Jump to content

Custom Search





Coming Up Next:
Lincoln Continental • Lincoln Aviator


Welcome to Blue Oval Forums


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to Blue Oval Forums.  You must first register to create topics and post replies. Registration is a quick and easy process and only takes a minute.  Be apart of Blue Oval Forums by signing in or creating an account.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create a photo album and post images
  • Use the Shout feature and more. . .
Click here to create an account now.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

5.0 undesirable?


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   meyeste

meyeste

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 140 posts
  • Joined 13-August 05
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 06 July 2014 - 09:49 AM

I read somewhere - I believe it was torque news that because the Coyote 5.0 Engine shares architecture with the Jag engine (does it? I don't know) it is complicated and therefore expensive to make and Dearborn would like to replace it for something simpler - which according to what I read was the voodoo engine. It's my understanding the 5.0L has earned a reputation among truck owners as being bullet-proof, rock solid (no knock on the 3.5L) "5.0's don't come back" - a quote from a dealer service rep. So was wondering if there is anything too that, I for one say "keep the 5.0".


Edited by meyeste, 06 July 2014 - 09:49 AM.








Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#2 OFFLINE   twintornados

twintornados

    Ford fan for a long, long time.

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,120 posts
  • Joined 16-February 10
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Central NY
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Lincoln MKX Elite

Posted 06 July 2014 - 02:32 PM

The 5.0L is an evolution of the 4.6L and 5.4L V8 and 6.8L V10 "Triton" or Modular motors....the motors have been in production since the early 90's and is produced in the Romeo and Windsor engine plants....early versions had spark plug issues, but later editions have addressed those concerns. The BOSS 6.2L is a variant of the Modular design, but it has different bore spacing...


Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours....Gordon Lightfoot, "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. ~ Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974

#3 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,137 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 07 July 2014 - 07:31 AM

The 5.0L is an evolution of the 4.6L and 5.4L V8 and 6.8L V10 "Triton" or Modular motors....the motors have been in production since the early 90's and is produced in the Romeo and Windsor engine plants....

True !

The 6.2L BOSS was supposed to have a "little brother", but early development testing showed fuel economy was not as good as expected. A group of Modular Engine engineers, with experience in "hot rodding" the Modular engine (outside of the company), connived management that there was still a lot of potential in that engine. Many of the updated were "old school" racer tricks (piston cooling oil jets). The real key was thousands of hours of computational fluid dynamics modeling of cylinder head air flow.

The final "cherry on top" was engineering fulfilling a marketing request. Make it another "5.0L" ! Nostalgia sells !! (Which is why there will be a 2.3L turbo in the 2015 Mustang.)

The 5.0L may not be the world's best truck engine, but careful intake and exhaust tuning has improved the low end torque.



#4 OFFLINE   twintornados

twintornados

    Ford fan for a long, long time.

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,120 posts
  • Joined 16-February 10
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Central NY
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Lincoln MKX Elite

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:00 AM

The 5.0L may not be the world's best truck engine, but careful intake and exhaust tuning has improved the low end torque.

 

Everybody I talk to that has an F150 with the 5.0L Coyote motor absolutely loves it...biggest complaint from the guys that have the Ecoboost 3.5L mill in their F150 is that the mileage is disappointing...but then admit that they have their foot in the turbos every chance they get....


  • jeff355 and goinbroke2 like this
Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours....Gordon Lightfoot, "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. ~ Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974

#5 OFFLINE   NickF1011

NickF1011

    Moderator Shmoderator

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,712 posts
  • Joined 13-September 04
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Annapolis, MD
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Edge Sport, 1997 Mustang Cobra

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:56 AM

! Nostalgia sells !! (Which is why there will be a 2.3L turbo in the 2015 Mustang.)
 

 

I don't think too many people are nostalgic about the 2.3T in the 80's Mustangs.  There's a reason they were only offered for a few years.  The 2.3 was going to exist whether the Mustang used it or not, as there is a need for it in other vehicles.  More than likely, it just happened to check all the boxes that were needed in the Mustang also, so there it is.


Edited by NickF1011, 07 July 2014 - 08:57 AM.

  • CurtisH likes this
Current Rides:
2011 Ford Edge Sport AWD
1997 Ford SVT Mustang Cobra

Previous Rides:
2004 Mazda 6s
1995 Saturn SL2
1994 Ford Explorer XLT 4x2
1993 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo 4x4
1993 Ford Taurus LX
1987 Ford Taurus GL
 
Moderator at TeamMustang.net

#6 OFFLINE   Bob Rosadini

Bob Rosadini

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 2,432 posts
  • Joined 15-October 99

Posted 07 July 2014 - 11:30 AM

 

I don't think too many people are nostalgic about the 2.3T in the 80's Mustangs.  There's a reason they were only offered for a few years.  The 2.3 was going to exist whether the Mustang used it or not, as there is a need for it in other vehicles.  More than likely, it just happened to check all the boxes that were needed in the Mustang also, so there it is.

