The 4.6 and 5.4 are a power disaster. Ford overates the claimed bhp by alot. When you drive all three pickups back to back you know this. When you drive a Mustang, a GTO and Charger all on the same day you know this. Either of Dodge's Hemi's and GM's LS1, LS6's are incredible. Take your pick they both are "old fashioned" pushrods motors and both got less parasitic loss than Fords sophisticated overhead cam boat anchor. Both are knocking out alot of horsepower per cubic inch or liters however you want to look at it. Plus Fords modular motor is both physically big and heavy. When they came out with a "modular motor" they said it was because it would give them flexability. Same pistons just longer stroke will save a ton of money. ???

So physcially big Ford can't put the 5.4 in the Crown Victoria or Mustang. Lets get this strait, Fords largest car, the Crown Vic can't physically fit the larger of its two V8's in the engine bay? Thats why the Marauder had the 4.6, thats why their Police Interceptor has the 4.6. Is this a mistake that Mercedes would make? Would the Japs make such a horrible long term mistake?

One more example. The fullsize luxury SUV's are today what the Caddys were back in the 50's, if you got it flaunt it, big and powerful. Their flagship, their largest and most expensive vehicle can't fit the one motor appropriate to that vehicle in it. The 6.8 V10 again won't physically fit in it. However you look at the brands if the Navigator had the V10 it would pull sales away from the Cadillac Escalade.

While Mopar and the General are making tire buring ticket getting horsepower, Ford is watching paint dry. Ford coming late to the party did a lot of R&D on a high horsepower high displacement pushrod V8 and then killed it when gas briefly hit 3 bucks a gallon. What kind of a knee jerk decisions is top management making over there? They have been in this rut for 10 years, they get up nerve and then lose it again.

Yeah Yeah before all the Mustang freaks point out the nuance fact that one Stang had a 5.4 in it lets just remember what all they had to do to stick it in there. It had to come off the production line, cut the cross member and weld it back together. Then the hood wouldn't close so they made a J.C Whitney looking one and called it good. Could it be anymore top heavy. It came from the factory looking homemade. And they only did it once.

 

Gee, I was just thinking that.

GMs rehash of the small block makes more power and gets better mileage. AND then they figure out how to do variable valve timing on a pushrod motor! (they retard/advance the cam on one, giving a nice flat torque curve, which gives you the low-end grunt feel and linear horsepower.)

I notice you forgot to mention the plug spitting feature...........

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the name thing.

Think Civic, Camry, Accord. Same name for years and years, always good, and they get better.

The worst example from Ford is the Windstar/Freestar. Same POS for years, but folks will think it's new with a new name.... Great when it came out, but great turns to dated pretty quick.

Taurus....What is it now? The Fusion or the 500 or the Confusion? Plus, isn't it a Mazda in drag? Not that the Mazda isn't a good base for a car, but what's with not being able to design, engineer and produce your own product? And it's underpowered, but a better engine is on the way. Huh?

Could someone call over there and wake 'em up?

 

You've been goofing around on Myspace, haven't you?

You already got my thoughts with Lincoln needing to set itself apart and have the hi-po stuff like the DOHC 5.4L and the v10 and nothing less in those cars....

As mentioned, it is bad (in a sense... but since since they own Mazda, Jag-u-ar, etc) that Ford can't make their own products. Mazda makes smaller unibodies, 4 cylinders, Jag made up the Tritons and their cousins WAY BACK WHEN....

Yeah, putting the money all in the suv basket helped, didn't it?

 

I want to see real proof that any of this high-performance grocery-getting car-making actually makes the corporation any more money...

While it's nice to see all these nice hot-rods, I'm not entirely sure the profit is there.

Fleet customers aren't going to buy a 6.2L 2-door. Or 4-door, for that matter. Most families won't, given fuel prices. Guys who want a weekend-car, sure, and there is a market for that, but is that really where the money is?

When everyone has Hemi's, the novelty will go away.

As to POWER output from a motor, start looking at torque curves, not peak HP figures. Then realize that the HP number has nothing to do with actual acceleration or anything else, for that matter. It's a made-up number that between different manufacturers and platforms makes NO sense comparing.

