Bigger V8 from Ford

[foghorn67]

Not the case in reality? what reality is that?
Its widely known the 4.6L blocks are much wider than the 302s because of angle of separation between the two banks.

i'm lost as well. The 4.6L blocks are even wider then the 429/460 big blocks.
How is my 289 that wide in somebody's reality?

 

[SVTdriver]

Not that I am trying to start a debate or anything. But where are people finding the dimensions of the blocks? I have looked and can't find the information. I can find the overall motor dimensions, but not the block. And it would be handy for any engine swap ideas.

 

[foghorn67]

Not that I am trying to start a debate or anything. But where are people finding the dimensions of the blocks? I have looked and can't find the information. I can find the overall motor dimensions, but not the block. And it would be handy for any engine swap ideas.

FRPP catalog.

 

[SVTdriver]

Is that the new one. I have the 2003 and they don't list block size.

 

[Yellow99Saleen]

Hey platinum, thanks for the clarification, i wasnt trying to be an ass, your comments just seemed a little like a mustang hater. But i see what you mean.

 

[Z28x]

Since when has it been about big engine big power? You are the one complaining about it having a small displacement motor. And not enough hp. Are you trying to be confusing? Or just not reading your own posts.
How bout this scenario. Since what is realisticly going into a mustang. Since you don't like it. But a hemi and stop complaining about mustangs.

The Mustang has always had relatively big power and a big engine compared to every other non F-body coupe on the road. Even today in 2004 the Mustang is the king of sub $30K performance cars with its 310HP 4.6L V8. Compare that to the closest sub $30K performance car the Evo with its 271HP turbo 2.0L engine, or a 240HP 3.8L V8 Monte Carlo SS.

Buy a hemi and stop complaining about mustangs.

Hemi Mustang..hmmmm...... that would be a fun project car, but If I'm going to put a non-Ford ening in a Mustang it is going to be the LS2

Oh yeah z28x.....you are dead on with almost everyone of your comments.

Thank You

 

[mustang sallad]

hey does anybody else get a kick out of the number specifically?

i heard some guy saying 4.6 just doest sound right. i like some numbers better than others. for instance, i like 6, 5, and 8, i think those are some good numbers. 2's pretty good too
so i think 6.2 sounds pretty awesome.
i also like nissan's 5.6 L in those giant suvs they just released. 5.6 sounds so much better than 5.5 would. even better than 5.7, i think.
6.2 is pretty sweet, and those numbers represent a pretty big engine too, so that side of me that ignores bad things likes it a lot that there's gonna be a 6.2 in an F-150.
Another weird thing: i think the 3.8 L v8 in the LS and thunderbird sounds like a cooler number than 4.6.
This is a very important issue, and i think car companies should start lying about the displacements of their engines so that the names will sound cooler.
Mercedes has it all backwards with the new ML350 though. The engine's actually a 3.7, me thinks. ML370 sounds cooler. But what would really be cool would be like, ML680, so i think they should call it that and just lie.

Anybody else see what i'm talking about?

 

[351CJ]

Not the case in reality? what reality is that?
Its widely known the 4.6L blocks are much wider than the 302s because of angle of separation between the two banks.

Say what?

They are both 90 degree Vs. How can the angle of separation be greater?

It is NOT the blocks that are wider (on the 4.6), it is the maxium overall width of the engine with the heads installed.

However even the maximum width of the DOHC 4.6 is mis-leading because the exhaust manifolds tuck under the heads. On the 5.0 the exhuast manifolds stick out on the side. So a better comparison would be with both engines "fully dressed" with the exhaust mainfolds installed.

 

[351CJ]

i'm lost as well. The 4.6L blocks are even wider then the 429/460 big blocks.
How is my 289 that wide in somebody's reality?

See above. You are lost because you are confusing overall engine dimesions (which are the only dimensions given in even the latest SVT catalog) with block dimensions.

I NEVER said that the 4.6 block was smaller, but I know the block itself is not bigger. The way to determine the perspective in the photo is to take a reference point on the engine and compare.

Do you guys know the difference between the block and the heads?

 

[Omegalock]

hey does anybody else get a kick out of the number specifically?

i heard some guy saying 4.6 just doest sound right. i like some numbers better than others. for instance, i like 6, 5, and 8, i think those are some good numbers. 2's pretty good too
so i think 6.2 sounds pretty awesome.
i also like nissan's 5.6 L in those giant suvs they just released. 5.6 sounds so much better than 5.5 would. even better than 5.7, i think.
6.2 is pretty sweet, and those numbers represent a pretty big engine too, so that side of me that ignores bad things likes it a lot that there's gonna be a 6.2 in an F-150.
Another weird thing: i think the 3.8 L v8 in the LS and thunderbird sounds like a cooler number than 4.6.
This is a very important issue, and i think car companies should start lying about the displacements of their engines so that the names will sound cooler.
Mercedes has it all backwards with the new ML350 though. The engine's actually a 3.7, me thinks. ML370 sounds cooler. But what would really be cool would be like, ML680, so i think they should call it that and just lie.

Anybody else see what i'm talking about?

