New Lincoln Engine Info

[wescoent]

Some information has come to my attention over the past few days that might interest people on this board.

 

First, is the preliminary horsepower numbers from the new 3.7L V6. From someone claiming to be from a marketing firm working with Ford, that the new V6 is getting about 320hp from regular gas at the moment in testing.

 

Secondly is from Motor Trend, that Lincoln is working on an exclusive 5.0L V8 for front or rear drive applications to replace the Yamaha motor, but that it won't be done in time for the MKS launch. If based on the Duratec architecture, and if tuned like the 3.7, we could be talking 440hp here.

[Blueblood]

Some information has come to my attention over the past few days that might interest people on this board.

 

First, is the preliminary horsepower numbers from the new 3.7L V6. From someone claiming to be from a marketing firm working with Ford, that the new V6 is getting about 320hp from regular gas at the moment in testing.

 

 

Now that's the kind of info I like to hear! Reminds of the days we got future info here, I miss that..

Secondly is from Motor Trend, that Lincoln is working on an exclusive 5.0L V8 for front or rear drive applications to replace the Yamaha motor, but that it won't be done in time for the MKS launch. If based on the Duratec architecture, and if tuned like the 3.7, we could be talking 440hp here.

 

I saw that in Motor Trend, I wonder how reliable that info is since I've heard nothing elsewhere about Ford developing another new V8 in addition to the Hurricane. Would be nice though, bt I can't see 440 horsepower out of a naturally aspirated 5.0L. But if they are getting 320 out of the 3.7 then who knows..

[waymondospiff]

Secondly is from Motor Trend, that Lincoln is working on an exclusive 5.0L V8 for front or rear drive applications to replace the Yamaha motor, but that it won't be done in time for the MKS launch. If based on the Duratec architecture, and if tuned like the 3.7, we could be talking 440hp here.

I saw that too...can't say I really believe it is for the MKS though. The 4.6L Duratec is already FWD/RWD capable - that's not the issue. The problem for the MKS and all of the D3s is the unique engine compartment of the Volvo chassis that can only fit transverse engines with a very narrow angle (Hence the Yamaha V8.) I think Ford would be better off designing a "regular" chassis for a larger range of luxury cars than designing an engine for a nearly ten year old chassis design.

 

Just my opinion.

 

But 320hp out of the 3.7? Good times.

 

Scott

[Edstock]

 

It appears that, for AWD in a relatively low-riding chassis, a sideways engine orientation has benefits.

 

Just how wide would a comfortable-fit mod V-8 sideways-mounted engine chassis be? If American luxury is width, is this a problem? Would a wider D3 with a 5.4 AWD be successful?

[ZanatWork]

This reminds me of the V8 discussion...with the 3.7 essentially making the same power as the Yamaha motor, I said that I didn't see the point of both.

 

A new multi-use V8 making the kind of numbers we're seeing from BMW/Audi/M-B, on the other hand, would be a huge step forward for Lincoln. Their customers have had to settle for "barely competitive" too long.

 

Looks like Aston's on the block, so Jag can move up...and that means Lincoln can look upmarket too.

[LincolnFan]

Come on, this site has a lot of Ford employees and not even a single hint?

 

but 320HP out of a 3.7.. what the hell are they planning to do exactly? the 6F can't handle that power.

 

Any news of that engine getting in the Lincoln line-up?

[old_fairmont_wagon]

320 HP from 3.7L on REGULAR UNLEADED? That's almost pie in the sky impressive. Lets compare with competing engines:

Toyota/Lexus 3.5L DOHC, DGI ~305 HP on premium fuel

Infiniti/Nissan 3.5L DOHC, ~305 HP on premium fuel

Honda/Acura 3.5L DOHC, ~300 HP on premium Fuel

GM 3.6L DOCH, ~265 on premium fuel

MB 3.5L DOHC ~265 on premium fuel

VW 3.6L DOHC ~280 hp on premium fuel

 

Now, this 320 HP 3.7L monster is based on a 3.5L that manages to conjure up 265 hp out of regular unleaded. Given reasonable expectation for an engine that's got the same VE but is just upsized and appropriately tuned, you'd expect to see maybe 275 hp. If they decide to go the Direct gasoline injection route (something they've been working on for a while) and lean entirely to performance, than they can expect around a 10% improvement in torque across the band, resulting in a similar improvement in HP, leaving them with around 305 HP. 320 HP is around 5% more than the 305 HP number that I speced, and, given that Ford's architecture seems to be very good on this engine compared to the competition, and given that there are other performance tricks that are open to them, 320 HP is indeed reachable with only a N/A engine of that size. And, those numbers didn't take into account a possible switch to premium fuel. If they switch to premium, then hitting that target number or blowing right past it for them will be easier. If they're doing 320 hp on the bench on regular, using premium fuel on the same engine and properly tuning it should be good for 350+ hp. With a 350 hp N/A 3.7L, why even bother turboing the thing? If they can get those power numbers from an N/A motor, what can we imagine coming from a twin-turbo D35? Is 400HP a MINIMUM number to expect? Is 450 hp not out of the question?

