Why Ford engines not GM
03-08-2006, 10:48 AM
#1
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Deerfield, VA
Posts: 674
Why Ford engines not GM
Many of you are new to Ford products/engines and have many gripes about displacement, HP, and general engine design. First, I am probably one of the oldest folks in this forum at 50 years old, and have been involved in cars since 14 (owned my first). I have owned easily over 70 vehicles my life. I was a GM dealer training instructor for 8 years, HS automotive instructor 7 years, journeyman Tool and Die Maker ( started learning in Dad's machine shop at 12) and certified Automotive fleet manager. (ran a large utility fleet 7 years). And currently a HS CAD and Design instructor. I have seen and learned many things about vehicles, and have predominantly owned all Ford products, Why? Because they use innovative engineering in their products, I have seen this over and over since I've owned my first Ford at 16. I'm just going to explain a few things about Ford Modular Engines.
First Mod engine, 1992 Panther platform (Crown Vic/Grand Marquis)
Ford standardizes their Bore size at 3.562" The 4.6L is a "sqaure" Bore X Stroke meaning 3.562 X 3.562" , all other Ford mods use this Bore size regardless of displacement, why, because this size has been proven to be best balance of combustion efficiency/power (have you ever seen a 4.6 with an air pump tacked on?)
The block, The 4.6 block has one of the shortest deck heights in the industry making it extremely ridgid, this coupled with CROSS-Bolted Main journals make the main bearing girdle one of the toughest, and most stable designs in a V-8 engine (Ford also did this with their OHC 427 in '67, you know, the one NASCAR banned)
Those cursed Sintered metal rods, Why? Because they used a NEW and more accurate way of locating rod caps. They machine the rod main bore, then crack the rod end in two with a Hydraulic press. When bolted back together it locates at the fracture so precisely, they can run rod bearing clearances of .0007 to .0012, normal rod clearance is .0007 to 0019, BTW a human hair is .002. Closer tolerances=consistent oiling and less rod stress, smaller piston=less inertial force, so you can use sintered rod in stock vehicle and tolerate 6200 RPM consistently. Remember this engine is designed for endurance and durability in STOCK form, not racing. But, you have a good base to build up. I have read of 4.6 liter V-8's in taxis in New York routinely going 500K to 700K miles without a teardown, let GM make that claim. I had a pile of GM truck 5.7's in my fleet garage, on the floor, that never saw 75K. We always had two new GM 5.7's in stock, when they blew they were non rebuildable.
Overhead cam, GM hasn't caught on to this in their low end vehicles. (the Northstar is one beautiful piece, like the 4.6) Pushrods, rockers, valve lifters, all add up to a lot more weight, and more inertial mass than OHC, the Japanese knew this for years and utilized it heavily. OHC also gives more leeway for port design, due to to the lack of pushrod bores in the heads.
True coil on plug, many GM vehicles still use distributors/plug wires/or cheesy coil on plug (a Briggs and Stratton coil and 3" plug wire, on a 'VETTE, give me a break! Ever change plugs/wires on a "F body" try about 8 hrs of work. I have two special sockets, just for that task. Look at the easy serviceability of the 4.6's plugs. And at least you can put headers on a Mustang, you have to drop the engine cradle on an "F Body".
I can rave on about body integrity, interior quality, electrical failures, and many other issues, drive an old F body and tell me, if it isn't a rattle trap. you are talking about a company that for years used RTV and a cast surface as a gasket surface. (intakes and valve covers) look also at the # of bolts they fasten their covers with. GM has been playing catch up for years with Ford, one piece rear main seals, Bolster plates on oil pan rails, Silicone rubber gaskets, They still haven't improved and caught up, look close, then decide.
John
First Mod engine, 1992 Panther platform (Crown Vic/Grand Marquis)
Ford standardizes their Bore size at 3.562" The 4.6L is a "sqaure" Bore X Stroke meaning 3.562 X 3.562" , all other Ford mods use this Bore size regardless of displacement, why, because this size has been proven to be best balance of combustion efficiency/power (have you ever seen a 4.6 with an air pump tacked on?)
The block, The 4.6 block has one of the shortest deck heights in the industry making it extremely ridgid, this coupled with CROSS-Bolted Main journals make the main bearing girdle one of the toughest, and most stable designs in a V-8 engine (Ford also did this with their OHC 427 in '67, you know, the one NASCAR banned)
Those cursed Sintered metal rods, Why? Because they used a NEW and more accurate way of locating rod caps. They machine the rod main bore, then crack the rod end in two with a Hydraulic press. When bolted back together it locates at the fracture so precisely, they can run rod bearing clearances of .0007 to .0012, normal rod clearance is .0007 to 0019, BTW a human hair is .002. Closer tolerances=consistent oiling and less rod stress, smaller piston=less inertial force, so you can use sintered rod in stock vehicle and tolerate 6200 RPM consistently. Remember this engine is designed for endurance and durability in STOCK form, not racing. But, you have a good base to build up. I have read of 4.6 liter V-8's in taxis in New York routinely going 500K to 700K miles without a teardown, let GM make that claim. I had a pile of GM truck 5.7's in my fleet garage, on the floor, that never saw 75K. We always had two new GM 5.7's in stock, when they blew they were non rebuildable.
