I just read some conversations on another FTE forum about Dodge hemis and performance (or lack of it) compared to Ford performance and engines. I thought I would post some thoughts here about such because we in the "V10 Brother and Sisterhood" seem to be more passionate about our rides than anyone else, so maybe y'all will tolerate my ramblings.

1) hemi schemmi. I have a 1994 MK V111 with the 32V intech, and I strongly believe its a "Hemi" . (Hemispherical combustion chamber), as are any Ford vehicles with that engine or some form of it. Navigator, Aviator, Cobra, Lightning, FordGT, etc. What's the big deal - So Daimler Chrysler has a trademark on the word "Hemi", but not on the words describing the configuration of the combustion chamber, or the technical designation of it. I know Chrysler made them in the 50's, then in the 60's, and now in the 2000's. Why don't they just get on with it and give us a rest. I don't see Ford and Chevy making a big deal out of "Wedge", and those engines seem to produce fairly good HP.

2) PLEASE tell me why Ford didn't go ahead and put 40 valve heads on the V10, shouldn't have been too much trouble since they do it on the 4.6 and 5.4. For that matter, how about a supercharger option with DOHC and 40 Valves, and make a std. cab short bed "lightened" 250 with that engine (if it wouldn't fit in a regular Lightning), and go do some real Hemi bashing, with about 600 HP. (maybe even some more displacement! how about an 8 litre supercharged intercooled DOHC 40 valve v10 with about 750 Horses) I'd pay for it - anybody else?????

3) Final point - Yep, Ford can make some serious HP - ever hear of the SVT 10.0 Boss Mustang - check out January 2000 Car and Driver, I suppose John Coletti got sick of people acting like Ford couldn't make a fast car W/0 super and DOHC and multiple valves. A 460 opened up (4.6 in X 4.5 in B/S, 10 litres) 855 HP 790 Torque in a 1994 SVT Mustang Cobra. 1/4 in 10.55 @ 135.05, 0 - 100 in 5.5, and 0 - 60 in 1.9. A one and only car with "no intent of production".

Thanks gang for letting me vent - I know Ford makes us all mad at times, but I still love 'em.

Dave - 1999 F250 Lariat SD ext cab, 4x4 off road, 8ft. V10, 3.73, 4R100. (Thinking of a Whipple SC, and a re-gear to 4.30 or 4.56 and a gearvendors over/under, or stay 3.73 and add an underdrive)

 

1. I dunno

2. Because the name of the game in a V10 truck isn't horsepower and speed, it's torque at a useable RPM for hauling/towing. 4VPC is a high winding motor that won't hit it's range until the higher RPM's.

3. Yeah, Ford can produce high HP. They are the innovators of the V10 formula1 motors that every formula1 team now copies and uses. However, what good is a motor that produces 850 HP @ 12,000 RPM in a truck that you supposedly purchase to haul/tow items approximately 1.5 times the weight of the truck itself?

I get what you are saying but it isn't apples to apples, so to speak. So, Dodge has trademarked the name Hemi and uses it to their advantage. Okay, that's business, no complaint from me on that. I know I have a superior product for what I use the truck for. That's good enough for me. Trucks, in my opinion, have become a stylish fad. Those of us that really need a truck daily and use them as such, educate ourselves to how it performs within certain peramiters, not smoke and mirrors, not how stylish it is, not what name they call it by. Look around and ask yourself why so many companies that 'use' trucks, utility companies, construction companies, ambulances, service companies, etc. Aren't driving Dodge, Chevy or GMC's. They most all run Ford's, there is a reason for that. To quote William Clay Ford, "....trucks are our business, we build cars as a sideline."

 

Dodge wasn't even the first company to use a "hemi". Airplanes had them long before. There was some quiz on Powerblock on Spike TV that had 3 things that used "hemi" engines before Dodge.

But, to quote "Married...with Children": "Dodge is a good car, Ran over my wife with a Dodge"

 

An F250 "Lightning" with a V10 in any form (3V, 4V, or super charged) would be awsome. Love the idea of a 2x short bed lightning 250. I'm gonna dream about that tonight.

Hang10 you said that the a 40 valve would be a high winding motor. I don't think it would have to be. With the variable valve timing and charge motion valve and such it could make excelent low end power. You could have the best of both worlds.

Totally agree with everything you said alatriton10. I nominate you for president of vehicle developement at FORD.

 

I have no doubt that the average Ford truck owner, particularly SD , wants a complete truck, comfort, brakes, creature luxuries, towing capability, and that speed is not the primary consideration. I drive my truck empty a lot, but also may have a ton of crushed stone on it, or with the camper shell on it, a ton of books, or with an 8000 lb. travel trailer behind it, or a flat bed car hauler, and I know lots of people work theirs' harder than that.

However, I agree that one of the replies that DOHC and 4v can do both, is right. After all, Ford does sell all the Lightnings it makes, and if some folks want a limited production "outlandish" v10, well, sell it to 'em.

At the same time, Ford could build a very powerful(torquey)v10 W/ 4 cams and 4 valves and supercharger. I'm a retired fire Chief, and worked around heavy diesel engines for over 30 years, and the last engine I spec'd before I retired was a Detroit Diesel Series 60. It is what Detroit calls it's "preminum heavy duty engine" and it's an inline six, I believe 11.something litres, and our version had 430 HP and 1250 ft lb of torque. (They were available at over 500 and over 1500 then, three years ago.) Wouldn't I love to shoehorn one of those into a PU?

The point is, however, is that the Series 60 has an OH cam, and multiple valves, I believe four, per cylinder, but doesn't turn but about 2200 RPM. I know it's a diesel, and the difference in burn rates diesel/gas dictate some of that, but Cummins went with oc cam and 4 Valves per in Dodge and got a big increase; better breathing can help in areas other than high RPM, especially with all the computer controls available.

I say put the superc, 4 cam, 4 valves and make a strong, torquey engine for most of us, and since some folks always gotta go faster, make a "burner" version for them.

The question might then become why not buy a PSD, cause you could make a 400 horse, 700 ft lb one of those, well, the fact that probably most of us here could have bought PSDs but went with tritonv10s addresses that issue. I'd rather have my 400 horse, 700 ft.lbs. being gas, not diesel.

Another thing, I hope Ford is working diligently on direct injection for gasoline, it's a technology that is upon us and can only improve things.
So, I guess what I want is an 8 litre, DOHC, 4 valve, supercharged, intercooled, direct injection "intech" v10, with 400 horses and 700 foot lbs., a real stump puller, in a 250 or 350 true SD. If you're gonna dream, make it a sweet one.

 

Bragging rights, sales and marketing hype have much more to do with up grading the V10 to 3valves than engineering the best motor configuration...don't forget the required EPA noise and Air quality standards.

Also remember that Ford wants to have a safe buffer for powertrain life span of greater than 100,000 miles. 3 valve head is a good compromise to get HP and torque up, retain fuel economy (yes, a SuperDuty oxymoron) and signifcantly increase tow and haul ratings to "beat" the competition for another model year.

Remember this is a 415 CI motor that moves a 7000lb+ truck with ease and is more effecient than the old 460 CI moving 4900-6200ls trucks of yesteryear. And I don't know about you folks, but my big 460 never got close to 10MPG, mostly 8-9MPG cruising and 4-6MPG with the camper.

Dodge and Chevy can spend all the $$$ they want on their monster CI engines... some will sell, but most folks agree the best money is a Ford PSD or V10!