 | 
06-18-05, 07:44 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: April 2004
Posts: 42
| | | Modular Motor Specs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!if Anyone Is Curious
Basic Modular Engine Dimensions
4.6-liter SOHC and DOHC
Aluminum block weight (bare): 86 lbs.
Iron block weight (bare): 154 lbs.
Assembled cylinder head weight: 44 lbs.*
Displacement: 4.6 liters/281 cubic inches
Bore: 3.552 inches
Stroke: 3.543 inches
Bore spacing: 3.937 inches
Main journal dia.: 2.657 inches
Rod journal dia.: 2.086 inches
Rod length: 5.933 inches
Deck height: 8.937 inches
*Assembled 302 iron head weighs approx. 55 lbs.
5.4-liter (8 cylinders) and 6.8-liter (10 cylinders)
-Return to menu
Displacement: 5.4 liters/6.8 liters (330 cubic inches/415 cubic inches)
Bore: 3.552 inches
Stroke: 4.165 inches
Bore spacing: 3.937 inches
Main journal dia.: 2.657 inches
Rod journal dia.: 2.086 inches
Rod length: 6.657 inches
Deck height: 10.078 inches
1996 4.6 SOHC 215HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.559 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. F6ZE-CG
Cylinder heads: cast No. RF-F5AE-AE
Combustion chambers: 49.77cc
Valves: 1.752/1.339 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.80:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .473/.473-inch lift
Compression ratio: 9.30:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.153-inch dish
1997 4.6 SOHC 215HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.559 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. F6ZE-CG
Cylinder heads: cast No. RF-F5AE-AE
Combustion chambers: 49.77cc
Valves: 1.752/1.339 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.80:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .473/.473-inch lift
Compression ratio: 9.30:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.153-inch dish
1998 4.6 SOHC 225HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.559 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. F6ZE-CG
Cylinder heads: cast No. RF-F5AE-AE
Combustion chambers: 49.77cc
Valves: 1.752/1.339 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.80:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .473/.473-inch lift
Compression ratio: 9.30:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.153-inch dish
1999 4.6 SOHC 260HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 66.8mm (2.630 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. XR3E-DC
Cylinder heads: cast No. RFXL3-CZOD
Combustion chambers: 42.40cc
Valves: 1.752/1.417 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.80:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .505/.534-inch lift Duration (I/E) @ .050" 186/194
Compression ratio: 9.30:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.188-inch dish
2000 4.6 SOHC 260HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.560 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. XR3E-DC
Cylinder heads: cast No. RFXL3-CZOD
Combustion chambers: 42.45cc
Valves: 1.752/1.417 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.81:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .505/.534-inch lift Duration (I/E) @ .050" 186/194
Compression ratio: 9.74:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.188-inch dish
2001 4.6 SOHC 260HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.560 inches)
Intake manifold: composite, cast No. 1L2E-DL
Cylinder heads: cast No. RF1L2E-6090-D22D (or D24D)
Combustion chambers: 42.45cc
Valves: 1.752/1.417 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.81:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .505/.534-inch lift Duration (I/E) @ .050" 186/194
Compression ratio: 9.74:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.145-inch dish
2001 4.6 SOHC 265HP Mustang Bullitt Engine
Throttle body: twin 57mm (twin 2.24-inch)
Intake manifold: cast aluminum, cast No. RF-2RE3-9A448-AA
Cylinder heads: cast No. RF1L2E-6090-D22D (or D24D)
Combustion chambers: 42.45cc
Valves: 1.752/1.417 inches
Rockers: roller type, w/1.81:1 ratio
Camshaft lift: .505/.534-inch lift Duration (I/E) @ .050" 186/194
Compression ratio: 9.74:1
Pistons: hypereutectic w/.145-inch dish  |
06-18-05, 07:46 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: March 2004 Location: Georgetown,SC
Posts: 499
| | | |
06-18-05, 07:58 PM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: April 2005 Location: Atlantic City, NJ
Posts: 100
| | | |
06-19-05, 12:08 AM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: June 2005 Location: detriot,MI
Posts: 58
| | OH I was hoping for crank end play or bearing specs/journal diameters????
WOW! bling there the are,,, sort of
Last edited by white96blown2v; 06-19-05 at 12:09 AM.
|
06-19-05, 01:07 AM
|  | Banned | | Join Date: March 2003 Location: Arlington, WA
Posts: 1,920
| | Thanks, here is another link which may be useful. Modular Mix and Match |
06-19-05, 01:23 AM
| | Member | | Join Date: May 2005 Location: Canton,Oh
Posts: 20
| | what is weird that no one picks up on is that not only in 99 did they go to the PI heads but they also went to different cams! The 99 and newer has cams with more lift and more duration!
Andrew |
06-19-05, 01:28 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: August 2004 Location: Orange,ca
Posts: 960
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by fatkidracing4.6 what is weird that no one picks up on is that not only in 99 did they go to the PI heads but they also went to different cams! The 99 and newer has cams with more lift and more duration!
Andrew | uhh, some of us picked up on that in 1999  |
06-19-05, 03:35 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 189
| | | |
06-19-05, 10:14 AM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 189
| | I think you should post this in the " POST THE BEST FAQ TECH THREADS IN HERE" section. Its a nice thread.  |
06-20-05, 11:25 AM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: April 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 142
| | Is it true that the 99 had a bigger TB than the 2000+, but had less compression (bigger dish piston)? Who else noticed that? I also didn't know they changed the intake & heads in 2001.
Good info none the less, points to you!
Last edited by cougar694u; 06-20-05 at 11:26 AM.
|
06-20-05, 12:31 PM
|  | it came to $4.56 and i got $0.44 change from a 5, man, they must be dumb | | Join Date: April 2003 Location: VA Beach
Posts: 909
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by productj1 Basic Modular Engine Dimensions
1999 4.6 SOHC 260HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 66.8mm (2.630 inches)
2000 4.6 SOHC 260HP Mustang Engine
Throttle body: 65mm (2.560 inches) | can you read?  |
06-20-05, 01:08 PM
|  | SuperMod
Canadian Colossus | | Join Date: August 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 8,062
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by east_sidaz40 I think you should post this in the " POST THE BEST FAQ TECH THREADS IN HERE" section. Its a nice thread. | That's a great idea.....that is unless someone already has it covered. http://forums.stangnet.com/showpost....4&postcount=25
Maybe reading the "Best FAQ tech threads" thread before suggesting he post this in it would help? |
06-20-05, 02:33 PM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: April 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 142
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by 97v6Silver can you read? | Quote: |
Originally Posted by cougar694u ...Who else noticed that? I also didn't know they changed the intake & heads in 2001... | Uhhh, yeah, dumba$$, that's why I asked if anyone else knew or noticed that. I didn't know, and wasn't sure if it was common knowledge. That's why I asked the question, moron. | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | | |
| |
