Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

New Ford Push-Rod V-8


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 07 February 2019 - 18:27

https://www.enginela...-ohv-big-block/



Advertisement

#2 427MkIV

427MkIV
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 14 February 2019 - 16:06

Interesting engine. I hear that it came about at least in part due to the high up-front cost and high maintenance costs of the 6.7-liter diesel -- not to mention diesel fuel is about $1/gal more in the U.S. And I assume the V10 is no more. Is that right?



#3 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 16 February 2019 - 17:32

From what I could find, the V-10 was/is still around but this would probably kill it.

The Wiki is not reliable and other sites may be old sites out of date.



#4 427MkIV

427MkIV
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 18 February 2019 - 16:42

I'm looking forward to the engine becoming available and the performance engine builders getting hold of it and seeing if it can be turned into a performance or race engine. So far it looks like this a born-and-bred truck engine for relatively low-rev hauling and towing, but we'll see.



#5 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,198 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 26 February 2019 - 14:43

I'm looking forward to the engine becoming available and the performance engine builders getting hold of it and seeing if it can be turned into a performance or race engine. So far it looks like this a born-and-bred truck engine for relatively low-rev hauling and towing, but we'll see.



Viper.....

#6 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 27 February 2019 - 03:59

I've just been reading that modifiers of early model Mustangs have resorted to using Chevy Gen II and IV small blocks because they fit between the strut towers and the Ford Coyote don't.

 

So maybe this engine will become a favourite of that crowd.



#7 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 27 February 2019 - 04:23

That seems odd given the prodigious power output the LS platform of engines in modified trim. Meaning, if you’re going for an off-brand swap why bother with the pre-LS engines at all? I’ve always considered myself a GM guy, which is odd given that I’ve not once been the first o owner of any GM product or even second owner of one that wasn’t at least 25 years old. Biases aside, there are literally hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of YouTube videos of 700+ hp LS engines built on tiny budgets. The Coyote May be an interesting and capable motor but for whatever reason - perhaps the extra width - they aren’t being dropped into everything you can think of at an astonishing rate.

This is a constant topic of discussion in our machine shop as we debate what side-project should occupy the frame table next. No longer are the engines of our youth even remotely attractive. You’ve got an hot rod big-block muscle car putting down serious (for the time) power? Give us a weekend, a junkyard 4.8 iron block LS and a turbo and we’ll watch you fade into the rear view mirror like you forgot to release the brake. The LS platform combined with affordable turbocharging and aftermarket EFI has turned high-power, 9-second street cars into the reality of your local high school parking lot. They ain’t pretty, probably ain’t safe or reliable but when it all hits that **** is fast as hell.

For kicks, you can always google the turbo LS-swap Winnebago Chieftan. See my earlier remarks about safety...
https://youtu.be/nEdIuoCus3Q

#8 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 27 February 2019 - 05:58

Yes, LS engines into, well, anything. But I thought they were Gen III or Gen IV. Or is that a different thing?



#9 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 27 February 2019 - 17:34

An LS Chevy block is pretty much an LS block unless you get into the after market or parts book heavy duty items.

Small block mouse Chevys had changes that led to classifications.

 

Why anyone would put a Chevy into to Ford makes no sense and is  obtuse..

The Small block Ford is the smallest U.S. small-block , with the exception of the Buick and Olds alloy blocks, and has cylinder heads available that put any Chevy to shame.

The current NASCAR Ford block nearly did not exist because a goodly number of Ford people wanted to keep using the the so called Windsor block.

When both were compared the new one had no real advantage but the insiders decided since the new one was built it would be wasted money not to use it.

 

Put a blower on any thing, and you will get gobs of horse power, it is what power levels that can be obtained without a blower that shows which engine is truly better.



#10 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 27 February 2019 - 21:55

People put Chevys into Fords for all kinds of reasons I'm sure. Maybe to piss off purists, maybe because it's what they had at hand, maybe they like the shape of the Ford and understand how to make power with the Chevy. If you put your ego and your biases on the shelf and the plan is to make the fastest street car you can for the lowest $$ input you can, I don't think you can beat the LS platform at the moment. There's a reason they've become a boring cliche - because it works. I mean, it's not like the OEMs have engineers that don't know how to make an engine, or to make a powerful one or a durable one or whatever the constraints and goals might be, but for whatever reason or confluence of reasons, the LS platform currently owns the budget go-fast scene, and that's as good a yardstick for "truly better" as anything else.

