GT350 5.2 Engine

[bifs66]

Recently, there have been a number of interesting articles written about the new flat plane 5.2 GT350 engine. I get a kick reading some of the nonsense in the comments sections. Typically, someone just has to reference some version of the G.M LS engine series and how it either makes more H.P., is lighter, has a lower center of gravity, or is less complicated. After all, a flathead engine is smaller, lighter, and less complicated than an OHV engine; but it cannot match the power of an OHV engine of similar displacement. I suppose they just can't let go of the past when the "Mod" engines were initially outclassed. It reminds me of the NASCAR days of yore where the G.M. cars won most races; and us Ford guys would save some face by claiming that they all used Ford 9" rear ends.

[Dave-S]

Each manufacturer takes their own approach to power plants for a whole variety of reasons. I don't think one is necessarily better than the other but i suppose you could term Ford's Engine more "sophisticated" than GM's. (On the other hand GM's ZR1 engine from the nineties that was installed in the Corvette was also very sophisticated with DOHC and four valves per cylinder and GM didn't continue that approach in V8 technology after that). Does the Ford engine cost more to produce than a traditional push rod engine? I would think it might............ but maybe not. Do they both get the job done? Yes. And don't forget Chrysler also uses a traditional push rod engine in both their V8 and V10 versions for the Challenger and Viper. Then there is the issue of IRS where Ford was the last hold out until this latest gen Mustang. Was it necessarily a bad decision to continue with the straight axle up until 2015.............I don't think so....in fact I personally prefer the straight axle myself.

 

So my point is while any of these manufacturers may take a more "sophisticated" approach with engines, drivetrains, suspensions, etc, it doesn't necessarily mean the other guy's approach is wrong.

[akirby]

Each manufacturer takes their own approach to power plants for a whole variety of reasons. I don't think one is necessarily better than the other but i suppose you could term Ford's Engine more "sophisticated" than GM's. (On the other hand GM's ZR1 engine from the nineties that was installed in the Corvette was also very sophisticated with DOHC and four valves per cylinder and GM didn't continue that approach in V8 technology after that). Does the Ford engine cost more to produce than a traditional push rod engine? I would think it might............ but maybe not. Do they both get the job done? Yes. And don't forget Chrysler also uses a traditional push rod engine in both their V8 and V10 versions for the Challenger and Viper. Then there is the issue of IRS where Ford was the last hold out until this latest gen Mustang. Was it necessarily a bad decision to continue with the straight axle up until 2015.............I don't think so....in fact I personally prefer the straight axle myself.

 

So my point is while any of these manufacturers may take a more "sophisticated" approach with engines, drivetrains, suspensions, etc, it doesn't necessarily mean the other guy's approach is wrong.

 

 

Not wrong, just outdated. GM and Chrysler have pushed their OHV designs to the limit and arguably done a great job with them. Just like Ford did with the SRA mustang. But there is a reason why coil springs replaced leaf springs, IRS replaced SRA, fuel injection replaced carburetors and OHC engines have replaced almost all OHV engines.

[Dave-S]

Not sure what you mean by "outdated" but that's OK.

 

As far as OHC (over head cam) engines go, GM was very clear why they choose to stick with a push rod engine when they introduced the LS series of engines back in the late nineties (a few of the things I remember were less complexity, and lower engine height) and they have continued that approach to this day and likely with good reason (although I am not sure what they would cite today). Since GM and Chrysler both use OHC engines for their V6 and 4 Cylinder engines and there is no doubt either manufacturer could introduce OHC versions of their V8 and V12 engines if they so chose.

 

I guess I see no reason for a manufacturer to change their engine design unless it is plainly and clearly outdated. GM's push rod engines produce plenty of power, get reasonable fuel mileage, and are quite sophisticated with both direct injection as well as cylinder deactivation. The engines have proven themselves to be winners in competition as well, While I can certainly appreciate the "sophistication" of a Ford V8, I also appreciate the (relative) simplicity of a pushrod engine that gets the job done as well.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Dave-S

[Sevensecondsuv]

We've been through this in other threads. The advantages to OHC are mainly that it gives you independent VVT of intake and exhaust and it's much easier to do multiple intake/exhaust valves per cylinder. The disadvantages of OHC are mostly engine size, weight, and packaging.

