Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Modular V8 (4.6L, 5.4L)
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


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 08-02-2004, 07:46 PM
fordflaresides's Avatar
fordflaresides fordflaresides is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 535
fordflaresides is starting off with a positive reputation.
Thunderbird 4.6

I know you guys are probably tired about hp questions, but does anyone know the stock hp/torque for a '96 T-bird w/ 4.6?
__________________
2006 Toyota Tacoma 2wd Reg. Cab
1978 F100 Flareside 300/3spd/9"
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:05 PM
wmcnally wmcnally is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Long Island
Posts: 223
wmcnally is starting off with a positive reputation.
fordflaresides,

The pre '99 (non PI heads) 4.6L was rated @ 220 HP for the trucks. The cars had, I believe, different intake design etc. and were rated 10 to 15% higher.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08-03-2004, 09:39 PM
94tbirdman's Avatar
94tbirdman 94tbirdman is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 69
94tbirdman is starting off with a positive reputation.
For 1994, the first model year Thunderbird that had the 4.6L SOHC V8, through 1995, the engine produced 205HP@4500RPM and 265lbs/ft of torque@3200RPM. From 1996 to 1997, the MN12 Thunderbird's last year, the engine produced 205HP@4250RPM and 280lbs/ft of torque@3000RPM.

For comparison, in case you're interested, the 5.0L OHV V8 used in the Thunderbird from 1991-1993 produced 200HP@4000RPM and 275lbs/ft of torque@3000RPM. The supercharged 3.8L OHV V6 used in the Thunderbird Super Coupe from 1989-1993 produced 210HP@2000RPM and 315lbs/ft of torque@2600RPM. From 1994 to the Super Coupe's final year in 1995, this engine produced 230HP@4400RPM and 330lbs/ft of torque@2500RPM. The base 3.8L OHV V6 used in 1989 and 1990 could produce 120HP@3600RPM and 205lbs/ft of torque@1600RPM. From 1991-1995, this engine enjoyed a performance increase to 140HP@3800RPM and 215lbs/ft of torque@2400RPM. And finally, from 1996 to 1997, thanks in to the EEC-V computer which replaced the EEC-IV after 1995 but was in use with 4.6L SOHC V8 equipped Thunderbirds since 1994, the 3.8L OHV V6 produced 145HP@4000RPM and 215lbs/ft of torque@2750RPM.

The year to year output of these engines should be close to Mustangs of the same years, where the usage of a given engine applies. The Thunderbird was discontinued before PI heads debuted so their 4.6L SOHC V8 never enjoyed the major performance gain that the Mustang did in 1999.

How's that for tired?
__________________
2001 Ford Ranger XLT SuperCab; 4.0L SOHC V6, 4x4; Black
2001 Ford Taurus SE; 3.0L OHV V6; Silver
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX; 3.8L OHV V6; Light Evergreen Frost (damn straight!)

Last edited by 94tbirdman; 08-03-2004 at 10:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08-05-2004, 10:03 PM
JH6 JH6 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 221
JH6 is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
the 96 tbird 4.6 is the same motor as the 96 mustang gt 4.6.

Same deal.

Another tccoa member?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 08-06-2004, 02:12 AM
94tbirdman's Avatar
94tbirdman 94tbirdman is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 69
94tbirdman is starting off with a positive reputation.
I thought the '96 Mustang had a 10HP edge over Thunderbirds of the same year? Ehh, probably doesn't matter much anyway. Even if the Mustang didn't have the advantage in performance at the engine it would still be faster because it would weigh less than a Thunderbird of the same year. I don't even have a V8 and my car weighs close to two tons (over two tons when I'm driving ). Aside from that, any of these early modular V8s were pretty weak until the PI heads came around.

And no, I'm not a member of TCCOA, although I have been to their website many times. What I do want though is a general Ford website like what GMInsidenews is for GM fans. Ford Truck Enthusiasts is great and all but I want to see something that covers all Ford vehicles. And not Ford Forums, that has too much of an Australian influence.
__________________
2001 Ford Ranger XLT SuperCab; 4.0L SOHC V6, 4x4; Black
2001 Ford Taurus SE; 3.0L OHV V6; Silver
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX; 3.8L OHV V6; Light Evergreen Frost (damn straight!)

