Ford Rethinks Big Block V8s
Elder User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 699
Likes: 1
just got my 4wheeler mag and they had a right up that said that ford was likely going to cancel the boss motor in the F150 and along with it, the F150 raptor, because it was supposed to have that motor so that program is currently "under review"
they did say that it could ind its way into the superduty though.
Bottom line is Ford better figure a way for these motor to make more ponies, or the competition is going to keep pulling away.
they did say that it could ind its way into the superduty though.
Bottom line is Ford better figure a way for these motor to make more ponies, or the competition is going to keep pulling away.
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,101
Likes: 40
From: Pa
I just think theres quite a bit of power to be had with the modulars without going into a forced induction or more displacement. A 4V 5.4l, modified cam profile and some other tweaks would put out good power with little retooling. Maybe even a ci bump with a stroker crank.
A 400+lb weight reduction would help, I'd start cutting fat out of the interior and cutting the bed rail height and window height down to normal on the F-150. At this point with the truck market slump I just don't see a need to replace modular truck motors, just refine to keep up with the competition.
A 400+lb weight reduction would help, I'd start cutting fat out of the interior and cutting the bed rail height and window height down to normal on the F-150. At this point with the truck market slump I just don't see a need to replace modular truck motors, just refine to keep up with the competition.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 22,436
Likes: 17
From: Louisville,Ky.
4.17" stroke isn't long enough?? The small bore shrouds the valves limiting power without a power adder.
This is why these engines respond so well to forced induction. ( supercharger or turbocharger).
The Navigators had a 4V 5.4L and only had 300hp and about the same amount of torque.
The 3V engine outperforms the naturally aspirated 4V engine.
2001 Cobra 4.6L 32V had about 320hp?
2008 Bullitt Mustang 4.6L 3V has 315HP and better low end torque.
I don't think a 4V head is the answer at this point.
This is why these engines respond so well to forced induction. ( supercharger or turbocharger).
The Navigators had a 4V 5.4L and only had 300hp and about the same amount of torque.
The 3V engine outperforms the naturally aspirated 4V engine.
2001 Cobra 4.6L 32V had about 320hp?
2008 Bullitt Mustang 4.6L 3V has 315HP and better low end torque.
I don't think a 4V head is the answer at this point.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 22,436
Likes: 17
From: Louisville,Ky.
4.17" stroke isn't long enough?? The small bore shrouds the valves limiting power without a power adder.
This is why these engines respond so well to forced induction. ( supercharger or turbocharger).
The Navigators had a 4V 5.4L and only had 300hp and about the same amount of torque.
The 3V engine outperforms the naturally aspirated 4V engine.
2001 Cobra 4.6L 32V had about 320hp?
2008 Bullitt Mustang 4.6L 3V has 315HP and better low end torque.
I don't think a 4V head is the answer at this point.
This is why these engines respond so well to forced induction. ( supercharger or turbocharger).
The Navigators had a 4V 5.4L and only had 300hp and about the same amount of torque.
The 3V engine outperforms the naturally aspirated 4V engine.
2001 Cobra 4.6L 32V had about 320hp?
2008 Bullitt Mustang 4.6L 3V has 315HP and better low end torque.
I don't think a 4V head is the answer at this point.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Senior User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Hey why not, chrysler tried it out in the sixties and seventies.
Chrysler Turbine Car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
....now put hydrogen in the equation.....
Chrysler Turbine Car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
....now put hydrogen in the equation.....
Tuned
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 311
Likes: 3
From: Arkansas
Need to brush up on your Thermodynamics. HEAT is precisely why turbochargers work as well as they do. The energy of the HOT, EXPANDING exhaust gasses are exactly what is imparting energy to the turbine. The temp drop is not a by-product of expanding gas, the temp drop is a direct relation of work/energy transfer from the exhaust gas and the more heat involved the better the transfer takes place. You are right that turbos are not a free poweradder....but heat is the majority contributor here. It all goes back into why turbochargers are load sensing...load being the fundamental term here.
Oh, and for Ford going to a big block...GM already tried that approach, didn't work very well then and it sure as hell won't work well now.
Elder User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 699
Likes: 1
Need to brush up on your Thermodynamics. HEAT is precisely why turbochargers work as well as they do. The energy of the HOT, EXPANDING exhaust gasses are exactly what is imparting energy to the turbine. The temp drop is not a by-product of expanding gas, the temp drop is a direct relation of work/energy transfer from the exhaust gas and the more heat involved the better the transfer takes place. You are right that turbos are not a free poweradder....but heat is the majority contributor here. It all goes back into why turbochargers are load sensing...load being the fundamental term here.
Oh, and for Ford going to a big block...GM already tried that approach, didn't work very well then and it sure as hell won't work well now.
Oh, and for Ford going to a big block...GM already tried that approach, didn't work very well then and it sure as hell won't work well now.
and see how awesome my turbo works! lol
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
Need to brush up on your Thermodynamics. HEAT is precisely why turbochargers work as well as they do. The energy of the HOT, EXPANDING exhaust gasses are exactly what is imparting energy to the turbine. The temp drop is not a by-product of expanding gas, the temp drop is a direct relation of work/energy transfer from the exhaust gas and the more heat involved the better the transfer takes place.
The gases are no longer expanding after they have left the cylinder. If anything, they are cooling off, contracting. Combustion has finished once it has left the cylinder. There is no heat being added after combustion is done.
Granted, there is a temperature rise, as the gases are compressed by having to do work by pushing the turbine. A bigger the intake turbine on the turbo, the more the exhaust gases are compressed before the exhaust turbine.
It basically hydraulics with gases instead of a liquid. There is no magic "expanding of exhaust gases" after it leaves the combustion chamber. If anything, it is being compressed even more (raising the temp) before the exhaust turbine.
Tuned
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 311
Likes: 3
From: Arkansas
And you'd be wrong. Think about it, rich air-fuel mixture + retarded ignition timing = stuff is STILL burning even as the exhaust valve is opening. Those in hi-po turbo drag cars take this effect to the extreme, called an anti-lag setup. Look it up.
Granted, there is a temperature rise, as the gases are compressed by having to do work by pushing the turbine. A bigger the intake turbine on the turbo, the more the exhaust gases are compressed before the exhaust turbine.
It basically hydraulics with gases instead of a liquid. There is no magic "expanding of exhaust gases" after it leaves the combustion chamber. If anything, it is being compressed even more (raising the temp) before the exhaust turbine.
It basically hydraulics with gases instead of a liquid. There is no magic "expanding of exhaust gases" after it leaves the combustion chamber. If anything, it is being compressed even more (raising the temp) before the exhaust turbine.
Turbochargers, like all gas turbine systems, are fundamentally heat engines. Heat engines...why do they call them that you think?
And for the quip from the guy about running the EGT's up to 1800 degrees: if the turbine could handle that kind of temperature for a given period of time the turbo WOULD work better. The most advances in gas turbine technology has been in coming up with materials that can withstand higher temperatures. Engineers know this, you'd do well to understand as well.
For the sake of further argument I'm just going to post a quote from one of the best turbo resources on the net.
The turbine is powered by hot expanding exhaust gas, a lot of hot expanding exhaust gas, the more and the hotter the expanding exhaust gas the better. I am sure many of you have seen pictures of turbo charged engines with cherry red hot exhaust systems and turbo housings. The captions under most of these types of pictures proclaim outstanding horse power numbers. What most of the articles related to these pictures do not tell you is that the engine was under an extreme load. A load so heavy that the engine was almost at its stall point for a prolonged period of time. A condition that most turbo charged engines will never see.
http://www.turbomustangs.com/turbote...charger_theory