Its back...Hurricane!
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder
Are you reading any of this thread???
The 5.4 is only down 35 or so HP(389, I know I said 400) with nearly 40 cubes less.....I believe that with a few tweaks (like VVT/Variable runner lenghts) that ain't no hill to climb considering the potential of a DOHC 4 valve head (see comparo's to Japanese and German motors)
Since some people are worried about piston speed (rightfully so) how about Ford buliding us a long rod shorter stroke motor with the tall deck 5.4 block...like stated, BMW can get 500 HP out of 5.0 Liters N/A.
"I know about the supercharger 5.4 haveing tons of power, but anyone and their mother can get big power with forced induction"
Since one goofy comment deserves another, here's my gem of the day;
I know about the 427 cubic inch LS7 having tons of power, but anyone and their mother can get big power with 7.0 liters....
At the risk of being redundant, I look forward to a 6.2 Litre Ford........but as is usual with Ford, they tend to abandon designs/products that have LOTS of potential left for the sake of change or perceived economics.
The 5.4 is only down 35 or so HP(389, I know I said 400) with nearly 40 cubes less.....I believe that with a few tweaks (like VVT/Variable runner lenghts) that ain't no hill to climb considering the potential of a DOHC 4 valve head (see comparo's to Japanese and German motors)
Since some people are worried about piston speed (rightfully so) how about Ford buliding us a long rod shorter stroke motor with the tall deck 5.4 block...like stated, BMW can get 500 HP out of 5.0 Liters N/A.
"I know about the supercharger 5.4 haveing tons of power, but anyone and their mother can get big power with forced induction"
Since one goofy comment deserves another, here's my gem of the day;
I know about the 427 cubic inch LS7 having tons of power, but anyone and their mother can get big power with 7.0 liters....
At the risk of being redundant, I look forward to a 6.2 Litre Ford........but as is usual with Ford, they tend to abandon designs/products that have LOTS of potential left for the sake of change or perceived economics.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder
Not versed on the European market......But I do know that the success of GM and the aftermarket is directly related to interchangabilty and length of production.
Even the LS(GM) series of motors 4.8 through 7.0 have probably more interchangability than the Ford MOD motors ( the 4.6 MOD motors from Romeo and Windsor factories have MANY different parts.......from valve covers to cranks)
Give me ANY reason to change bellhousing/trans mount patterns from the 302/351 to the MOD motors???
How about different input shafts from the FOX body to SN95 cars(Mustangs) EVEN though the underpinning were indentical???
I just wish Ford would stick with something and stop acting like their engineers are tweeking!!
Even the LS(GM) series of motors 4.8 through 7.0 have probably more interchangability than the Ford MOD motors ( the 4.6 MOD motors from Romeo and Windsor factories have MANY different parts.......from valve covers to cranks)
Give me ANY reason to change bellhousing/trans mount patterns from the 302/351 to the MOD motors???
How about different input shafts from the FOX body to SN95 cars(Mustangs) EVEN though the underpinning were indentical???
I just wish Ford would stick with something and stop acting like their engineers are tweeking!!
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,074
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas
Originally Posted by 92f150I6
Yes I am reading the thread. My point is that I have never been impressed with the 5.4 and I own for goodness sake. Do I like it, yes I do, but I want more power for highway speed, and it just doesn give it to me. I think it is good that ford is developing a new engine, and I stated my opinion that the 5.4 isn't cutting it, and I would like to see a return to pushrods as I like pushrod engines. If everone else like the OHC mod motors better, sue me as they are not outperforming their pushrod counterparts.
The fact that Ford doesn't utilize their superior head design for their trucks may be a good reason to abandon the OHC.
Why Ford only lets there truck motors have 260 or 300 HP when the 5.4 is capable of so much more is Ford's continuous way of screwing things up.
And please don't start with the torque stuff.......I'll take a HUGE gamble and say those Aussie motors with near 400HP have as much torque down low as the truck motors by 2000 RPM.......Fred????
BTW...........you're being sued. I'll settle for 1 BILLION dollars..
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 18,787
Likes: 30
From: Melbourne, Aus
I'll take a HUGE gamble and say those Aussie motors with near 400HP have as much torque down low as the truck motors by 2000 RPM.......
Not quite (unfortunately)
VVT would help a lot though...
Not quite (unfortunately)
VVT would help a lot though...
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,074
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas
Any chance you have graphs of the 4V???
I found these;
http://www.hypertech-inc.com/dynofrdtk.html
The 2V peaked at 2000RPM with 278#
The 3V had 260@2000 but peaked at 300#'s @3900
My W.A.G. is your 4V will be very close down low but carry an extra 30+ #'s at it's peak which I'm guessing is not that far off the 3V's 3900RPM.
I found these;
http://www.hypertech-inc.com/dynofrdtk.html
The 2V peaked at 2000RPM with 278#
The 3V had 260@2000 but peaked at 300#'s @3900
My W.A.G. is your 4V will be very close down low but carry an extra 30+ #'s at it's peak which I'm guessing is not that far off the 3V's 3900RPM.
Last edited by DOHCmarauder; Apr 2, 2006 at 12:38 AM.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 18,787
Likes: 30
From: Melbourne, Aus
Thats a fair point:
http://www.fpv.com.au/index.asp?link...&parent_id=180
(remember we are in metric)
From the graph (remember this is an engine dyno, not a chassis dyno like yours...)
At 2000 it looks about 435Nm (320lb.ft)
Torque peaks at 4500 with 520Nm (382lb.ft)
So, taking into account an estimated 20% loss:
@2000 = 256lb.ft
@4500 = 306lb.ft
http://www.fpv.com.au/index.asp?link...&parent_id=180
(remember we are in metric)
From the graph (remember this is an engine dyno, not a chassis dyno like yours...)
