Ford, PLEASE put your best V8 in the Mustang!!! I'm begging...

F

FoxBodySwapper

New Member
Feb 13, 2004
11
0
0
#1
http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_volvos_reach_beyond/index.htm

Introductory info: In current factory trim this yamaha-built 4.4L V-8 engine sports an aluminum block and heads, 32 valves, 311 horses, 325 lb-ft, ULEVII emissions, and a companion 6-speed automatic transmission. No exact weight figure, but it's said to be a compact package similar to a typical V6 engine/trans.

Synopsis: Ford has announced rights to use this engine in any product under Ford's umbrella.

I for one would happily pay Cobra or Boss prices for a car with a slight power upgrade and significantly less weight up front. Would also help ford meet CAFE and product-line emission regulations while reducing insurance-cost burden on younger consumers (compared to a 400 hp nose-heavy beast).

Then I'll be saying bring 'em on to the M3!
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#3
Yes, they're both made by Yamaha. No, it does not share any design or componentry with the old SHO motor. Yamaha R&D's the hizzuh out of everything they make.

I'm talking about more powerful, stout, and refined than the 5.4 with less weight on the front axle. The 5.4 is underpowered by comparison, that's why they can sell it in cheap SUVs.
 
#6
First off, I'm sure if you told Yamaha to lose the ULEVII and make it noisier they could tune for 350 horse easily.

Secondly, here's another thought to make you Yamahaters barf: The Japanese and Germans are better than us at solving hard engineering problems due to the regimented work ethic they embrace at an early age. I'm just happy to enjoy the spoils of a world market while our country is still at the top financially. :flag:
 
#7
FoxBodySwapper said:
Yes, they're both made by Yamaha. No, it does not share any design or componentry with the old SHO motor. Yamaha R&D's the hizzuh out of everything they make.

I'm talking about more powerful, stout, and refined than the 5.4 with less weight on the front axle. The 5.4 is underpowered by comparison, that's why they can sell it in cheap SUVs.
Click to expand...

Unless Yamaha designed a new engine then yest it does. Its the next step in the family.
 
#8
I got one word for you: torque

The 4.4L is nice engine but it won't match the 5.4L (or the upcoming 6.2L Hurricane) when it comes to torque.

One other note about the 4.4: it's a 60 degree V8 not a 90 degree V8 like the 4.6/5.4 so that it works in tight FWD applications. If it's like it's SHO ancestor, it has a balance shaft since the 60 degree configuration creates vibration. The balance shaft robs power just like all the other accessories that drive off the crank.

Also, the SHO version had a defect in the cam design that caused the cam sprocket to separate from the cam-shaft. Being an interference engine, bent valves were the result. Hopefully this design flaw is fixed in the Volvo variant.

All in all, a nice piece but it isn't right for the Mustang IMO.
 
#9
Yeah, I can't answer for the extra space leftover from the original transverse layout, unless you want to decompromise the original macpherson front suspension design at the same time (which is necessitated by the 90 degree V-8). But the engine is torquey, and six speeds would negate the benefit of a Hurricane when it comes to racing anyway.
 
#10
Yeah, a 60 degree engine is meant for front wheel drive cars, and wont have the same type of torque as bigger engines.

I dont think it would be a bad idea for ford to use the 351 truck engine (supercharger, please?) because of the torque increase, although I am all over this new 4.6 all aluminum GT 3-vpc engine. I think its a very well built and fairly lightweight engine for the power it puts out.
 
#11
jmk97GT said:
Yeah, a 60 degree engine is meant for front wheel drive cars, and wont have the same type of torque as bigger engines.
Click to expand...


Yeah, FWD and also the Nissan 350Z. But those don't have any punch, they handle for crap, and package badly with extremely poor balance and C.G. <---(That was sarcasm)
 
#12
FoxBodySwapper said:
Yeah, I can't answer for the extra space leftover from the original transverse layout, unless you want to decompromise the original macpherson front suspension design at the same time (which is necessitated by the 90 degree V-8). But the engine is torquey, and six speeds would negate the benefit of a Hurricane when it comes to racing anyway.
Click to expand...

If you mate the same six-speed to the Hurricane then the balance of power (if you'll pardon the pun) shifts back. I'm not saying the 4.4L is a bad engine. I just don't think it's right for the Mustang. Now, drop it into a 500 with a six speed and AWD, then you'll have something!
 
#14
If you look in to the SHO Yamaha engines you would find some very unhappy car owners. I know the last SHO V8 have problems with them lasting. Just think what we do to mustangs and how long thay would last.
Todd
 
#15
no kidding man...no replacement for displacement!

GM keeps getting bigger...
5.7L LS1
6.0L LS2
6.4L LS7 (coming soon)

goddamnit, if the next Cobra/Mach1/whatever SE does not have AT LEAST a 5.4L I will scream. Superchargers are nice, but I'm getting real tired of the F-body fanboys saying "sure...put a S/C on an LS1 and see what it'll run!"
 
#16
toddrGT05 said:
If you look in to the SHO Yamaha engines you would find some very unhappy car owners. I know the last SHO V8 have problems with them lasting. Just think what we do to mustangs and how long thay would last.
Todd
Click to expand...

I am a former SHO owner (although I had the V6 version) but I still subscribe to an SHO mailing list so I still hear the V8 cam issues. Too bad they didn't build the V8 as well as the V6. It was damn near bulletproof!
 
#17
Well, the 4.6L 3V puts out almost the same HP and torque on 87 octane and it is also ULEV-II. The Yamaha/Volvo 4.4L requires 91 octane.

Re-flash your PCM for 91 Octane fuel calibration with the software that FRPP will be selling in a couple months and you'll have more HP & Torque than that Yamaha engine.
 
#18
Scot_94GT said:
no kidding man...no replacement for displacement!
Click to expand...

There most certainly is-- it's called decent engineering. GM and Chrysler are becoming too "old school" in their powertrains-- most of their V-8's date back nearly 40 years! They even still use pushrods! And then GM wonders why their powertrains are outclassed, outgunned, and all-out OWNED by virtually every other maker out there.

Their only saving grace is the Northstar V8 used in the Cadillac STS, which, like Ford's 3v SOHC 4.6, uses variable intake valve timing.

Scot_94GT said:
GM keeps getting bigger...
5.7L LS1
6.0L LS2
6.4L LS7 (coming soon)
Click to expand...

And heavier and heavier... and, by the way, the LS7 will be 7.0L displacement. It is slated for use in the Corvette Z06. With a bore and stroke that massive, they should have plenty of low-end torque... after all, that's about all it'll have.

Scot_94GT said:
goddamnit, if the next Cobra/Mach1/whatever SE does not have AT LEAST a 5.4L I will scream. Superchargers are nice, but I'm getting real tired of the F-body fanboys saying "sure...put a S/C on an LS1 and see what it'll run!"
Click to expand...

Let those F-body fanboys drink themselves stupid in their run-down trailers when they get trounced by a 2.4L V-10 (yes, you read that correctly) in an F1 racer.
 
#20
Scot_94GT said:
no kidding man...no replacement for displacement!

GM keeps getting bigger...
5.7L LS1
6.0L LS2
6.4L LS7 (coming soon)

goddamnit, if the next Cobra/Mach1/whatever SE does not have AT LEAST a 5.4L I will scream. Superchargers are nice, but I'm getting real tired of the F-body fanboys saying "sure...put a S/C on an LS1 and see what it'll run!"
Click to expand...
LS1s will also go BOOM, because they have too high of compression to add a blower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu