Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > General > Ford vs The Competition
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.

Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2003, 04:01 PM
custom_truker custom_truker is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 147
custom_truker is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Ford uses the 4.6 in Mustangs, but Chevy offers the 5.7 in its now no longer produced Camaro's and Trans Ams. So, why didn't Ford raise to the same level? Is the 4.6 capable of taking on a 5.7 liter in a Camaro? Is it possible to get 300 horses from a 4.6 with only bolt ons and some simple computer adjustments? If a 5.7 is modified and a 4.6 which will be faster, and produce more hp and trq? Just curious and thought I would ask. be great if a 4.6 could stomp a chevy 5.7 camaro
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2003, 10:30 PM
Lectrocuted Lectrocuted is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 658
Lectrocuted is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

The only way to overcome a 70 cubic inch disadvantage is ground breaking technology, significant weight difference, or a supercharger. Naturally aspirated is no contest. 5.7 all the way.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2003, 11:56 PM
franktheman franktheman is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 161
franktheman is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

4.6L vs 5.7L?

You do know the 5.7L aka Chevy 350 is prolly the most versatile engine of all time don't you?
Comparing the 2 is like comparing ice cream(350) to horse dung(4.6L).
Now I know, this is a Ford enthusiasts site, but come on', the 350 has been around for 50 years or so-I doubt the 4.6L will live to see it's 50th year in production in any format or application.

Besides this,I've owned an 88' Chevy dump truck with 350 engine in it, damn good truck engine-and equally at home in a camaro, or corvette - hell there was even a version for powering boats.

Now I've never owned a truck with 4.6L in it, but from what I've heard from owners is that it's a bit light for any use you'd have for a full sized pickup-and looking at the spec's I'd say thats probably true.
Could you mod it? Sure, but you could mod the 350 too-then what? Would you want a 1 ton masons dump powered by a 4.6L?
Not even close. Just like the guy who tried to compare the 4.6L to the 300IL6-not even close, and even further from a 350.


Regards.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 12:26 AM
DOHCmarauder's Avatar
DOHCmarauder DOHCmarauder is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,074
DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by franktheman
4.6L vs 5.7L?

You do know the 5.7L aka Chevy 350 is prolly the most versatile engine of all time don't you?
Comparing the 2 is like comparing ice cream(350) to horse dung(4.6L).
Now I know, this is a Ford enthusiasts site, but come on', the 350 has been around for 50 years or so-I doubt the 4.6L will live to see it's 50th year in production in any format or application.

Besides this,I've owned an 88' Chevy dump truck with 350 engine in it, damn good truck engine-and equally at home in a camaro, or corvette - hell there was even a version for powering boats.

Now I've never owned a truck with 4.6L in it, but from what I've heard from owners is that it's a bit light for any use you'd have for a full sized pickup-and looking at the spec's I'd say thats probably true.
Could you mod it? Sure, but you could mod the 350 too-then what? Would you want a 1 ton masons dump powered by a 4.6L?
Not even close. Just like the guy who tried to compare the 4.6L to the 300IL6-not even close, and even further from a 350.


Regards.


"SIGH"...........considering the LS1 version of the 5.7(which is actually 346inches and is directly related to the 4.8, 5.3, 6.0) Share NOT ONE PART with the "350 that has been around for 50 years" and that the 302 horsepower 4.6 in a Grand Marquis spanks the 260 horse LTI(which was based on the previous GEN small block) in the '96 Impala SS, I'd say technology can make up cubes.