Overhead cam, GM hasn't caught on to this in their low end vehicles. (the Northstar is one beautiful piece, like the 4.6) Pushrods, rockers, valve lifters, all add up to a lot more weight, and more inertial mass than OHC, the Japanese knew this for years and utilized it heavily. OHC also gives more leeway for port design, due to to the lack of pushrod bores in the heads.
True coil on plug, many GM vehicles still use distributors/plug wires/or cheesy coil on plug (a Briggs and Stratton coil and 3" plug wire, on a 'VETTE, give me a break! Ever change plugs/wires on a "F body" try about 8 hrs of work. I have two special sockets, just for that task. Look at the easy serviceability of the 4.6's plugs. And at least you can put headers on a Mustang, you have to drop the engine cradle on an "F Body".
I can rave on about body integrity, interior quality, electrical failures, and many other issues, drive an old F body and tell me, if it isn't a rattle trap. you are talking about a company that for years used RTV and a cast surface as a gasket surface. (intakes and valve covers) look also at the # of bolts they fasten their covers with. GM has been playing catch up for years with Ford, one piece rear main seals, Bolster plates on oil pan rails, Silicone rubber gaskets, They still haven't improved and caught up, look close, then decide.
John
03-08-2006, 11:47 AM
#7
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 2,375
RE: Why Ford engines not GM
ORIGINAL: 06mustang88
great info! it's good to hear that not everyone is crazy about the oh so famous LS1
great info! it's good to hear that not everyone is crazy about the oh so famous LS1
Great read, I agree...regardless of the power the LS1 engine, it is not as efficient and I have always hated the design and styling of chevy except for the corvette. But even the corvette has ****ty interior for how expensive of a car it is. I would love to see ford design a 7.0Liter Modular V8 and put it in a special edition Mustang and see how much power they get out of it. I cant believe the new Z06 is fuking 7.0L...that's HUGE! lol
Cheap
Heap
Every
Valve
Rattles
Oil
Leaks
Every
Time
03-08-2006, 11:57 AM
#9
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,724
RE: Why Ford engines not GM
Thanks for that post.
One thing that might help folks that want to make mods is if you explain a little how some of these features that make the ford Mod engine so good in stock form could cause issues when being modified.
One simple one that comes to mind is changing oil viscosity. Because the mod motor has such small clearances, you should never use "heavier" oil. This type of info can save some folks large head aches.
One thing that might help folks that want to make mods is if you explain a little how some of these features that make the ford Mod engine so good in stock form could cause issues when being modified.
One simple one that comes to mind is changing oil viscosity. Because the mod motor has such small clearances, you should never use "heavier" oil. This type of info can save some folks large head aches.
03-08-2006, 12:28 PM
#10
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Deerfield, VA
Posts: 674
RE: Why Ford engines not GM
You are exactly right, that is why Ford requires 5W-20 oil in it's engines, a 20W base oil, pumps much easier into those tight clearances. Not an issue (using 5W-30) in moderate temps, but in North Dakota, I'd use 5W-20.
There are some GM products I'd suffer with, a C-6 Vette, that body is so COOOOOOL! And, the new Z06 is an impressive world class sports car, at a very reasonable price, and looks bad-***! If I had the money, that would be a tough call, the new Shelby GT500, or the Z06. Cadillac is also putting out some nice product, and I'm all for the new Camaro, a little competition will make the Mustang better. I think GM trucks still suck A**, they just don't seem to get it, truck people want torque, not HP. I want all our American manufacturers to prosper and survive, the alternative is scary, we'd be talking on a Tiburon forum!!!! Argghggg, slice my wrists, PLEASE.
John
There are some GM products I'd suffer with, a C-6 Vette, that body is so COOOOOOL! And, the new Z06 is an impressive world class sports car, at a very reasonable price, and looks bad-***! If I had the money, that would be a tough call, the new Shelby GT500, or the Z06. Cadillac is also putting out some nice product, and I'm all for the new Camaro, a little competition will make the Mustang better. I think GM trucks still suck A**, they just don't seem to get it, truck people want torque, not HP. I want all our American manufacturers to prosper and survive, the alternative is scary, we'd be talking on a Tiburon forum!!!! Argghggg, slice my wrists, PLEASE.
John