I thought today's 2.3 is a totally different animal from the old 2.3 of Mustang II days??   And I'm talking about non-turbo vs non-turbo.

True?



#7 OFFLINE   NickF1011

NickF1011

    Moderator Shmoderator

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,712 posts
  • Joined 13-September 04
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Annapolis, MD
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Edge Sport, 1997 Mustang Cobra

Posted 07 July 2014 - 11:49 AM

I thought today's 2.3 is a totally different animal from the old 2.3 of Mustang II days??   And I'm talking about non-turbo vs non-turbo.

True?

It's as different as the current 5.0 is to the old Windsor motor.  Is there still a naturally-aspirated 2.3 in the lineup though?  Thought that was replaced by the 2.5 and/or 1.6/1.9EB's.


Current Rides:
2011 Ford Edge Sport AWD
1997 Ford SVT Mustang Cobra

Previous Rides:
2004 Mazda 6s
1995 Saturn SL2
1994 Ford Explorer XLT 4x2
1993 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo 4x4
1993 Ford Taurus LX
1987 Ford Taurus GL
 
Moderator at TeamMustang.net

#8 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,502 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 07 July 2014 - 11:52 AM

No NA 2.3L - just the 2.3L EB.  The nostalgia comment was aimed at the 2.3L turbo in the mustang II but as Nick pointed out I don't think that had anything to do with it.  Although I'm sure the 5.0/302 had lots of nostalgia behind that decision.



2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)

#9 OFFLINE   CurtisH

CurtisH

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 439 posts
  • Joined 23-December 02
  • Location:Georgia
  • Current Vehicle:2005 Mustang GT

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:09 PM

No NA 2.3L - just the 2.3L EB.  The nostalgia comment was aimed at the 2.3L turbo in the mustang II but as Nick pointed out I don't think that had anything to do with it.  Although I'm sure the 5.0/302 had lots of nostalgia behind that decision.

Uh, there was no 2.3L turbo in the Mustang II.  :)



#10 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,502 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:12 PM

Uh, there was no 2.3L turbo in the Mustang II.  :)

 

Oops - SVO mustang.  Sorry.


  • CurtisH likes this

2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)

#11 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,137 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 08 July 2014 - 07:56 AM

I am still interested in seeing the differences between the base engine between the new 2.0L and the new 2.3L.  The 2.3L has a "cast in" exhaust manifold.  50 years ago, that was a "kiss of death".



#12 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,502 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 08 July 2014 - 08:06 AM

Isn't that the same design as the 1.0L and 1.5L?



2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)

#13 OFFLINE   edselford

edselford

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 73 posts
  • Joined 04-February 07

Posted 11 July 2014 - 10:29 AM

regarding the question of the 5.o liter V8 being identical to the Jaguar 5.0 V8,

 

I recall that the Jaguar design started out 3.9/4.4 liter V8 and had about 96mm bore spacing.

 

The design was drastically upgraded with the introduction of their 5.0 liter V8.  They increased the bore spacing to 100mm just like the Ford Modular family.

 

However the Jaguar 5.0 has a slightly larger bore and a slightly shorter stroke and the design always had gas direct injection, I think from the top of the cylinder combustion chamber, not the side.

 

I think that they are not identical and I do not know if for an engineering mule, the Jag cylinder heads and direct injection would fit on a ford 5.0 liter block.

 

Regarding the 6.2 liter, there was a development 5.8 liter version that included cylinder deactivation for increased fuel economy, targeted for the Mustang.  102mm bore and 89mm stroke.  Unfortunately, I actually heard that the cylinder deactivation system failed durability testing and this is why the development was stopped.

 

From what people at Ford said, the 6.2 family was designed for displacements from 5.5 liters to over 7 liters.

 

As you can see, ford jumped on the Ecoboost  band wagon, making smaller size engines perform like larger engines with some degree of fuel economy savings, if driven conservatively.  So they save gas in part throttle and are slightly more thursty at wide open throttle than a comprable V6 or V8.  I guess, like someone already said, the Ecoboost is fords cylinder deactivation. Also, smaller engines weigh less.

 

7.8mm or .307" is getting down there as the distance between cylinder walls,(cylinder liners and water) but it seems to work, even for a truck. Daimler is down to 7mm or .27559" but utilizes an arch metal spray process that is propretary.

 

Once a major investment is made in an engine plant, there are always sacred cows that can't be changed.  Thats why the creative guys at Ford Engine came up with the 5.0 liter, they maintained the use of the existing investment.