Is Ford doing it with the 4.6 in trucks? I've heard of 3 valve heads in the works but remember, it's the base V8 and I'm sure Ford is thinking if you want more ba!!$ ante up to the 5.4 or SD V10.
__________________
If Ford, GM, Chrysler and even the U.S. government can buy foreign, why can't we???
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 01:16 AM
custom_truker custom_truker is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 147
custom_truker is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

you uys have good insight, but I know that the chevy 5.7 is a good engine, and that their are probably more aftermarket parts for that size engine than any other, but that is not really what I am asking. Is it possible, for a 4.6 liter to out race a chevy 5.7 liter engine in a sports car, or other type car as long as they are of similar weight. I have friends that would say a 4.6 liter Ford mustang wouldn't stand a chance against a camaro of trans am, and I would like to be able and look them eye, and throw out the numbers that prove a 4.6 is very well capable of keeping up with a camaro and even beating it. It would be great So, can I do that. Can I say the 4.6 has more juice? Any one know what the numbers are for the 4.6? I have the numbers for the chevy, they are all over the place. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 10:19 AM
Lectrocuted Lectrocuted is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 658
Lectrocuted is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

If you're going to compare the lowest powered 350 to the 4.6, it might have a chace. What about the z28 or trans-am 5.7?????? Once again...no contest.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 11:36 AM
92f150I6's Avatar
92f150I6 92f150I6 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,577
92f150I6 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by DOHCmarauder
"SIGH"...........considering the LS1 version of the 5.7(which is actually 346inches and is directly related to the 4.8, 5.3, 6.0) Share NOT ONE PART with the "350 that has been around for 50 years" and that the 302 horsepower 4.6 in a Grand Marquis spanks the 260 horse LTI(which was based on the previous GEN small block) in the '96 Impala SS, I'd say technology can make up cubes.

That is not what I have been hearing from magazines and such. They complain that the Marauder is a pig that lacks torque. Have you ever been in an LTI powered impala or caprice? I can tell you that their acceleration is ferocious. I am no Chevy fan. I have never owned one, nor will I ever, but i will give credit where credir is due, and the LT1, and Ls1 5.7's are excellent engines and would be hard to beat.
__________________
2003 F250 SD 4X4 5.4L 4:10 Arizona Beige
1987 Mustang GT
09 Challenger RT
A bunch of motorcycles, other cars, and a Quad.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 12:27 PM
DOHCmarauder's Avatar
DOHCmarauder DOHCmarauder is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,074
DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by 92f150I6
That is not what I have been hearing from magazines and such. They complain that the Marauder is a pig that lacks torque. Have you ever been in an LTI powered impala or caprice? I can tell you that their acceleration is ferocious. I am no Chevy fan. I have never owned one, nor will I ever, but i will give credit where credir is due, and the LT1, and Ls1 5.7's are excellent engines and would be hard to beat.

Mine absolutely lacks low end torque. And my neighbor has a '96 SS with exhaust and a chip. Bottom line is at the track (we've gone 1 Friday) our 60 foot times are near equal because of her tire spin where I just launch smoothly(I can powerbrake to smoke the meats, but why?) and at the 1/4 I'm between a .3 and .5 seconds ahead.(mid 14's) 80 MPH roll ons to a 100 I get a few car lenghts.

BTW, I've read the low end complaint(kenne-bell has been contacted) but I never heard the term "pig" and I've read everything I could find on the Marauder.

I LOVE the OLD Impala SS, this is the reason I bought the Ford version. If the current SS wasn't a V6 POS.......who knows.
__________________
If Ford, GM, Chrysler and even the U.S. government can buy foreign, why can't we???
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 12:35 PM
DOHCmarauder's Avatar
DOHCmarauder DOHCmarauder is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,074
DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by custom_truker
you uys have good insight, but I know that the chevy 5.7 is a good engine, and that their are probably more aftermarket parts for that size engine than any other, but that is not really what I am asking. Is it possible, for a 4.6 liter to out race a chevy 5.7 liter engine in a sports car, or other type car as long as they are of similar weight. I have friends that would say a 4.6 liter Ford mustang wouldn't stand a chance against a camaro of trans am, and I would like to be able and look them eye, and throw out the numbers that prove a 4.6 is very well capable of keeping up with a camaro and even beating it. It would be great So, can I do that. Can I say the 4.6 has more juice? Any one know what the numbers are for the 4.6? I have the numbers for the chevy, they are all over the place. Thanks.