At 2000 it looks about 435Nm (320lb.ft)
Torque peaks at 4500 with 520Nm (382lb.ft)
So, taking into account an estimated 20% loss:
@2000 = 256lb.ft
@4500 = 306lb.ft
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,074
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas
Originally Posted by BigF350
Thats a fair point:
http://www.fpv.com.au/index.asp?link...&parent_id=180
(remember we are in metric)
From the graph (remember this is an engine dyno, not a chassis dyno like yours...)
At 2000 it looks about 435Nm (320lb.ft)
Torque peaks at 4500 with 520Nm (382lb.ft)
So, taking into account an estimated 20% loss:
@2000 = 256lb.ft
@4500 = 306lb.ft
http://www.fpv.com.au/index.asp?link...&parent_id=180
(remember we are in metric)
From the graph (remember this is an engine dyno, not a chassis dyno like yours...)
At 2000 it looks about 435Nm (320lb.ft)
Torque peaks at 4500 with 520Nm (382lb.ft)
So, taking into account an estimated 20% loss:
@2000 = 256lb.ft
@4500 = 306lb.ft
Not quite what I was expecting....
I'm basing a lot of my "thoughts" on Navigator performance since all 3 motors have been available; 2V, 4V and now the 3V.
Strictly from memory, when the 4V replaced the the 2V the Navi gained 40 high end HP with about 10#'s more torque higher in the powerband....but it GAINED a nearly 2 second advantage 0-60.
The 3V seems to have a very close powerband to the 4V but the Navi LOST a second to the 4V!!!
Give me the HP a DOHC 4 valve is capable of and gear it CORRECTLY any day over a motor that runs out of breath quickly.
I will always concede that at the power #'s that Ford tunes these truck motors to, that OHC seems to be overkill (especially the old 2V SOHC)
One revelation that kinda blows my mind is that IF this Hurricane makes it to market by, let's say, 2009.........the MOD motors will be 18-19 years old!!!
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,221
Likes: 5
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Laughing Gas
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 2
From: Denver, CO
Originally Posted by 92f150I6
If everone else like the OHC mod motors better, sue me as they are not outperforming their pushrod counterparts.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
Dude, those engines are totally different. Not even produced at the same time. Those are not the mod motor pushrod counterparts. The LS/vortec GM's, and the newer Hemi's are.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
Last edited by IB Tim; Apr 4, 2006 at 05:15 AM.
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,074
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas
Originally Posted by 92f150I6
Dude, those engines are totally different. Not even produced at the same time. Those are not the mod motor pushrod counterparts. The LS/vortec GM's, and the newer Hemi's are.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
Good point.
But the problem, IMHO, is Ford doesn't use their best version in the trucks.....with the exception of the V10.
Here are Ford's BEST MOD motors;
320 HP DOHC 4.6..........more than a match for GM's 4.8
390 HP DOHC 5.4 from Oz....would stuff the 5.7 hemi and 5.3 GM. and I really believe with more tweaking could run with the GM 6.2 and 6.1 hemi.
The V10 equals and surpasses GM's 8.1 (I realize the 8.1 is old school) while giving up 1300CC or 80 cubic inches!!!
I know the 5.4 in a Super Duty is kinda overmatched but I rarely got double digit MPG in my 460 where I regularly get low teens with the V10 (have heard the 5.4 is aprox. the same)
All I've tried to say this whole thread is Ford has the guns to compete.....for whatever reason, they choose a different more costly route....as is their usual M.O.
Laughing Gas
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 2
From: Denver, CO
Originally Posted by 92f150I6
Dude, those engines are totally different. Not even produced at the same time. Those are not the mod motor pushrod counterparts. The LS/vortec GM's, and the newer Hemi's are.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
Is your fule milage really much better than your 7.5L? Cause my 5.4 sure isn't much better than my uncles 96 460.
PS. The fuel mileage is about 50% better with the V10 over the 7.5L. I would struggle to get 10 with the 460 and get 14-15 on a regular basis with the V10. I have gotten as good as 16.5mpg (It was hard driving that slow).
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
Originally Posted by MadMedic20
PS. The fuel mileage is about 50% better with the V10 over the 7.5L. I would struggle to get 10 with the 460 and get 14-15 on a regular basis with the V10. I have gotten as good as 16.5mpg (It was hard driving that slow).
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder
Good point.
But the problem, IMHO, is Ford doesn't use their best version in the trucks.....with the exception of the V10.
Here are Ford's BEST MOD motors;
320 HP DOHC 4.6..........more than a match for GM's 4.8
390 HP DOHC 5.4 from Oz....would stuff the 5.7 hemi and 5.3 GM. and I really believe with more tweaking could run with the GM 6.2 and 6.1 hemi.
I know the 5.4 in a Super Duty is kinda overmatched but I rarely got double digit MPG in my 460 where I regularly get low teens with the V10 (have heard the 5.4 is aprox. the same)
All I've tried to say this whole thread is Ford has the guns to compete.....for whatever reason, they choose a different more costly route....as is their usual M.O.
But the problem, IMHO, is Ford doesn't use their best version in the trucks.....with the exception of the V10.
Here are Ford's BEST MOD motors;
320 HP DOHC 4.6..........more than a match for GM's 4.8
390 HP DOHC 5.4 from Oz....would stuff the 5.7 hemi and 5.3 GM. and I really believe with more tweaking could run with the GM 6.2 and 6.1 hemi.
I know the 5.4 in a Super Duty is kinda overmatched but I rarely got double digit MPG in my 460 where I regularly get low teens with the V10 (have heard the 5.4 is aprox. the same)
All I've tried to say this whole thread is Ford has the guns to compete.....for whatever reason, they choose a different more costly route....as is their usual M.O.