Just as the title reads.

I just got my first ford and first modular not too long ago.

I've had olds 350s (so so), a caddy 425( smooth and torquey), olds 307 (two of 'em, low powered but solid), and a dodge 360.
I still have this one. Used hard for 155 of 255k. Burns a qt of oil in 2500 miles. It tows great, gives great mileage (18 mpg), and hasn't had any major repairs.

I put a computer and an egr valve in repairs....and a water pump. Three if you count the ****ty reman. Advance auto parts pumps.

Even though i've had the dodge longer, i like the mod motors better.

What say you, guys?

 

I like the mod engines. They do last a long time and I feel they are well built. Mod engine pre-pi heads im not all that impressed with and they were not really better the the Windsor engines they replaced IMO. I do like my 5.4 in my superduty.
I had a Jeep 304 which was awesome and it would throw around my Jeep cj7 pretty dang fast. the 350 Pontiac I had in my grand prix was a great engine as well, reliable, not that much HP, but torque was good and moved the car just fine. The 5.7 hemi in my challemger has been excellent thus far. Good low end, and a strong top end. The 5.4 pales in comparison.

 

By modular if we are talking 4.6 and 5.4 in 2 valve and 3 valve setups I will say in a word....crap. ( just my opinion )

Ford had from ( and i will be generous ) from 2000 to 2010 to do something productive with these engines and all the 5.4 is...in my opinion is an anchor. Won't go into the 4.6L because it came out in 92 in a 4V version that Ford didn't put into the Mustang GT.....

They had the right idea years ago with the 5.4 DOHC in the Cobra R. The technology was there....reference the 5.0L we have today...but why Ford didn't pursue the DOHC V8 in "mass" production still boogles me.

As for longevity...sure they last long...with the piston slap...cam phasers....and so on. Just sayin' owned 2 5.4 2V's and I currrently have a 10 5.4L that sounds like a rattle trap....

 

i think they are great engines for use by the average clueless idiot.
and they last forever with proper maintenance. i know of several 4.6 engines with over 700,000 miles on them in limo's.

 

What is so "modular" about them? Just that V-8's and a V-10 were built on the same line and shared some parts? The same could be said about the Windsor V-8's and V-6's which werent called "modular".

The whole concept was lost a long time ago. It started as a Ford "Better Idea" aka cheaper idea, a SOHC I-4, V-6, V-8 and V-10 engine family with many interchangeable parts and common tooling. What happened?

 

IMO, the modular v8's are a great design. The 4.6 OHC V8 was the engine used in the last gen Crown Vic police package and had very hard service...with many after police duty doing taxi work after.

Then there's the 5.4 V8 and 6.8 V 10.

Great idea...OHC, modern design some excellent design aspects with this...then economy of scale...using engine components in different engines in the modular family.

Modular engines have a strong rep for reliability and durability...some spark plug issues with the V 10, valve guide wear with others...but generally fairly bullet proof.

However not used by hot rodders that much. The 5 liter OHV sbf and of course the Chevy SB and BB Chevy Rat have never been in danger of being dethroned as the rodder's choice by the modular family.

But I think this was due in large part to the relatively advanced design and many assumed additional complexity of OHC's, electronic engine management of a modern design etc.

I think the fear of the unknown kept it away from hot rodders.

But a great engine design ? IMO. Absolutely. Used in trucks, cars, sportscars...it's done it all...well.

 

Smiggs, i guess i was talking about durability over performance. I mean, in 20 years, will people look back and say "that was a good engine".
I heard that the 5.4 does have piston slap due to the longer stroke.

As far as the dohc thing, didn't they use them in the lincoln avaitor and similar models?
It seems like the trucks don't get the good stuff. Almost as if they don't have to try too hard. Look at the e series vans. They didn't even get the 3 valve heads that the f150 has. Neither of those got the 4 valve heads.

I think the modular moniker is more of a way to differentiate it from the windsor and other series.