I'll concede that a GT (SOHC 2 valve motor) is lacking against the LS1 but the new Mach1 with the 4 valve DOHC(basically a Cobra mill sans supercharger) is equaling the last #'s of the F-bodies(may they RIP) And the '03 Cobra is in Z06 territory. (yes it is supercharged)

Please don't confuse the interchangeability of the previous generation chevy smallblocks with the new ls1. They are completely different engines.
__________________
If Ford, GM, Chrysler and even the U.S. government can buy foreign, why can't we???
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 12:43 PM
custom_truker custom_truker is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 147
custom_truker is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Isn't the 4.6 liter a DOHC engine? I think I heard somewhere that it was. Most DOHC engines will rev to the sky compared to a traditional pushrod engine, so would the revs that the 4.6 makes have anything to do with the low end power issue? I mean, if the engine is built to use the revs, then by all means, use the revs. If it isn't, and then it still doesn't make low end power, then there might be some issues that need to be adressed. About, racing two different cars at a drag strip, that is all nice and a blast I am sure, but a drivers skill then comes into the equation and it becomes which driver can drive his or her vehicle to its max without over stepping the performance envelope, and whoever gets closest to the edge without going over, will probably win. For example, if I have a 500 horse power car and race a 200 horsepower car, if I can't drive the car in a way to get it to hook up, then all that power is useless because I am not getting it to the ground. If anyone wants to compare what car did at the track as opposed to the other, try and research it a little and find numbers for both cars, driven by different drivers, and then see which ran fastest. Make sense? Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 01:34 PM
DOHCmarauder's Avatar
DOHCmarauder DOHCmarauder is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,074
DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by custom_truker
Isn't the 4.6 liter a DOHC engine? I think I heard somewhere that it was. Most DOHC engines will rev to the sky compared to a traditional pushrod engine, so would the revs that the 4.6 makes have anything to do with the low end power issue? I mean, if the engine is built to use the revs, then by all means, use the revs. If it isn't, and then it still doesn't make low end power, then there might be some issues that need to be adressed. About, racing two different cars at a drag strip, that is all nice and a blast I am sure, but a drivers skill then comes into the equation and it becomes which driver can drive his or her vehicle to its max without over stepping the performance envelope, and whoever gets closest to the edge without going over, will probably win. For example, if I have a 500 horse power car and race a 200 horsepower car, if I can't drive the car in a way to get it to hook up, then all that power is useless because I am not getting it to the ground. If anyone wants to compare what car did at the track as opposed to the other, try and research it a little and find numbers for both cars, driven by different drivers, and then see which ran fastest. Make sense? Thanks.

Fair post.......No, not all 4.6's are DOHC. The Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, Mustang GT and trucks are all SOHC. The new Lincoln Aviator, Cobra, Mach 1 and Marauder are DOHC 4 valve heads.

Without getting too technical, the cam placement has nothing to do with powerband. In theory an OHC setup should be more efficient at higher revs but you don't have to utilize the revs(Ford truck motors for instance) The lack of low end torque has as much to do with 280 cubes trying to get 4000 pounds moving. Yes, the DOHC 4.6 is tuned for higher end power(over 6000 RPM redline) but so is the 346 in the Corvette Z06 which still uses pushrods.

The same basic 4.6 DOHC in my old '97 Cobra would FRY the tires off the line. But add weight, an automatic with a tight convertor and the low end seems lethargic.

Your skill comment is very true and roasting the skins at the start is death in a drag race. But once the times are near a second apart (GT Mustang vs. LS1 F-body) you could smoke the tires for 3/4 of a second and still run down a stock GT.

I'll admit one painful thing. As is common with Ford, they answer the bell waaay late. Impala SS vs. Marauder(six years late) Mach 1 vs Z28(there is no more Z28) and I do wish I had bragging rights for gassers with the V10. (the 8.1 is rated higher but the V10 does hold its own......most of the time)
__________________
If Ford, GM, Chrysler and even the U.S. government can buy foreign, why can't we???
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 10:05 PM
Ultramagdan's Avatar
Ultramagdan Ultramagdan is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Kansas
Posts: 11,496
Ultramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud ofUltramagdan has much to be proud of
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

I rode in a Impala SS, I was not impressed. I had to think that the driver was not pushing it. He said he had it nailed but the get up and go was nowhere near what I was expecting.