If it was in the same weight car, a 210HP 4.6L will push that car to 60 a lot faster than a 2.0L 4-banger rated at 210HP. The trick is, the 4.6L won't have to be geared to heck.

that comment about wedging a 5.4L into a Mustang requiring a crossmember being cut out and weled back, that sounds a little far-fetched. Lots of backyard mechanics putting 5.4L's into Mustangs, Crown Victorias, and even T-bird/Cougars ('94-'97). No major surgery required. The t-bird/cougar takes a little inventiveness with intakes, but it's still doable with the stock '96-97 hood. If Ford did something to bad as to cut out and re-weld a cross-member, that engineer should be taken out back and shot.

 

Thread moved to Ford vs. Competition

 

Obviously dodge can sell just about anything with hp and the Hemi badge on the side. do you think dodge isn't making a profit on those cars?

BTW hp numbers are one of the few things that do actually mean something.

I don't know how you figured the 2.0 would be slower. if they both made the same hp and the same torque (peak) even with the same gearing, i think the 2 liter would win just because the V8 would weight so much more. not to mention how quick those 2.0's can rev up.

 

For what it's worth (not much):
Hemi:
345 rated HP
345-ish to the rear wheels

Nissan Titan V8:
305 rated HP
350-ish to the rear wheels

I wish Ford power gains would come as cheaply as they do for Chebbies. I need a blower while Chebbies need cams and maybe heads to make similar - or more - power.

 

HP is a marketing tool. HP=(Torque*RPM)/5252

In the real world, that snapshot where RPM rises to a point where torque starts to fall off, otherwise known as HP, does NOTHING to describe what a motor can do.

 

I do not know where those power numbers come from?? A hemi 1/2 ton 2004 on the chassis dyno at Kenne Bell pulled 246 hp at the wheels a good figure but nowhere near 345. A Ford f150 with a 5.4 makes about 225 on the same day. You guys have lost me and I run a DYNO for a living. A typical new 4.6 mustang will put down about 265 though newer 2006's have put down about 275 at the wheels and this is with a 5 speed. I just get more amazed at what I read everyday.

 

Um, you can't gain power on a chassis dyno... you typically loose between 15-25% (depending on the vehicle) - it will be closer to 25% in the case of a full size 4x4 truck.


As for seat of the pants performance, it has FAR more to do with gearing than power/torque...

 

Like you, I too am amazed.

 

F350 -Typically I use 12% for a Mustang with an 8.8 and a T5 as I have been fortunate to have run an engine on the dyno then have it run on a chassis dyno when installed in the car. Jim Bell told me the he usually figures a transmission like a 4r100 will take 50 bhp at full tilt. A 9 inch Ford will take about 3% more than an 8.8 if all else like ratios are equal. A truck can lose 20% or more at full power.

 

A high flow air intake, a high flow exhaust and a custom ECM and I have about 35 more hp and 40 ft. lb of torque on my 5.3. No, I have not been on a Dyno and I did not read the box on my air intake, but my custom programmer told me what I had when ordering my custom tune. That with Torque Management virtually removed and the seat of the pants drive is awesome!!

I have eaten "Hemi-trucks" for lunch several times.

 

Those numbers are not right and not consistent with what independent dynos are showing.

Hemi's are putting out about 250-260 horses at the rear wheel's unmodded.

My Armada puts down 264 horses - bone stock.

When you factor in drive line loss (the Hemi has a notoriously ineffecient drive line and the Titan/Armada a pretty efficient one), 250-260 stock horses at the rear wheels is pretty strong, however.

The 5.4L 3 valve is going to come up about 20-30 horses shy of this. Slap those 4 valve DOHC Navigator heads of yore on the 5.4 and they would wake it up considerably. Especially if Ford follows through and puts the 6 speed auto tranny in the F-150 that is now going to be in the new Expedition.

 

The biggest disaster in my book is the hemi. Its overated underpowered an lacks low end torque. The hemi is the biggest fraud I ever seen. Just because its a hemi people think its so great. Ford has the right engines for there trucks. If you guys wanna dragster get a Mustang. A truck is a truck made to haul stuff. Ford has the right engines for there trucks. The majority off people i talk too are not impresssed by the hemi whatsoever. Ford will have the lightning again that will satisfy your power needs. The next engine Ford will put in there half tons will be a diesel. Thats the right move not a bigger gas engine.