with multiple brands of cars - rather than just single-brand events. That's always the best way to get the best instructors by far.

 

[Fourcam330]

Interesting discussion on the Hurricane, but given that the Hurricane engine is a few years out for it's first iteration, who can say that we'll see it in an enthusiast car (Mustang, Cobra, Falcon) anytime soon? Given very limited development funds, the over-riding priority is trucks. That means large displacement and slow turning... oriented around low-speed torque. That does not make an engine of interest for our kind of cars.

Later development might include a less pedestrian cylinder head... more breathing... higher RPM. But not at first given the constraints and market pressures Ford has to live within. Remember, Hurricane is intended to answer the needs of several hundred thousand buyers (high volume and high profit per unit) a year - not ten thousand buyers with minimal profit returns.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the existing modular lineup - at least in 4.6 (and 5.0) form (I'm not interested in the absurdly long-stroke 5.4). It is limited in displacement - but it is competitive against like displacement (that does not mean a GM 5.7 or 6 liter engine).

A problem with the modular engine is that evolution of it has essentially come to a stop. The 4V cylinder head is all but identical to the head when it was first introduced to production 12 years ago. Yes, some minor differences have taken place - the inlet tract, minor changes to water passages (and not enough, only the Ford GT head has the most even cooling properties). But, nothing major in terms of evolution. There is a fundamental issue with the head, and that's the location and positioning of the 4 valves. They limit airflow. Ford created an experimental version of the head with the valves repositioned over the bores so that they could breath considerably better (this is all publicly documented in an interesting and very worthwhile engineering paper). Ford also built (courtesy of engineering partner Yamaha) an experimental 5-valve head (with variable intake cam timing) that offered considerably better breathing. But, none of this has gone into the run-of-the-mill production heads. Evolution has all but come to a stop.

IMO, there have been several significant changes in the history of Ford's DOHC heads. There are now 6 distinctive castings.
The latest derivation of Ford's DOHC head lineup, the '03/04 DOHC head (used on the Marauder, Aviator, Cobra, and Mach 1, single intake port and the new large rectangular exhaust port) has absolutely nothing in common with Ford's first DOHC head (93-98 B head, twin intake ports (square primary and round secondary and the smaller more rounded exhaust port).
The '03/04 head is essentially a 99/01 C head with better casting (smoother transition at the short turn) in the throat of the intake/exhaust ports. The exhaust port of the 99/01 C head is shared with the B head, and again the 03/04 head has the newer larger exh. port.
The FR500 has the smallest intake port volume of any tumble port head (same intake port shape as the '03/04 head) combined with an even better throat area (almost a smooth radius) than the '03 head, and a dry exhaust port (no coolant running through the separator). The exh. port is smaller than the '03/04 port to start, but can be ported extensively.
The Navi is essentially a 99/01 C head with much more intake port volume and a slightly revised exhaust port--though it had the smaller common exhaust mouth pattern. These heads are also physically larger than their 4.6L cousins.
'00R/'05GT, Pimp daddy heads capable of insane #s. The raised intake ports require a custom valvetrain not shared on other Ford 4v heads; also unique to these castings are the +2mm exhaust valves. A stock '00R/'05GT head will flow almost as much on the exhaust as the intake of a stock 99/01 C head at the same lift.
Regarding your thoughts on the 4Vs valve placement, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Modular motors are bore limited (thanks EPA), meaning head flow is ultimately limited by our smallish valves (37/30mm for all heads save the '00R/05GT at 37/32mm) and the cross sectional area of our (again smallish) valve seats. Until recently DOHC heads had a poor short turn radius from the factory (looked more like it was gouged out than precision cut) causing the incoming air to "overshoot" the valves. The B heads really sucked becuase of the excessive intake port volume/cross sectional area, and the less than optimal fuel injector placement (only the primary had an injector so the secondary would clog with carbon after as little as 8k miles or so.)
Modular Performance pioneered the 5.0L big bore motors (3.700" bore vs. a 3.55" stock bore) that have become popular today--it only took Ford an extra 4 years to come out with their own dry sleeve 3.700" block. The additional bore allows the valves to unshroud themselves from the chamber wall seriously helping air flow. The same set of 4v heads will flow about 20-25cfm more on a 3.70" bore than a 3.55" bore. While I'm on the subject...I'm sure we all wish we had a 4x3" B/S like the old 5.0L windsors but the fact remains even a severly undersquare motor (5.4L @ 3.55x4.165") can make great power and rev high enough to do so reliably. You just have to have the correct H/C/I in place to allow the motor to breathe and a solid shortblock. Not to mention the fact that the 50+CI larger motors don't have to rev as high as a 4.6L to make the same or greater power; though the Tymensky's can and do spin their 358" big bore 5.9L to 9300rpm with Al rods. Chevy 454s have an even longer stroke and I don't think anyone questions their ability as a performance motor. Take it fwiw, as I've also had a 5.3L/324CI 4v big bore/stroker.
If you'd like even more info on Ford's DOHC heads PM me with your email address. I'll send you the 4v head guide I wrote for the Dec. '04 issue of 5.0 & SFs--including flowbench results for all types of heads (except '00R/'05GT) both ported and stock.