my feelings arent hurt and i know im on a ford website. i enjoy getting my questions answered like in FTE freds post. that is something i didnt know. and im not defending gm. i just want to know why (if we are going to talk about trucks) why the new 5.4 has such a low power out put and everyone thinks gms and mopar (whose motors do perform) motors are fossils. that is the question i would like to have answered. this is not bashing or being biased. i have driven the 5.4, all of gms v8s and the hemi ram. im sure fords new motor will be up to par with the rest.
my feelings arent hurt and i know im on a ford website. i enjoy getting my questions answered like in FTE freds post. that is something i didnt know. and im not defending gm. i just want to know why (if we are going to talk about trucks) why the new 5.4 has such a low power out put and everyone thinks gms and mopar (whose motors do perform) motors are fossils. that is the question i would like to have answered. this is not bashing or being biased. i have driven the 5.4, all of gms v8s and the hemi ram. im sure fords new motor will be up to par with the rest.
I will agree with ya on the 5.4's compared to the competition. ( trucks ) I guess it's all what you use your truck for, I'm more concerned about useable tq down low and the current 5.4 works well down low. While the Gm and Hemi have to rev more.
But there is always room for improvement and I won't be happy until Ford gives me big block #'s and 30 mpg to boot. ( it's nice to dream isn't it? )
__________________
SMIGGS
2000 Eddie Bauer
1999 F-150 4x4
Wishfull thinking on MM&FF part. The engine in the Roush isn't a pushrod mill...period. Take a look at the cylinder heads, front cover, valve covers, and the bulkhead cast into the front sider of each cylinder head (near that obvious rounding of the valve cover which should scream "cam gear"). This has been beaten to death on other sites...it's a large bore modular. The modulars where originally designed to be modular not only in parts interchangeability but in longitudinal and transverse mounted applications as well. Hence the reason they have such short bore centers. Short bore centers means narrow cylinder bores, means shrouding valves, means unimpressive n/a power numbers. Stretching the engines out pretty much fixes the major n/a performance hindrance.
Here are some stills from the video:
Take note of the shape of the valve covers and the how the timing chain cover sticks out well past the engine block to meet them. Pushrods don't stick out that far and neither do rocker arms (especially in a Hemi arrangement). Would explain room for a cam phaser though. Also notice the location of the water pump, pretty much in line with current mod motor setups.
Close up still.
I just read in the March 2007 that it is a pushrod engine as well. The waterpump looks more like the one on mt 5.0 and the head sticks out in the front, but that is an awful lot of space for a cam phaser to stick out a couple of inches. And it it was a cam phaser, the head under the valve cover would be round, not hacked up and flat.
The new Viper engine has variable cam timing with the cam in the block. It uses a 2 piece camshaft. Interesting.
I guess we'll find out one of these days.
I just read in the March 2007 that it is a pushrod engine as well. The waterpump looks more like the one on mt 5.0 and the head sticks out in the front, but that is an awful lot of space for a cam phaser to stick out a couple of inches. And it it was a cam phaser, the head under the valve cover would be round, not hacked up and flat.
The new Viper engine has variable cam timing with the cam in the block. It uses a 2 piece camshaft. Interesting.
I guess we'll find out one of these days.
The Tundra 5.7 timing chain cover looks almost identical to that on the driver side. Huge boss to make room for a huge cam phaser.
The only thing that throws me off about the experimental engine is the location of the (visible) spark plugs. Maybe it is a wedge engine with 2 spark plugs per cyliner?
There are alot of very Modular looking aspects to that engine, look at the the intake ports, coolant passages, timing chain cover, etc.
I'd be willing to bet big money this experimental engine is in essence a Modular with comparativey huge bore spacing. Is so, this engine family is going to put the new Hemi and LSX engines on the trailer.
I agree, I'm just quoting what I read. It kinda looks like a combination of both OHV and OHC engines. As long as it has a big bore and shorter stroke (like the 385 series engines), then it should be a winner.
Ford Boss engine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Ford Boss V8
Manufacturer Ford Motor Company
Also called: Ford Hurricane V8
Production: 2008–
Predecessor: 385 V8
Modular V8
The Boss engine is a forthcoming all new large-displacement V8 engine project at Ford Motor Company. The engine project was reportedly canceled in 2005 as the company focused on its existing Modular V8 and V10, but was reportedly revived in early 2006 by Mark Fields. [1] The large engine will compete with DaimlerChrysler's 6.1 L and larger Hemi and General Motors' 6.2 L Vortec engines. The Boss V8 will be built at Cleveland Engine in Cleveland, Ohio and the first application will be Ford's new 2009 (likely a late availability 2009 or 2010 model year option) F-Series pickup trucks produced at Dearborn Truck.
The Boss engine will reportedly displace 6.2 L (6207 cc/379 in³) and produce roughly 425 hp (317 kW) and 425 ft·lbf (576 N·m) upon introduction. The engine architecture will offer the ability to exceed 7.0 L in future applications. Insider reports indicate the Boss will retain several design similarities with the Modular V8 such as deep skirt block with cross bolted main caps, crankshaft driven gerotor oil pump, and overhead camshaft valve train arrangement. The Boss' single most significant departure from the Modular V8 will be seen in the significantly wider 4.53 in (115 mm) bore centerline (The Modular V8 is 3.94 in (100 mm) by comparison). The 6.2 L will reportedly employ a 4.015 in (102 mm) bore diameter and a 3.74 in (95 mm) stroke to achieve it's 6.2 L of displacement. The initial versions of the Boss will have single overhead camshafts, two valves per cylinder, two spark plugs per cylinder and employ a form of cylinder deactivation for increased fuel economy. Initial information on valve sizes of the 6.2 L puts the intake valve at 2.10 in and the exhaust valve at 1.65 in. [2] Later high-performance versions will be equipped with DOHC 4-valve heads and gasoline direct injection (GDI). A "TwinForce" 6.2 L DOHC 4-valve, twin-turbo, GDI version of the Boss is currently being developed and has reportedly produced over 650 ft·lbf (881 N·m) in initial testing.
Roush Racing is currently field testing an experimental, large displacement version of the Boss engine code named "777", which stands for 7.0 L, 700 hp @ 7,000 rpm, at National Mustang Racers Association (NMRA) events around the United States. The 777 Boss is naturally aspirated and runs on E85 biofuel.
The engine was initially called the "Hurricane", but this was changed in mid 2006 to the storied Boss name in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. [3]
That sounds about right. It is putting out close to 800hp in the test car mentioned.
After carefully studying the available pictures, it is appears to be a SOHC 2V head in the test car with the spark plugs relocated.
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