 

As for unboosted output, it's pretty clear the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers have everyone beat. Unless you mean total hp rather than output per unit displacement. Then I suppose it's just a matter of who's spinning the fastest and still breathing. 

 

I've just been reading that modifiers of early model Mustangs have resorted to using Chevy Gen II and IV small blocks <snip>

The Gen II is the LT, rather than the LS platform. It's the most like the Gen 1 and relatively rare - cars only, no trucks and was discontinued while the Gen 1 was still going. The Gen III and later as of today at least, are the LS-series found in almost everything.

 

I suppose that's part of what makes their use so widespread. Any full-size van, SUV or pickup will have something to work with that can take a pretty substantial beating and keep on ticking. McGuire's old friends at HotRod tried to blow up a junkyard 5.3, that turned out to be a 4.8, pushing it to well over 1000 hp before they ran out of dyno time, failing to break it.



#11 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 28 February 2019 - 00:36

The Gen II is the LT, rather than the LS platform. It's the most like the Gen 1 and relatively rare - cars only, no trucks and was discontinued while the Gen 1 was still going. The Gen III and later as of today at least, are the LS-series found in almost everything.


It was a typo. It was supposed to Gen III and IV, not Gen II and IV.



#12 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 28 February 2019 - 00:38

Why anyone would put a Chevy into to Ford makes no sense and is  obtuse..

The Small block Ford is the smallest U.S. small-block , with the exception of the Buick and Olds alloy blocks, and has cylinder heads available that put any Chevy to shame.

The current NASCAR Ford block nearly did not exist because a goodly number of Ford people wanted to keep using the the so called Windsor block.

When both were compared the new one had no real advantage but the insiders decided since the new one was built it would be wasted money not to use it.

 

Put a blower on any thing, and you will get gobs of horse power, it is what power levels that can be obtained without a blower that shows which engine is truly better.

 

I'm guessing that some wanted a modern engine, and the LS fits without mods to the engine bay while Ford's modern quad cam engines do not.



#13 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 01 March 2019 - 06:04

I'm guessing that some wanted a modern engine, and the LS fits without mods to the engine bay while Ford's modern quad cam engines do not.

There is nothing more modern about the Ford Mod. V-8, just more components that means more things to go wrong.

 

In a non-blown horsepower race, the best factory available small block Ford parts will out do the best Chevy LS.

The best Chevy would be a Mouse small block with the canted-valve heads.



#14 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 01 March 2019 - 06:14

People put Chevys into Fords for all kinds of reasons I'm sure. Maybe to piss off purists, maybe because it's what they had at hand, 

You do not put  a Ford into a any GM car because it is what you have at hand, and that works for putting any big three engine into another  makes car.

It  is not done because it is cheap.

There are Fords in Chevies, Chevies in Ford but damn few.

Now do they do it to get attention, hey look at me, or to  get published, aw gee who would crave attention so badly to do that? :lol:  :lol:  :stoned:

 

The GM Generation I and Generation II (LT) engine families are both derived from the longstanding Chevrolet small block V8. The Generation III small-block V8 was a "clean sheet" design, which replaced the Gen I and Gen II engine families in 2003 and 1996 respectively.

Like the previous two generations, the Buick and Oldsmobile small blocks, the gen III/IV can be found in many different brands. The engine blocks were cast in aluminium for car applications, and iron for most truck applications (notable exceptions include the Chevrolet TrailBlazer SSChevrolet SSR and a limited run of Chevrolet/GMC Extended Cab Standard Box Trucks).

The architecture of the LS series makes for an extremely strong engine block with the aluminium engines being nearly as strong as the iron generation I and II engines. The LS engine also used coil-near-plug style ignition to replace the distributor setup of all previous small-block based engines.

The traditional five-bolt pentagonal cylinder head pattern was replaced with a square four-bolt design (much like the 64-90 Oldsmobile V8 ), and the pistons are of the flat-topped variety (in the LS1, LS2, LS3, LS6, LS7, LQ9 and L33), while all other variants, including the new LS9 and LQ4 truck engine received a dished version of the GM hypereutectic piston.

The cylinder firing order was changed to 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3, so that the LS series now corresponds to the firing pattern of other modern V8 engines


Edited by Bob Riebe, 01 March 2019 - 06:21.


#15 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 01 March 2019 - 06:26

Based on an engine configuration of a 90-degree V8 block spinning a cross-plane crankshaft, there are only eight possible firing-order combinations. Actually, there are 16 because GM and Chrysler engines are left-bank forward and the automakers number their cylinders differently than Ford, which is right-bank forward. With a little math and comparison mapping, we can find the common ground for the eight firing orders (see chart below) available to the manufacturers.