As far as frank's comment about the 4.6's dubious production roll of 50 years. What engine made today will have a production run of 10 years? 20 tops. The chevy 350 was a popular motor and it is easier to hop it up (and cheaper to do) than possibly any other motor. But the current trend in technology and emissions, plus fuel cell motors makes any engine made today a limited production engine (compared to a 50 year run).

As far as getting a 4.6 to beat a camero with the LT1......possible but expensive. The LT1 in that package is really tough. You would probably have to re-engineer the car and the motor to beat them in a straight line without a blower.
__________________
Dan
1998 F250 LD 4X4
2004 Explorer EB 4X4
2006 KLR 685
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2003, 11:17 PM
DOHCmarauder's Avatar
DOHCmarauder DOHCmarauder is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,074
DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.DOHCmarauder has a great reputation on FTE.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

Quote:
Originally posted by ultramagdan
I rode in a Impala SS, I was not impressed. I had to think that the driver was not pushing it. He said he had it nailed but the get up and go was nowhere near what I was expecting.

As far as frank's comment about the 4.6's dubious production roll of 50 years. What engine made today will have a production run of 10 years? 20 tops. The chevy 350 was a popular motor and it is easier to hop it up (and cheaper to do) than possibly any other motor. But the current trend in technology and emissions, plus fuel cell motors makes any engine made today a limited production engine (compared to a 50 year run).

As far as getting a 4.6 to beat a camero with the LT1......possible but expensive. The LT1 in that package is really tough. You would probably have to re-engineer the car and the motor to beat them in a straight line without a blower.

Actually, the LT1 hasn't been around since '96(?) The current 260 Hp SOHC Mustang GT will beat it. The LS1 is a different animal, but I will still challenge one with a DOHC 4 valve Cobra or Mach1.
__________________
If Ford, GM, Chrysler and even the U.S. government can buy foreign, why can't we???
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 03-01-2003, 05:30 PM
truckfreak69 truckfreak69 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,017
truckfreak69 is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

A camaro is a larger car though, so maybe there is a chance that it will beat it because of that? I think the reason Ford never put the 5.4 in a regular mustang was simply there was no reason. My mom's 4.6 powered T-Bird has unbelievable amounts of tourque (more than anything else I've driven). Note that mustangs run (comprably equipped) about 4-5 thousand less than a Comaro or Firebird. How often do you get to stomp on it on the road anyway? It's more image in selling cars these days than actual performance numbers. (Note: Ricers). And in order to sell them they must also be affordable, hence the reason the mustang is still in production. They sell more v6 convertables than anything else anyway.

The I6 I believe was around for at least 40 years, why don't you consider it one of the best engines in production? (they still use it for generators and water pumps etc.)
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 03-02-2003, 07:30 PM
i looove fords i looove fords is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: green bay
Posts: 29
i looove fords is starting off with a positive reputation.
4.6 liter vs. 5.7 liter

i have a 1994 ford t-bird with a 4.6 v8 with accel coil packs and wires,a k&n air filter and bosch plugs..thats it and my brother has a 1989 chevy iroc 305 tpi with bosch plugs and a k&n air filter..he also has about 75,000 miles on his car compared to the 125,000 on my bird and any day of the week i'll whoop him..my car weighs more than his and almost everything is new on his..while the rest of mine is all stock..and as far as top end 50-105 he doesnt stand a chance ..neither does any of the 4 1990's?? 5.0 mustangs i have raced on the highway...as for taking off the mustang 5.0 will leave me..but i have a very badly screwed tranny from all the racing i have also raced a newer chevy lt1 350 and i personally do not think it is all that great..i stayed with it til about 45 then he let off..i think he was embarrassed my bird hung with him..but yes i think you could beef up a 4.6 to beat a lt1 or any other chevy engine..hope i have been of any help..
mike
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2003, 07:30 PM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > General > Ford vs The Competition

Tags
2001, 46, 57, 96, dohc, ford, hp, lariat, liter, lt1, lti, make, motor, power, truck

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup