Final Ford 4.6-Liter Rolls of Assembly Line - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices

Final Ford 4.6-Liter Rolls of Assembly Line

 
  #1  
Old 05-13-2014, 03:38 PM
Ford-Trucks Editors
Ford-Trucks Editors is offline
Host
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 169
Ford-Trucks Editors is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Final Ford 4.6-Liter Rolls of Assembly Line

This notice comes from a user over on F150Online who mentioned the last 4.6-liter V8 is rolled off the assembly line last Friday.

Now, there hasn't been a lot of fanfare about that from Ford, but it's a pretty big deal. The 4.6 was one of Ford's backbone V8s for over twenty years now. That it's finally going away is surely the mark of an end of an era.

What're you're thoughts on the 4.6? How about Ford's determinedly turbocharged future?

[Ford-Trucks Blog Post here!]
 
  #2  
Old 05-13-2014, 09:44 PM
pony
pony is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 157
pony is starting off with a positive reputation.
Originally Posted by Ford-Trucks Editors View Post
This notice comes from a user over on F150Online who mentioned the last 4.6-liter V8 is rolled off the assembly line last Friday.

Now, there hasn't been a lot of fanfare about that from Ford, but it's a pretty big deal. The 4.6 was one of Ford's backbone V8s for over twenty years now. That it's finally going away is surely the mark of an end of an era.

What're you're thoughts on the 4.6? How about Ford's determinedly turbocharged future?

[Ford-Trucks Blog Post here!]
I'm not a big fan of the mod motors (5.4)...too many faults for my liking....sparkplug blowouts, oil leaking head gaskets, cam phasers...those are biggys in my book. Yeah they do appear to have a bullet proof bottom end which can give longevity but aluminum heads on a cast iron block....well give me all cast iron with push rods. As for turbocharging....that's not going to be in my future if I can possibly avoid it..."give me the simple life"...just more to go wrong.
 
  #3  
Old 05-14-2014, 09:15 PM
YoGeorge
YoGeorge is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,191
YoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud ofYoGeorge has much to be proud of
I really like the Mod motors (with reservations) and am sad to see the 4.6 go. I've got 120k on my 4.6 in my '02 E150 and it uses less oil now than it did when new.

Unfortunately mine was an early Romeo PI engine and got a new pair of cylinder heads under warranty (thank God I bought an extended warranty). And the engineers who designed and allowed the minimal spark plug threads on the 2V engines and the deep sleeves on the 3V versions should have been fired. Maybe they were the same guys who screwed up the early Romeo PI heads.

I think that Ford choosing to use an overhead cam in this whole series of long stroke engines was basically stupid (I think the purpose was "gee whiz" advertising or something). They are not high rev engines and end up larger than the old 460. They are solid day-in, day-out running engines that typically go a lot of miles but don't fit in hot rods and make servicing difficult because they're huge.

I also think Ford's having separate Windsor and Romeo engine versions with NO MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCES was stupid in the same way that they had 3 different 351 engines in the old days. Why? Seems like it would only end up costing Ford more money in the long haul having to carry 2 sets of parts...

Frankly, the small block Chevy V8 was a far more sensible design in terms of size. My 4.6 runs fine and I like it, but I think Ford would have done better to design their version of the small block Chevy and keep the cam in the block....Ford would have more money in the bank if they had done this.

As for turbos, they are nice for "gee whiz" advertising purposes and saving a bit of gas, but I'm not in line to buy one. I blew up the 2.2 turbo in my old '86 Lancer (thankfully under warranty) and don't see turbos as being 250k mile engines like the small block Chevy, or even the mod motors. It'll take a few years for me to see if I'm wrong, but I don't see lawn crews driving clapped out and under-serviced 300k mile pickups with EcoBoost engines in the future.

George
 
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mjr46
1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
72
04-01-2017 07:05 PM
Rusty_S
General Automotive Discussion
14
02-28-2016 05:51 PM
f15046
1997 - 2003 F150
7
11-03-2012 06:48 PM
highteckredneck
1997 - 2003 F150
1
04-19-2010 07:51 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Final Ford 4.6-Liter Rolls of Assembly Line


Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.