yea but they were ex-cab only, but still so much potential there with the huge aftermarket the LS based engines have. Hell car craft took a 100K+ mile bone stock 4.8, bolted a turbo to it and just kept addin boost, fuel and pulled timin out and made over 1000 hp reliably, thats no BS.

 

A few pulls on a dyno or a run down a drag is not reliably. Even the old 4.0L Toyota 1UZ V8s can do that.

 

well hot rod magazine did the exact same thing, (maybe they were both the same one) and did over 150 dyno pulls and ended the day with 30 some psi of boost and over 1000 horsepower with nothing more than a new set of rings

 

The article said about 60 runs, with the pulls starting at around 4500-5000 RPM. Any lower then that an cylinder pressures got too high and would push a rod through the block

If this could be done reliably, there wouldn't be a market for LS rods and pistons.

 

wow online article said 150 pulls... sketchy

 

Its a conspiracy!

 

lots of butthurt on this thread , lead head says "A few pulls on a dyno", when he already knows it was at least 60 pulls which is well more then a few. They took a junkyard 100,000 + mile engine and made over 1000 hp with it, whats not to be totally impressed with about that? Yea its not a ford but damn that is incredible testimony to how well built and engineered those LS motors are from GM. I seriously doubt you could try the same thing with a equivalent 4.6 ford mod motor and get anywhere near even half of that 1000 hp for one pull on a dyno. whine on, I'm done with this type of thread on this forum, obvious it hurts peoples feelins and they can't give credit to anything but a Ford product. I'll stick to the ever popular "should I rhino line my bumper threads"

 

actually due to design a mod motor will make more power under the same amount of psi, the reason? they flow more, i can put a reducer in the intake and make 100 psi of boost and loose power, the point is you put the same turbo on both motors the psi will be lower on the mod motor than on an ls motor stock vs stock but i dont know how they compare stock vs stock in the reliability department

 

well if mod motors can make more power, why have they always been notorious dogs? Well heres what I saw firsthand workin at a late model salvage yard. The most requested V8 engine without a doubt is the 4.6 with the 5.4 close behind it. Most barely had 100,000 miles on them or less when they blew also from what our customers said. We didn't keep them on the shelves long at all. Now we had 4.8/5.3 gm's were layin all over the place and we NEVER got calls unless it was someone who wanted to do a swap into a older vehicle. Based on that, common sense says the mod motors are less reliable. Granted the 4.6's came out 5-6 years earlier then the LS gm engines did, but it really didn't matter as the mod motor engines calls were all years and not just the older ones.

 

i never said they were more reliable i said i didnt know

 

454 ...... Faster

460 ...... Laster

 

Because besides the Camaro (which died in 2001), and the Corvette, the LS engines were only used in trucks and SUVs. The 4.6s were used in Crown Vics, Mustangs, Mercuries, Lincolns, F-150s, Explorers. The 5.4 and 6.8 in Expeditions, F-150s, Super Duties. More engines, more chance for failure. The mod motors are extremely durable, with most lasting well over 200,000. There are many with over 300,000 and one documented one with over a million.

The 1000+ HP is impressive to a degree, but it is nothing un-heard of. They were suicide run dynos with the pulls starting at 5000 RPM. They used ARP headstuds, 110 Octane fuel and aftermarket headgaskets. People close to the actual engine builder stated they had one blow when they started the pull at a lower RPM. The only thing I was saying is that suicide runs on a dyno is not the same as something being "reliable". On a track, it'd blow very fast. The 5.3s start bending rods around the 800HP mark on the strip.

As far as being notorious dogs? In what way? They were fine in the mustangs, and fine in the F-150s as well as a host of other vehicles. There just wasn't enough displacement in the 5.4 for Super Duty/Expedition use, and the Crown Vics continued to use the old 2V engine until their death.

 

To add to this mod motor debate...
My TBird has a 4.6L, a rather early one at that, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that those motors are garbage.