Last edited by 94tbirdman; 08-06-2004 at 02:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 08-06-2004, 11:44 PM
LxMan1's Avatar
LxMan1 LxMan1 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Louisville,Ky.
Posts: 22,217
LxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant future
The Mustang makes a bit more power because the intake is tuned different and has true dual exhaust where as the Birds and Cougars have 2 into one back into 2 exhaust pipes.
__________________
Jimmy- FTE Moderator

88 5.0 LX Mustang
63 F100 351W/C6

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 08-07-2004, 01:46 AM
94tbirdman's Avatar
94tbirdman 94tbirdman is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 69
94tbirdman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Ha! I knew it. Ten more horsepower in the '96 Mustang over Thunderbirds of the same year, that means 215 total. After the Thunderbird departed in '97, I think they upped the horsepower by ten again for a total of 225 for the '98 model year before switching over to the PI head in '99 for the big boost. But, again, big deal. The Mustang would've been faster anyway, unfortunately.
__________________
2001 Ford Ranger XLT SuperCab; 4.0L SOHC V6, 4x4; Black
2001 Ford Taurus SE; 3.0L OHV V6; Silver
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX; 3.8L OHV V6; Light Evergreen Frost (damn straight!)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 08-09-2004, 04:34 PM
JH6 JH6 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 221
JH6 is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
it all depends what you put in your thunderbird. Mines enough to scare a few mustangs

Click the image to open in full size.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 08-09-2004, 08:27 PM
94tbirdman's Avatar
94tbirdman 94tbirdman is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 69
94tbirdman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Well, duh! The discussion was on what numbers the engines produce stock. Although I do like to see Thunderbirds that are faster than Mustangs, that's the way it should be; the T-bird came out ten years before the Mustang in 1955 and yet the Mustang has always gotten preferencial treatment in the area of performance ever since it came out. What's up with that?
__________________
2001 Ford Ranger XLT SuperCab; 4.0L SOHC V6, 4x4; Black
2001 Ford Taurus SE; 3.0L OHV V6; Silver
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX; 3.8L OHV V6; Light Evergreen Frost (damn straight!)
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 08-09-2004, 09:44 PM
LxMan1's Avatar
LxMan1 LxMan1 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Louisville,Ky.
Posts: 22,217
LxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant futureLxMan1 has a brilliant future
That's because the T-Bird in 58 turn into a cruise ship. They got way too big.
__________________
Jimmy- FTE Moderator

88 5.0 LX Mustang
63 F100 351W/C6

Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 08-10-2004, 02:14 AM
94tbirdman's Avatar
94tbirdman 94tbirdman is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 69
94tbirdman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LxMan1
That's because the T-Bird in 58 turn into a cruise ship. They got way too big.
Well sure, but the original Thunderbird was built to be a Corvette killer, which it did a good job of too, outselling the Corvette 23 to 1 in its first year. Given, the original C1 wasn't much to talk about compared to today's C6 but you can't get to six without starting with one first. It would've been interesting to have seen the Thunderbird evolve through the years the way the Corvette did though, being the company's top performer and all. Oh well, you can't change the past, but hopefully the next Thunderbird will be built to avoid the mistakes made back then.
__________________
2001 Ford Ranger XLT SuperCab; 4.0L SOHC V6, 4x4; Black
2001 Ford Taurus SE; 3.0L OHV V6; Silver
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX; 3.8L OHV V6; Light Evergreen Frost (damn straight!)

Last edited by 94tbirdman; 08-10-2004 at 02:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2004, 02:14 AM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Modular V8 (4.6L, 5.4L)

Tags
1996, 1997, 46, ford, modular, motor, pi, put, ranger, sohc, tbird, thunderbird, tuned, v6, v8

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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
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