I'm new here but not to Fords. I just bought a new '03 F-250 and love the truck except the engine. In my opinion Ford needs to give up on these modulars and design a totally new series of V8s.

There is no benifit to placing the cams over the heads but there are many disadvantages, for example:

The engines are externally as large as a big block 460 but actually have much smaller displacments than the 302/351s they replaced. The fact that the 4.6 was so "fat" it would not fit in the previous generation Explorer is the reason the 302 (5.0) stayed in production so long. Think it's no big deal? I have read threads here of people recomending removing the entire cab of a full size truck from the frame just to change a head gasket!

It seems Ford insisted on the overhead cam design simply to sound "high tech" during the sales pitch on the showroom floor. Compare the power output of these engines to others of approximately the same displacment and there is no advantage, and they do not get better fuel mileage either. In spite of all the high tech talk and a 3rd valve the new improved 5.4L will still be at a 50hp disadvantage to the Dodge hemi. And when potential buyers test drive the 2 trucks they will notice the difference.

The bottom line is Ford needs to design a new V8 of enough displacment with all of the good ideas of the modulars, close tolerances, skirted block for added main cap support, internal balancing, etc. But start with a larger 4in bore, simple durable and space efficent pushrods, roller cam and rockers, iron heads and pistons with enough skirt. And it shouldn't take all weekend and special tools just to change a timing chain. They would save a fortune in warranty costs not to mention customer satisfaction if they concentrated on making engines tough and powerful instead of high tech.

Any other opinions?

 

I tend to agree with you. The mod motors are ok, but the other guys are making alot more power with the old pushrod design and still keeping the emissions down.
The DOHC mods(Cobra and especially the Mach 1) Do make great power but at higher rpms and without the low end torque needed for a truck.
The mod motors may be more impressive if they had more cubic inches. 280 ans 330 are kinda small for great torque numbers. The overhead cam design is really designed for high rpm use in the fact that they have less rotating mass to throw around.
I know that my 5.4L doesn't really feel like it's got 350 ft/lb of torque.
Jimmy

 

Thanks for resopnding.

Another thing about the mods is they must use aluminum cylinder heads because of their over head cam design. Aluminum is a lousy engine material for strength! That's why the new supercharged Cobra's went back to iron blocks because the original and expensive high tech aluminum blocks failed during testing under the added stress of the blower.

How many owners have posted on this site about modular engines blowing spark plugs out and head gasket failures that required replacing the head with a new one because Ford says you cannot repair or resurface a mod head. Ever heard of these problems with the old, low tech iron head V8s?

None of this matters to me really because my truck is under warranty for a long time so if it breaks "they" will be fixing it. The engineers at Ford must be frustrated because some time in the late 1980's managment decided all V8s would be very small displacment OHC designs, then years later the market demanded big torque and horsepower for bigger and hevier trucks.

The modulars V8 and V10 are already "overtech" in my opinion, which means few people can or want to work on them and they cost a fortune, so the big news for 2004 is more tech the variable valve timing 3-valve 5.4L. And still the power is just enough for todays market.

Again I love my new truck or I wouldn't have bought but I think Ford could build a better TRUCK engine.

 

Yes and the variable torque controlled throttlebody? Oh boy. A computer glitch and you push the go pedal and nothing will happen. Can you say whiplash when you get hit in the rear because you tried to get out of the way and nothing happened?
Jimmy

 

I sorta agree. I bought my F-150 new in 1996. My '88 F150 (302) had more torgue, towed better, and got better gas mileage (towing or not).
I believe the new EOD trans is better then the old AOD.

 

Replace the high tech with low tech? Man you must be thinkin.' Quit that or we'll have to pull your brain.

I agree that the design is not the greatest, but my truck does have a better get up and go than any other Ford I've owned or driven. Had a '70 Mustang with a mildly built 351C and C-6 and couldn't light 'em up like this truck can. I think the torque numbers are about right or maybe the gearing is better matched in this particular truck.

I figure it's not just Ford, but all the automakers anyway.

The maintenance aspect of the newer vehicles is what the auto companies are banking on. After 7 -10 years it just costs too much to maintain an electronically controlled vehicle with pollution controls when the engine and tranny start to experience problems. You end up with a new vehicle or spending a mint on the maintenance, either way you've experienced planned obsolescence and made the automakers money.

-Kerry

 

oOoOo .....trying...to....understand all this....

wish someone could simplify this for a guy whose auto knowledge is comprable to a grease monkey...or less..