The mod motors even got the same treatment as the windsors did in this era. They got put in mustangs so there is no shortage of aftermarket equipment for them. If you ask me, the mod motors were a great step forward from what we have. How awesome would it be if we all had to deal with 10mpg (expected mpg from a 460) to get any kind of power? I mean, for heaven's sake, my Tbird gets 26MPG with a V8 in it, no shortage of power, and aftermarket parts for days.

As for your theory on why the mod motors were so requested, if I was going to build a motor, I would want a second one to build while I'm still using the motor in my car. And if I was going to build a motor, it's going to get beat, and I could see it lasting less than 100k because of that. Aside from that, mod motors were put into the #1 selling truck, can you see how there would be MANY MANY more requests for a motor that way more people had? Common sense isn't so common.

 

you guys are in dreamland. I worked at a late model salvage yard in SWFL, the car guy scenarios ya'll speak of made up about 1% if that of our customers. we got calls from shops, walk in avg joe people and other salvage yards. Now a real car guy like most of us on these forums will take better care of their vehicles, so on avg I think we usually have better luck with our stuff. Unfortunately most everyone else doesn't. The mod motors don't seem to hold up with these folks who are probably 50-75% of the population. They don't check or change their oil like they should, let the vehicle warm up a minute before they zoom off,keep up on tune ups etc MANY of the mod motors requested in trucks and suv's had under 100k on them. Tells me the 5.4's and especially the 4.6's work too hard and if not taken care of won't last like they should.

My opinion on the lack of power is just that just my opinion. As far as later model rides I have had the 95 5.2 magnum Dakota which hauled *** bigtime, I had a 95 Caprice wagon with the 5.7 LT1 that ran damn good for such a big vehicle and also got 25-28 mpg when it still had the stock 2.56 gears. Hell even the 5.2 magnum 1500 and 2500 rams I had would smoke a 4.6 150 of the pre 2012 era. In the trucks the mod motors don't seem to get any better mileage then the old 302/351w and they lack the lower end grunt those old ohv engines had. I have driven many mod motored powered vehicles and so far none of them have impressed me at all on power. I hear good things about the 2012/2013 trucks so maybe that problem has been taken care of and I have heard great things on mpg with the ecoboost engines. If I was to get a new gas truck though it would either be a Hemi Dodge or any of the Gm V8's, I wouldn't buy a Ford gas truck newer then a 1996, which is why I'm here.

My old 1979 f100 with the 300/c6 trans and 2.75 geared rear feels stronger then the 2005 4.6 f150 excab I used at work, which only had 40k miles on it. You may think I just hate fords, but thats far from the case. I had a 351w in a maverick I used to street race/drag race with, 429 powered ranchero Gt, several 80-82 f 150's and now my 79 and wifes 94. I won't deny my wifes 351w 4x4 ex cab is fuel thirsty though, but doubt a 5.4 version of her truck would do much better and I bet hers has way better bottom end power which is where a truck needs it most IMO since they are heavy and have the aerodynamics of a barn. I'm glad you have had great luck with your 4.6 T-bird, but i think your the exception rather then the rule. I mean I can't even recall the last time I saw one of those 92-96 4.6 T-birds/cougars on the road,96-99ish mustangs or even many 2000 and older town cars, grand marquis and crown vics but I see tons of older TBI 305/350 Gm vehicles, magnum powered Dodge trucks, 96 and older Ford trucks. I said before I have no brand loyalty at all I like what holds up regardless of make as long as its a Ford, Gm or Chrysler product. My opinions are based on real first hand experience, can't think of much better then that to base it on.

As far as the 1000+ hp junkyard 4.8 100,000+ mile "suicide dyno runs", like I said you probably couldn't make half of that with the equivalent 4.6 engine under the same circumstances, so give credit where credit is due and don't just try to downplay it because of brand loyalty. I have hijacked this poor guys thread long enough, so if you wanna bs and bench race, just send me a pm. I can give you a LONG list of automotive lemons to avoid for one reason or another.

 

i would seriously like to see this lemon list, share your knowledge