 

Its hard to compare Ford's OHC approach to GM's pushrod approach because Ford's motors are generally much smaller due to the mod motors short bore spacing. GM's larger V8s compensate for the limitations of only having one camshaft by having more displacement. If the Ford mod motor wasn't displacement limited, I think the OHC advantages would show up in the HP/Torque numbers.

 

Both strategies have served their makers well and a strong case can be made for either technology. However, if HP/liter is the goal, OHC gets you further.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[akirby]

If there was a strong case to be made for pushrods then there would be more pushrod engines still around.

[Dave-S]

http://wardsauto.com/vehicles-amp-technology/new-gm-v-8-proves-pushrods-still-rock

[coupe3w]

It reminds me of the NASCAR days of yore where the G.M. cars won most races; and us Ford guys would save some face by claiming that they all used Ford 9" rear ends.

Still holds true today. Pocono race today Chevy 1,2,3 sweep. Last week Dover Chevy 1,2,3,4 sweep. Charlotte Toyota wins. Where is the Ford performance?

[theoldwizard]

I still want to know how those NASCAR engine builders can build pushrod engines that can rev to 9,000+ rpm thousands of times during testing, qualify and a race weekend. Spring pressures must be enormous !

[akirby]

I still want to know how those NASCAR engine builders can build pushrod engines that can rev to 9,000+ rpm thousands of times during testing, qualify and a race weekend. Spring pressures must be enormous !

 

Failed springs were common early on. IIRC one engine mfr/parts supplier figured out the spring problem and enjoyed a big advantage until the others caught up.

[coupe3w]

 

Failed springs were common early on. IIRC one engine mfr/parts supplier figured out the spring problem and enjoyed a big advantage until the others caught up.

It was the Wood brothers or H&M I believe. They used oil squirters to help cool the springs.

Edited June 10, 2015 by coupe3w

[akirby]

Found it.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a7451/the-spring-that-revolutionized-nascar-6643778/

[theoldwizard]

Found it.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a7451/the-spring-that-revolutionized-nascar-6643778/

FASCINATING !

 

I found it extremely interesting that Yates redesigned the block so that they could have a shorter pushrod, the other big Achilles heel.

[theoldwizard]

It was the Wood brothers or H&M I believe. They used oil squirters to help cool the springs.

You must be as old as I am ! That was a long time ago !!

[theoldwizard]

There was a big push for push rods (pun intended) when the Hurricane/Boss was resurrected. Management thought it was a big cost savings and could produce the same power and fuel economy as OHC. The engineers won that battle.

[coupe3w]

You must be as old as I am ! That was a long time ago !!

Feels like yesterday.

[bifs66]

As far as Ford Performance goes..don't forget the factory Cobra Jet Mustangs in drag racing. They won Factory Stock Showdown this past weekend at Englishtown, N.J. This was the third consecutive win and makes them at 100% in the series this year. Chris Holbrook ran the quickest Stock Eliminator pass ever. I don't think the Cobra Jets are running G.M. LS engines.

[coupe3w]

As far as Ford Performance goes..don't forget the factory Cobra Jet Mustangs in drag racing. They won Factory Stock Showdown this past weekend at Englishtown, N.J. This was the third consecutive win and makes them at 100% in the series this year. Chris Holbrook ran the quickest Stock Eliminator pass ever. I don't think the Cobra Jets are running G.M. LS engines.

Good point. But NHRA won't let the Fords keep winning like that. They will add weight to them to slow them down.

[bifs66]

Good point. But NHRA won't let the Fords keep winning like that. They will add weight to them to slow them down.

How true. I've had the impression that the Cobra Jets have been more or less dominate in the "Factory Stock" classes ever since they came on the scene several years ago. It was often said....just wait for the factory COPO Camaros and Mopars to arrive. I think they did arrive some time ago; yet the Cobra Jets continue to win. No doubt something will be done to make the poor GM and Mopar cars fare better (as was done to Bob Glidden back in the day when he had to run 200-300 more lbs.)

[Dreygar]

I wonder how much these crate motors would cost??? Hopefully not GT-500 Crate motor prices. Although I am still waiting for Ford to do some Direct Injection on these motors.