 

Edselford

 



#14 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,502 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 11 July 2014 - 10:33 AM

I thought the Jag was a modified AJ V8 and the 5.0L Coyote was a modified modular design?  

 

Even on the AJ V8 that was shared by Ford and Jag the heads and top end were all different.



2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)

#15 OFFLINE   twintornados

twintornados

    Ford fan for a long, long time.

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,120 posts
  • Joined 16-February 10
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Central NY
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Lincoln MKX Elite

Posted 11 July 2014 - 11:38 AM

I am still interested in seeing the differences between the base engine between the new 2.0L and the new 2.3L.  The 2.3L has a "cast in" exhaust manifold.  50 years ago, that was a "kiss of death".

50 years ago, it was common for hot rodders to strip the cast iron exhaust manifolds from the engine and toss on some heavy breathing exit pipes.....I remember the 3.3L I-6 in my Fairmont had a "cast in place" intake manifold.... 


Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours....Gordon Lightfoot, "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. ~ Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974

#16 OFFLINE   silvrsvt

silvrsvt

    Bite my Shiny metal ass!

  • Moderator
  • 17,715 posts
  • Joined 03-October 02
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Escape SE AWD/2013 Taurus SHO

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:28 AM

I am still interested in seeing the differences between the base engine between the new 2.0L and the new 2.3L.  The 2.3L has a "cast in" exhaust manifold.  50 years ago, that was a "kiss of death".

 

 

That was HALF A CENTURY ago! SMH


"Hell, there are no rules here-- we're trying to accomplish something."
Thomas A. Edison


Ford Products owned though the years:
1986 Escort GT Race Red
1998 Mustang GT Dark Green Satin
2002 SVT Focus Satin Silver
2006 Mustang GT Tungsten Grey

2010 Escape XLT AWD Sport Blue
2013 Taurus SHO Ruby Red

2017 Escape SE AWD Platinum White

Future Fords:
2021 Bronco

20xx Mustang GT350 or the like

 

199923.png
 
photo-thumb-15254.jpg


#17 OFFLINE   silvrsvt

silvrsvt

    Bite my Shiny metal ass!

  • Moderator
  • 17,715 posts
  • Joined 03-October 02
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Escape SE AWD/2013 Taurus SHO

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:30 AM


 

7.8mm or .307" is getting down there as the distance between cylinder walls,(cylinder liners and water) but it seems to work, even for a truck. Daimler is down to 7mm or .27559" but utilizes an arch metal spray process that is propretary.

 

 

 

Doesn't Ford use a similar process for the 5.8L on the GT500 engine?


  • edselford likes this

"Hell, there are no rules here-- we're trying to accomplish something."
Thomas A. Edison


Ford Products owned though the years:
1986 Escort GT Race Red
1998 Mustang GT Dark Green Satin
2002 SVT Focus Satin Silver
2006 Mustang GT Tungsten Grey

2010 Escape XLT AWD Sport Blue
2013 Taurus SHO Ruby Red

2017 Escape SE AWD Platinum White

Future Fords:
2021 Bronco

20xx Mustang GT350 or the like

 

199923.png
 
photo-thumb-15254.jpg


#18 OFFLINE   edselford

edselford

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 73 posts
  • Joined 04-February 07

Posted 16 July 2014 - 12:04 PM

Yes, the 5.8 liter utilizes a similar process to Mercedes Benz, an arc spray of iron onto the sides of the cylinder wall.

 

I think this process will stay on very low volume, specialty applications like the Mustang 500.

 

It seems more probable that future ford engine designs will go the route of the 2.7 L V6 ecoboost, with a GCI / graphite compacted iron block/  aluminum lower crankcase and aluminium cylinder heads.

 

I just wonder if the 6.2 is forever gone at least in light truck?

 

eddselford

 

 



#19 OFFLINE   jeff355

jeff355

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 25 posts
  • Joined 25-February 07

Posted 12 August 2014 - 06:30 PM

If you are thinking of a 5.0L Coyote , dont think twice- It is the best engine ever put in an F150 IMO and gets no marketing whatsoever.

 

Ive had old 5.0s, 5.8s,  5.4s, 5.4 3valves and this engine is better, is good on fuel,  revs like a chevy, and has a sound that an ecoboost just cant beat !

 

Twin turbo 6cyl in my truck ?  Never.   Let me know how that works out after your warranty is up.

 

Trucks are supposed to have a v8.



#20 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,502 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 12 August 2014 - 07:05 PM

Twin turbo 6cyl in my truck ?  Never.   Let me know how that works out after your warranty is up.

 

How does that work out in turbo Diesel engines?

 

What do the ecoboost engines have in common with turbo diesel engines?  They were both designed for turbos from day one.



2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)








Custom Search


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy Terms of Service ·