 

2017-04-21_22-58-51-640x241.jpg

The chart shows the eight possible firing orders for a GM V8 engine, with the exception of a Cadillac Northstar–which is right-bank forward for packaging reasons and has a different firing order. The firing order with the asterisk is the one used most often when attempting a bank-to-bank configuration.



#16 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 01 March 2019 - 18:35

In a non-blown horsepower race, the best factory available small block Ford parts will out do the best Chevy LS.

The best Chevy would be a Mouse small block with the canted-valve heads.

I'm not up to speed on anything much these days. What information do you have that concludes this? Not suggesting it's not possible, only that the secrets to building power aren't really secrets anymore. The variances become smaller and smaller as the solutions converge on the ideal presented by the laws of physics and chemistry. The only factor I can imagine impacting a factory engineer (or engineering team)'s bid to make high performance engine components is the budget. Perhaps Ford's go-fast budget is indeed better than GM's.



#17 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,688 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 02 March 2019 - 03:33

 . . and whatever engine is capable (with modification) of the best outright horsepower doesn't make it the best bang for buck. LS do seem to be very popular - I imagine there is a logical reason.



#18 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 02 March 2019 - 05:01

Come to think of it, that is a actually a beautiful example of a free market system at work. There’s plenty of choice, plenty of price points, almost unlimited vendors - complete freedom on the part of the consumer and the sellers.

#19 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 02 March 2019 - 08:01

 . . and whatever engine is capable (with modification) of the best outright horsepower doesn't make it the best bang for buck. LS do seem to be very popular - I imagine there is a logical reason.

 

Cheap and available?



Advertisement

#20 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 02 March 2019 - 17:45

I don't think cheap has much to do with it; at this site, they still cover versions of the old school engines but the past year it has become far more LS this and LS that or they now throw in the Ford Mod. Motor.

 

The people who make money off of engine parts are pushing these two and the factories are probably backing this publicity blitz.

 

https://www.enginelabs.com



#21 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,769 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 16 March 2019 - 23:34

I've just been reading that modifiers of early model Mustangs have resorted to using Chevy Gen II and IV small blocks because they fit between the strut towers and the Ford Coyote don't.

 

So maybe this engine will become a favourite of that crowd.

A Ford powered Fox body in drag racing is a rarity. They all have Chevs as it is a far simpler and more powerfull stronger engine. And lighter!!

Though I keep hearing how a Windsor splits in half a 500hp. V8 Stupidcars are making around 620 with 420lbs of torque. Alright an SVO block but just a improved production block. 

A couple of  Boss 302  style engines I know have made well over 500 and run at 8000 rpm. One in a speedway sedan. Though the Stupidcar engine also is a Boss style engine.



#22 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 17 March 2019 - 00:03

A Chevy small block, Mouse not LS, is 25 pounds heavier than a Ford Cleveland and sixty five pounds heavier than a Windsor 351.

The Ford canted-valve head is far superior to any thing from Chevy except the Chevy canted-valve which was made for NASCAR.

For NASCAR Ford ran a Aussie Cleveland (from what I have found)  block, till the new non-street one was adapted, and there was a fight as to using it or not.

Chevy non-four bolt blocks, on average, are not stronger than Ford non-four bolt blocks but both when written about in performance improving articles, over here, are told not to go hog wild as you will probably pay for it in the long run.

A stud-girdle can make a difference but you rarely read about those any more.

Again it depends on which batch you are using.

 

Here is the latest engine weights listing and as usual you do not know how they measure.

Simple long block weights which would mean more are not available.

The LS listed does not say which one it is, as it came in both alloy and iron versions.

 

http://www.gomog.com/allmorgan/

 

Form JE Pistons:

The LS1 debuted with the C5 Corvette in 1997. This 5.7L (345ci) engine immediately promised great potential if for no other reason than it was the first Chevrolet production all-aluminum small-block V8. Right away this meant improved performance just from the reduction of roughly 50 pounds of dead weight compared to the iron block Gen I small-block. The difference between the iron and aluminum LS block is even more surprising with the production LS1/LS2 weighing 110 pounds less than a 6.0L iron truck block.

 

LS block weights

LS1/2...........106
LS7..............107
RHS..............110
Dart Billet......128
6.0L Iron.......216
LSX..............230

 

Check this out, this is interesting

 

https://www.tmeyerin...engine-weights/

 

Man O'war Ford engine blocks.

