4.6L General Discussion This section is for non-tech specific information pertaining to 4.6L (Modular) Mustangs built from 1996 to 2004.

5.3L 2v stoker instead..

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 3, 2008 | 12:47 AM
  #21  
texas_stang02's Avatar
texas_stang02
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 732
From: Houston TX
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

ORIGINAL: I G Joe

can you not port the heads for bigger valves? there are instances where 1 valve is actually better than 2 but maybe these 4.6's dont roll that way?

just wondering if you can put bigger valves in these engines and if it will make that much of a difference for N/A purposes, i understand our 281's are lacking the cubes to really push a lot of HP N/A for cheap money.
you can go with bigger valves, in fact the Patriot stage 3 heads claim that the intake valve is so large that you can only use it on a block that's been overbored. i called them up an asked them about it and the guy i talked to claimed that without that .015" extra clearance (from a .030" overbore) that the intake valve will come in contact with the engine block, so that's one factor that limits the size of the valves. and the picture below is from Patriot's web site that shows the underside of a 2v cylinder head, and it looks like the combustion chamber itself limits the size of the valves, otherwise you'd have to increase combustion chamber volume, and you still might have a valve come in contact with the block.


Old Feb 3, 2008 | 12:53 AM
  #22  
I G Joe's Avatar
I G Joe
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,821
From: The Great Northwest
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

looking at that makes me crindge, that combustion chamber doesnt look efficient to me.
Old Feb 3, 2008 | 01:00 AM
  #23  
livefast1's Avatar
livefast1
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,363
From:
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

and in no case is overboring to gain clearance for bigger valves a good stand point for performance because that just goes to show how shrouded the valves are.
Old Feb 3, 2008 | 01:30 AM
  #24  
2000GT4.6's Avatar
2000GT4.6
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,575
From: United States
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

ORIGINAL: livefast1

and in no case is overboring to gain clearance for bigger valves a good stand point for performance because that just goes to show how shrouded the valves are.
Thats exactly what I was thinking.

No matter how big you go on the valves, its just not a well designed head from CFM point of view.

I swear, WHERE are the companys for our 4.6 2v??? I simply do not understand how there is not an aftermarket head for the 2v yet, consdiering the sheer volume of 4.6L 2v out there (think of it... 96-04 mustang GT, early Tbird 4.6, truck 4.6).

The first person that comes up with a 275+ CFM aftermarket head that can be CNC for more will be a multi millionare... and have at least some of my money too.
Old Feb 3, 2008 | 03:27 AM
  #25  
tbirdscwd's Avatar
tbirdscwd
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,039
From: CA
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6

ORIGINAL: livefast1

and in no case is overboring to gain clearance for bigger valves a good stand point for performance because that just goes to show how shrouded the valves are.
Thats exactly what I was thinking.

No matter how big you go on the valves, its just not a well designed head from CFM point of view.

I swear, WHERE are the companys for our 4.6 2v??? I simply do not understand how there is not an aftermarket head for the 2v yet, consdiering the sheer volume of 4.6L 2v out there (think of it... 96-04 mustang GT, early Tbird 4.6, truck 4.6).

The first person that comes up with a 275+ CFM aftermarket head that can be CNC for more will be a multi millionare... and have at least some of my money too.
I'm on the same page! WTF, how can they not see how much they would sell? Well I'll tell you one thing, if there isn't a set of aftermarket heads by the time I finish my engineering degree. Well then, there will be. Hopefully I can make my first millions!
Old Feb 14, 2008 | 02:13 PM
  #26  
Digiam42's Avatar
Digiam42
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

Hey guys. Im new to this forum and wanted you guys take on what motor i should use. I have a 2001 mustang gt stock as a rock. I have decided to go with either turbos or a procharger. I have heard a lot about swapping in a 5.4 2v and was wondering what you guys think. All im looking for is 600 rwhp on pump gas. I will also have a set of fox lake stage 3 2v heads and the cams have yet to be determined because i havnt made up my mind to go blower or turbo. Any help would be great.
Old Feb 14, 2008 | 05:25 PM
  #27  
96GT_PSL's Avatar
96GT_PSL
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 363
From:
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

i dont know if i was bull****ed but some guy around town is saying his mustang has a big bore kit and like a lot of money into the motor so hes pushing 600+ rwhp all motor. i didnt believe him but i gave him the benefit of the doubt
Old Feb 14, 2008 | 07:03 PM
  #28  
01snake's Avatar
01snake
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,795
From: Michigan
Default RE: 5.3L 2v stoker instead..

while we are still on this topic

what is the most you can bore the 4.6? 5.1ish?

and what if you were to stroke and bore?




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 PM.