 

I agree that larger displacement engines would be nice, but most of the automakers have gone with smaller engines and seem to have gotten higher horsepower and more torque. Technology is a wonderful thing, except when you have to fix it Chevy has done the same thing that ford has done with the 5.3 and 4.7 liter motors for there trucks, and they have more power and torque than the previous 350 or 305. As for dodge im not impressed with the latest hemi motor they offer in there truck line up. I may be rated for more horsepower but the thing is a dog when you hook a trailer to it. My uncle bought one about a month ago and tows a 20 foot boat with it. The truck couldn't get out of its own way with that boat behind it. I do like the way the motor rumbles but other than that I can't say its a good engine. He was even disapointed with it after towing the boat, and he's a hardcore dodge man. scarey!!!

 

Boy, that 351C must have been sick if it wouldn't outdo a 5.4L.

 

I agree that had to be one sick 351......I have the 5.4 expedition and pull a 28.5ft boat with it just about every weekend 300+ miles and am very happy with the power and ability to pull the boat up the hills no prob. The gas mileage REALLY blows at about 6 mpg avg. The worst thing is that I have the fuel mileage counter in it and cant take my eyes off of it. I hate that thing. The truck I like tho. The boat would pull my 93 Z71

 

I had a '71 Mach 1 Mustang with the 351-C 4V ram air engine. With the 4v Clevland's huge ports you got great high RPM power but they struggled below 3000, unfortunately most dealers ordered them with automatic trans and 3.00ish axle ratios which made them dogs off the line. Mine had the 3.50 traction-lock 9in and which was a good compromise raito for that car, 4.11 or 4.30 would have been good for the track.

My last truck and my current Mustang have the 302 (5.0L) which are great engines and I am expecting a lot from this new modular 5.4. Unfortunately at 2,100 miles the rear main seal had to be replaced! Yes that mileage is correct.

You can tell my age because I still like to refer to engines by cubic inches!

 

My 351C C-6 was a transplant from a '73 Mach1. I owned both cars, a '70 coupe and '73 Mach. The '73 had a tree fall on it. The '70 had a worn out 302 2V with C-4. Ungodly slow and generic. I felt a swap was in order. I just didn't do it right.

In '73, the 351 HO 4V package was referred to as the Cobra Jet, as the 429 was no longer available in the Mustang after '72. I actually had a built '72 short block put in after I had a mechanical melt down with the original block. I just put all the '73's garbage on the '72 block. The '73 block came with a Rochester Quadrajet spreadbore that had a serious vacuum secondary problem. When I hit 3000rpm in 2nd you could feel the car come to life as all four barrels finally worked together. That threw you back in the seat a bit. That 351 working on 2 barrels just didn't have the kick this truck does on the stock intake. I could pull an upper 14 quarter in the '70 with the 351 in it (used the original 8" rear with stock gears-- I think 2.73s), the truck launch feels like it could match it. Probably just that extra low end torque with 3.73s talking.

Then there's the weight in the rear and tire life. Truck must be a lot lighter, even with a canopy. Plus I had fairly new tires on the '70 and these on the truck are 60K miles old.

-Kerry

 

Yeah, The 4V heads on the 351C's had very large ports. Bigger than D0VE heads on a 460 I believe. No low end torque at all, but they would scream above about 3500rpm.
You know, Chevy still offers a 496ci Vortec gasoline V8 in there trucks. This is much larger than the V10 that Ford has. The Chevy is 8.1L.
I am still a Ford man and I bleed blue, I just wish Ford would up the anti and give us more power. There is no substitute for cubic inches.
I am not real keen on an electric motor controling the throttle body plate opening and closing. If the motor decides to go out (like IAC's do so often), then I don't want mine sticking either closed (no power) or open ( no stop!!).
I'll stick with the old fashioned cable.
I did see a 2004 going down the road yesterday. It sure did look good!!!
Jimmy

 

I make 600rwhp in my lincoln with my aluminum block and a girdle. Will it last 100,000 miles, I will never find out. Have I or other people making this sort of power had a problem yet with the alum block and the aid of a stud girdle.

The 4.6 DOHC engine is a wonderful engine. I think the 3 valve heads will prove to be very effective in the trucks. There is a guy on the corral that is making 500+ rwhp n/a with his 5.4 DOHC. I have never seen a 347 or non stroked 351 ever make 500rwhp n/a. The 5.4 and 6.8's super long stroke is specifically designed for torque.

 

I assume you mean a streetable 351. You can massage a 351 (Cleveland or Windsor) and get numbers in the 500rwhp range. The cam grind required would make one lopey feeling vehicle and pretty much unstreetable on pump gas let alone illegal in all fifty states (no smog equipment). Wouldn't mind getting behind the wheel of that one in a quarter.

I do agree with the stroke comment. The best Ford replacement for my 300 was the 5.4L. From the low end torque of one truck to another. Just praying this 5.4 powered truck lasts the 265K + miles that the 300 powered truck is seeing now, whether I see that many miles in it or not.

-Kerry