 

Our Man O'War Windsors weigh-in as follows:
8.2 deck/4.115 bore/2.248 main with splayed billet at every position:188lbs.
9.5 deck?4.115 bore/2.749 main also splayed billet: 213.
A 9.5 aluminum is 108lbs with sleeves and splayed billet mains.


Edited by Bob Riebe, 17 March 2019 - 00:32.


#23 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,769 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 17 March 2019 - 00:09

An LS Chevy block is pretty much an LS block unless you get into the after market or parts book heavy duty items.

Small block mouse Chevys had changes that led to classifications.

 

Why anyone would put a Chevy into to Ford makes no sense and is  obtuse..

The Small block Ford is the smallest U.S. small-block , with the exception of the Buick and Olds alloy blocks, and has cylinder heads available that put any Chevy to shame.

The current NASCAR Ford block nearly did not exist because a goodly number of Ford people wanted to keep using the the so called Windsor block.

When both were compared the new one had no real advantage but the insiders decided since the new one was built it would be wasted money not to use it.

 

Put a blower on any thing, and you will get gobs of horse power, it is what power levels that can be obtained without a blower that shows which engine is truly better.

Where are these Ford heads that put Chevs to shame?  As a production head I have never seen one. Clevo head on the Boss 302 was the best but you have to run 8000 rpm to make them work. Even in out and out raceheads there really is none! Equivilant maybe. 

The 302W block is too small, rods are too short and putting a longer crank in them is dangerous as you are clearancing the pan rails,, and denting the pan which in turn makes them weaker. I have built a couple of 347s. A bit more torque for a med sized car. But far from ideal for high sustained high RPM.

I like the little Ford as it fits in places nothing else will and is a willing little thing as well. Best oiled Ford but has only 4 bolts per hole compared with a SBCs 5. The down fall too of the LS. Though they have 12mm head bolts.Unlike the 7/16 on a 302. Though all the aftermarket stuff comes half inch. Ford or GM.

The taller 351 in some respects is the better except for those heat inducing 3" mains. SVO blocks come in 351 height though. BUT for production based racing are not legal.

351C [and the Oz 302] is near 50 y/o. Though the SBC is 65y/o.



#24 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,769 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 17 March 2019 - 00:21

A Chevy small block, Mouse not LS, is 25 pounds heavier than a Ford Cleveland and sixty five pounds heavier than a Windsor 351.

The Ford canted-valve head is far superior to any thing from Chevy except the Chevy canted-valve which was made for NASCAR.

For NASCAR Ford ran a Windsor block, till the new non-street one was adapted, and there was a fight as to using it or not.

Chevy non-four bolt blocks, on average, are not stronger than Ford non-four bolt blocks but both when written about in performance improving articles, over here, are told not to go hog wild as you will probably pay for it in the long run.

A stud-girdle can make a difference but you rarely read about those any more.

Again it depends on which batch you are using.

 

Here is the latest engine weights listing and as usual you do not know how they measure.

Simple long block weights which would mean more are not available.

The LS listed does not say which one it is, as it came in both alloy and iron versions.

 

http://www.gomog.com...ineweights.html

351C is a good deal heavier than a Chev, the crank too is a LOT heavier. Heads are heavy as well plus a cast iron intake at 22kilos. 

And yes I have weighed all of this stuff. A late 70s SBC too is about 15 lbs lighter than a late 60s block and is unsafe to overbore .030

The 302W is smaller and lighter than the Chev. The late 80s on blocks are a LOT better in every respect, better material, better finish, better castings. Though again .030 is the max.

I have built several of all of them. And the Chev is by far better engine than the Ford. Using 'junk' parts the Clevo [or Clevo headed 351W] makes good power for not a lot of money. BUT is a handgrenade with  poor oiling as well as being a boiler as well. And the next step up is a LOT more expensive than a Chev.

And the Olds/Buick/ Leyland engines are bigger [though lighter] than the 302W. And in reality never a great engine. Passenger transport only.



#25 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,271 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 17 March 2019 - 01:48

Ford production wedge, not Ford parts book there really weren't any, were not good, including after being worked on by the best cylinder head man,  a Chevy production head had the upper hand easily.

Which is why Ford created new heads for the Trans-Am series.

Then the Boss engine came out so Ford boys ran the Boss head as that was a production engine.

I drove a Boss on the street and had none of the problems the local 302 Z-28 boys had driving a street car..

 

Already though, already thirty years ago, Ford boys, around here were running short dirt track Ford modified  racers were running alloy after market Ford heads so U.S. rules were flexible.