Not really...lol

 

[Scot_94GT]

hey does anybody else get a kick out of the number specifically?

i heard some guy saying 4.6 just doest sound right. i like some numbers better than others. for instance, i like 6, 5, and 8, i think those are some good numbers. 2's pretty good too
so i think 6.2 sounds pretty awesome.
i also like nissan's 5.6 L in those giant suvs they just released. 5.6 sounds so much better than 5.5 would. even better than 5.7, i think.
6.2 is pretty sweet, and those numbers represent a pretty big engine too, so that side of me that ignores bad things likes it a lot that there's gonna be a 6.2 in an F-150.
Another weird thing: i think the 3.8 L v8 in the LS and thunderbird sounds like a cooler number than 4.6.
This is a very important issue, and i think car companies should start lying about the displacements of their engines so that the names will sound cooler.
Mercedes has it all backwards with the new ML350 though. The engine's actually a 3.7, me thinks. ML370 sounds cooler. But what would really be cool would be like, ML680, so i think they should call it that and just lie.

Anybody else see what i'm talking about?

I seriously hope you were being sarcastic.
3.8 sound "cooler" than 4.6?!? set down the crackpipe.

 

[CatmanJJ]

3.8 sounds better then 4.6, crank the motor and we'll see which one sounds better.

 

[1995cobraR]

the Camaro out sold the Mustang. In the last years of the F-body they still sold 70,000 cars,

Hmm, I just looked it up. The Mustang has averaged 140,000 cars per year for the last 10 years. According to my research the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 2 to 1 (total production per year). In it's entire production run the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 8,600,000 to 1,225,000.

P/S No flame here, the camaro was a great car, and why they killed it is beyond me. If I wanted a GM car, the Z06 is the best choice anyway.

 

[63_Fairlane]

ya theres a good reason why my 3.4 DOHC's engine bay is bigger and more tightly packed then my 86 5.0's engine bay was. Its sad when a 5.0 V8 AMG engine will fit better then a 3.4 V6 Chevy. (~ 4 inches from the radiator in the v8, ~2 with the V6)

Theres also a good reason why the 5.0 stang couldn't compare in track times.

Its called technology .

The mustang needs a 302 or 351... the 4.6's just dont sound right to me.

3.4 DOHC = 280hp, 285 torque.... 5.0 = 200hp, not sure on the torque.. 250?

and guess which one gets 330 miles to a tank, ill give u a hint, its not the mustang.

DOHC's are better, more valves = more power... thats why hemis were such a big deal back in the day.

Sorry, 5.0s made 300 ftlbs at the flywheel. Hemis only had 2 count them 2 valves per cylinder. Hemi refers to hemispherical combustion chambers, as in half of a globe. If you going to spout crap about Chevys and Dodges in a Mustang forum... at least get it right!!

 

[Z28x]

Hmm, I just looked it up. The Mustang has averaged 140,000 cars per year for the last 10 years. According to my research the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 2 to 1 (total production per year).

What site do you use to look up sales figures? I can't find a good one. I know the Camaro out sold the Stang in 94-95, The Mustang pretty much did a 2 to 1 on the F-bodies in 98+ (after GM decided to kill almost all funding and advertising)

Hopfully 05+ Stang sales will do good enough for Ford to throw the performance enthusisist a bone and give us a 5.4L or bigger engine in an affordable car.

 

[falchulk]

The camaro on its own only sold 2x,xxx for the last 3 years. Of those, 12,xxx were v8's! I have a 2001 and love it but they could not compare to the stangs sales figures. For accurate sales figurs on the fbody, go to http://web.camaross.com/forums/

 

[SVTdriver]

I read somewhere that out of the 35 years they were competing for sales. Camaros outsold mustangs in only 7 years. As far as where to get sales numbers. www.themustangsource.com. Check outthe timeline section and you can find production numbers for the mustangs. As far as camaros are concerned. It was a pain in the backside to find anything.

 

[foghorn67]

See above. You are lost because you are confusing overall engine dimesions (which are the only dimensions given in even the latest SVT catalog) with block dimensions.

I NEVER said that the 4.6 block was smaller, but I know the block itself is not bigger. The way to determine the perspective in the photo is to take a reference point on the engine and compare....Do you guys know the difference between the block and the heads?

I know enough that you're argument is pointless. can't make a motor run without heads. not to give you a hard time or anything...but nice try digging your way out of that.
SVT driver: I have an old 2000 or 2001 catalog.

 

[351CJ]

Hmm, I just looked it up. The Mustang has averaged 140,000 cars per year for the last 10 years. According to my research the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 2 to 1 (total production per year). In it's entire production run the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 8,600,000 to 1,225,000.

You're close, but here are the #s' that I found. Note that these are production #'s by model year, not sales per calendar year.

1965 680,989
1966 607,568
1967 472,121
1968 317,404
1969 299,824
1970 190,727
1971 149,678
1972 125,093
1973 134,867
1974 385,993
1975 188,575
1976 187,567
1977 153,173
1978 192,410
1979 369,936
1980 241,064
1981 162,593
1982 130,418
1983 120,873
1984 141,480
1985 156,514
1986 224,210
1987 159,145
1988 211,225
1989 209,769
1990 128,189
1991 98,737
1992 79,280
1993 114,228
1994 123,598
1995 165,037
1996 126,483
1997 100,254
1998 170,643
1999 130,695
2000 202,990
2001 155,563
2002 142,414
2003 150,601
2004 110,000 - estimated, - short year ~9 months of production.
-----------------
Total 8,201,928


Now quick, besides the Chevy Corvette, name another car model (model, not brand) that has been in production for over 40 continuous years and during those 40 years has essentially remained the same type of car as the original.

 

[spectravp]

Who cares wether the Mustang out sold the Camaro or not? The Camaro is gone. The Mustang is still here. There is a huge buzz about the 05. It's everywhere.... People say camaro and think of 1982 and globs of hair gel. Do I need to say more?