 

Fleet buyers are generally very conservative. They dont want the latest technology if it just produces more power for the drivers to use more gas. The hp wars in retail (high profit) pickups meant that some tech had to land in the F-150, but not the E-series.

I clearly recall that the "modular" was originally hyped as much more than a Windsor replacement. I-4 and V-6 engine development ended up going down separate paths than the "modular". Maybe if Alan had been in charge back then it wouldnt have happened that way. Look how long it took for the Cyclone to replace the ancient Cologne and Windsor/Essex V-6's.

 

The term 'Modular' had to do with the manufacturing tooling,which could be easily changed to build different versions of the 'Mod'.

 

IMO the 4.6, 5.4 and 6.8 are all great, with regular maint they will last forever! i've had no issues with my 5.4 or 3 6.8s i've owned/currently own.

i would love the DOHC 5.4 from a Lincoln Navigator in my expedition but she does well enough.

 

Orininally, Ford had nooo intention of puting the "new' modulars in the trucks.....the 4.6 & 5.4's were for the cars.....at a press conference where the PR staff was introducing the Mods to the media, one of the car mag staffers asked "if this new engine is so good, why isn't it going to be put in all the trucks?".......The Ford PR staff replied after a brief pause...oh it will be.......

the stage was set, Ford execs had no choice but to temp scrap the windsor series engines...which we are now seeing returning (including the 351) with the mod motor heads!

 

Well, that's an interesting story, but it isn't exactly what I was told. The Mod. was originally a project for the front wheel drive Lincoln Continentals back in the late 80's. At the time Jac Nassar was running Ford, and he was not someone you said no to. Jac decided one day that the V-8 was on the way out, and decreed that Ford would have at most ONE V-8 engine platform, period. Since a V-8 option for the FWD Continental was considered to be very important for the success of the car, the Mod. was going to have to work in everything else, including trucks. So basically you had one low volume vehicle dictating an engine design that was going to be used in a large variety of other vehicles (trucks) that it was not well suited for. A bad idea that came about because no one in Ford at the time had ***** enough to tell Nassar he was nuts. The Mod. was originally going to be a 4.6L only, but since it was going into the '97 F-150, Ford had to get more power out of it. The 5.4L was the result, and that was the absolute largest displacement Ford could get out of the Mod. without adding cylinders. The V-10 came with the 1999 Super Duty, and was nothing more than a 5.4L with 2 more cylinders and a balance shaft. None of these engines performed all that well in trucks until the 3 valve head was introduced. The 3 valve head overcame the breathing issues the 2 valve Mod. had caused by valve shrouding, a result of the very small cylinder bores. And, those small bores were a direct result of keeping the length of the Mod. engine to a minimum for FWD car applications. Can you say 'compromise'?

Not sure where you got the idea the Windsors are making a comeback. The 6.2L 'Boss' is basically a Mod. design with much larger bore spacing. The larger bore spacing allows for a larger cylinder bore, which makes a very efficient 2 valve head possible. The 'Boss' is not related to the Windsor in any way that I can see. The 'Boss' is far better suited for light trucks than the Mod. ever was, though I find it surprising it has not replaced the V-10 in the F-450 and larger trucks. I thought that a 7L 'Boss' was in the works for the larger trucks.

That's basically what I was told. If anyone can add to the story I would like to hear it.

 

You are also right....the original story was published in numerous peterson Publishing mags (including hot rod)....eventually leading up to Nassars office....and it goes from there.........

 

First off...sorry to reply so late..but seeing it's dead of late in this section of the website...

No doubt that they last long...but without problems...no..and looking at the potential that was there....

I agree. Let's look at when the LT1 Camaros and Firebird were introduced in the early 90's. They would hand it to any 5.0L in the day but Ford still outsold them because????? I'm not sure why. Better branding...better pedigree? Aftermarket?

 

Quality, or at least perceived quality. up to '92 F-bodies had a terrible reputation back then. The Van Nuys plant had a horrible rework rate. Before the LT1 there was the relatively weak 305 and that reputation had to be overcome.