Now, in the U.S. though there is a huge selection of factory and now even after-market complete engines, not just heads, that solve that problem.

I don't think there are any production only series in the U.S. that, except, spec. series and there you can only run one engine, that , that, is still a problem.


Edited by Bob Riebe, 17 March 2019 - 02:38.


#26 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,207 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 24 March 2019 - 02:49

A Ford powered Fox body in drag racing is a rarity. They all have Chevs as it is a far simpler and more powerfull stronger engine. And lighter!!
Though I keep hearing how a Windsor splits in half a 500hp. V8 Stupidcars are making around 620 with 420lbs of torque. Alright an SVO block but just a improved production block.
A couple of Boss 302 style engines I know have made well over 500 and run at 8000 rpm. One in a speedway sedan. Though the Stupidcar engine also is a Boss style engine.


The problem is the factory injected 5l block. The injected 5.8 and the earlier engines don't seem to have the same weakness

#27 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 25 March 2019 - 05:47

Having just spent my weekend replacing the cam phasers et al on the Triton 3V in my Expedition, **** Ford engines. The entire thing seems to be a direct result of poor tensioner seals that bleed oil pressure and eventually fail outright. A used car in parts cost for the sake of a $1 seal. Next time it’s getting the LS treatment too. 😆

#28 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,769 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 March 2019 - 08:28

Ford production wedge, not Ford parts book there really weren't any, were not good, including after being worked on by the best cylinder head man,  a Chevy production head had the upper hand easily.

Which is why Ford created new heads for the Trans-Am series.

Then the Boss engine came out so Ford boys ran the Boss head as that was a production engine.

I drove a Boss on the street and had none of the problems the local 302 Z-28 boys had driving a street car..

 

Already though, already thirty years ago, Ford boys, around here were running short dirt track Ford modified  racers were running alloy after market Ford heads so U.S. rules were flexible.

Now, in the U.S. though there is a huge selection of factory and now even after-market complete engines, not just heads, that solve that problem.

I don't think there are any production only series in the U.S. that, except, spec. series and there you can only run one engine, that , that, is still a problem.

The original Ford Trans Am head was the dreaded tunnel port. Evidently useless at under about 6000 and then not reliable.

The Boss 302  using 351C 4V heads really always had far too big a port. The 2V head  was  far better but the chamber then was way too large. In hindsight the Aussie 302 head would have [and often have been in later times] was a far better deal. I personally would never bother with a 4V, too big even on a 351. And I race one. And keep it under 6500 so it should stay together.

As I said above the little 302W is for racing really too small. Though still has been quite succesfull, though costs more.

I have ridden in a Z28 and it was not nice, the 70 Boss 302 I drove was probably worse. Though both were real revvers. With not much torque. And both had 3.7 and shorter diff ratios. And in this day and age very desirable classics. 

 

As for Chevs, the LS works well as a standard or near standard engine. Using aftermarket parts on the SBC will make as much power and probably more. Just about every class of racing world wide has been dominated by them for 50 years. And still is. 

The LS because the heads flow better as a standard engine though is cheaper to put a turbo on for drag racing. 

The late Ford engine is a huge lump that does not fit in many places. Hitech with less power than its comparable Chev or even Mopar competitor.

 

As for firing order,, It depends which way the engine is numbered. Fords are 1234 per forward head. Chevs are 1357 per forward head. From memory 302 and Chevs are actually the same firing order. 

 

It appears Ford are looking for a simple smaller engine to haul 2 ton plus trucks around so I guess torquey low revving thing. Though Ford have used unsuitable engines in commercials often in the past. Though what is the bore and stroke and rod length? That will give you a good idea.

Look to the distant past with 427 and 428 FE engines or even 351C and M engines And the big brother 400M with 4x4" bore and stroke and 6.55 long rods. Torque to drag around 2 ton + vehicles



#29 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 27 March 2019 - 12:00

As I said above the little 302W is for racing really too small. Though still has been quite succesfull, though costs more.

 

Except for racing series where the capacity limit was 5l.

 

Such as Trans Am in the '60s and early '70s.



#30 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,769 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 11 April 2019 - 07:48

Except for racing series where the capacity limit was 5l.

 

Such as Trans Am in the '60s and early '70s.

And I repeat ideally it is too small. 5.4 conrod is as long as fits. A 302 SBC will take a 6,125.

BUT a 302W fits places nothing else does as it is such a baby little thing. Compare it alongside a 302Chev or a 351W  or LA Mopar and see how small it is.


Edited by Lee Nicolle, 11 April 2019 - 07:49.