 

I wonder about the torque production of that engine. Working from the existing duratec 35's number of 250, the engine upsize will likely result in another 10 lbs, so, 270 lbs. Switching to DGI should give them a healthy 10% boost, so 297 lbs is reachable. Add in some other tuning possibilities and this could be the first v6 in that size range to hit 300+ lbs of torque without using forced induction. A switch to premium fuel would make that goal easier as well.

 

My last question is, what would a larger displacement V8 designed with the same performance characteristics achieve? If, perhaps, there is a 4.5L - 5.0L V8 in development for transverse FWD use (remember, not just Lincoln, but volvo, Mazda, mercury and ford could all use it, so it could potentially have volume advantages). What sort of power can we expect? Just do the math. The D35 at 265 hp from 3.5L is 75.7 HP/L efficient. At 4.5 to 5 L, said V8 would be producing about 340 to 380 HP from regular gas and without direct injection. Tuned like the 86.5 HP/L conjectural 3.7L V6 that is rumored in this thread, they would belt out 390 to 430 HP on regular gas. Those are not bad numbers by any measure.

 

As for V8s in american vehicles, remember that the MOD v8 line was designed around being as short as possible to accomodate mounting in the Continental. The new design BOSS is supposedly not compromised in that way. This conjectural V8 would be, but would still wind up being as long as or longer than the Yamaha V8. That being said, I don't think that, for moderately sized V8s, their length is prohibitive in a FWD vehicle. Its their weight and width that causes the problems. Remember, manufacturers are shoving inline 4 cylinders that are 2.3-2.5L in size into small cars all the time. Those engines are literally as long as most 4 to 5 liter V8s. It's their head to head width that causes the fittment issues.

[jlsaylor]

320 HP from 3.7L on REGULAR UNLEADED? That's almost pie in the sky impressive.....................................................................................................................

 

My last question is, what would a larger displacement V8 designed with the same performance characteristics achieve? If, perhaps, there is a 4.5L - 5.0L V8 in development for transverse FWD use (remember, not just Lincoln, but volvo, Mazda, mercury and ford could all use it, so it could potentially have volume advantages). What sort of power can we expect? Just do the math. The D35 at 265 hp from 3.5L is 75.7 HP/L efficient. At 4.5 to 5 L, said V8 would be producing about 340 to 380 HP from regular gas and without direct injection. Tuned like the 86.5 HP/L conjectural 3.7L V6 that is rumored in this thread, they would belt out 390 to 430 HP on regular gas. Those are not bad numbers by any measure.

 

As for V8s in american vehicles, remember that the MOD v8 line was designed around being as short as possible to accomodate mounting in the Continental. The new design BOSS is supposedly not compromised in that way. This conjectural V8 would be, but would still wind up being as long as or longer than the Yamaha V8. That being said, I don't think that, for moderately sized V8s, their length is prohibitive in a FWD vehicle. Its their weight and width that causes the problems. Remember, manufacturers are shoving inline 4 cylinders that are 2.3-2.5L in size into small cars all the time. Those engines are literally as long as most 4 to 5 liter V8s. It's their head to head width that causes the fittment issues.

 

As for the 3.7L V-6...I don't doubt the numbers, just that they were produced on regular unleaded in regular production trim. But 320hp, and the relatively meaty torque curve a this much displacement should bring, makes for fantastic power premium fuel or otherwise.

 

As for your idea regarding a V-8, I think the most logical long term solution is to develop and produce a small displacement, 45-degree V-8 engine lineup intended primarily, if not exclusively, for use in fwd vehicles. I would favor a range of displacements ranging from ~3.2L to ~5.0L. IMO this design makes the most sense for several reasons.

 

1: A 45-degree V-8 offers superb natural balance (much like a 90-degree design) and a nice, tidy (read:narrow) package for fwd vehicles.

 

2: That same 45-degree angle would promote low and mid range torque production, which is no bad thing.

 

3: This architecture could also be employed to produce 45-degree V-4 engines, which would offer outstanding packaging and smoothness, the same great torque charactersticvs mentioned above, better NVH characteristics than an inline-4, and the benefit of shared engineering and components. (yes, I'm supporting V-4's again)

Edited November 24, 2006 by jlsaylor

[Ben Beeck]

As for the 3.7L V-6...I don't doubt the numbers, just that they were produced on regular unleaded in regular production trim. But 320hp, and the relatively meaty torque curve a this much displacement should bring, makes for fantastic power premium fuel or otherwise.

 

As for your idea regarding a V-8, I think the most logical long term solution is to develop and produce a small displacement, 45-degree V-8 engine lineup intended primarily, if not exclusively, for use in fwd vehicles. I would favor a range of displacements ranging from ~3.2L to ~5.0L. IMO this design makes the most sense for several reasons.

 

1: A 45-degree V-8 offers superb natural balance (much like a 90-degree design) and a nice, tidy (read:narrow) package for fwd vehicles.

 

Actually, one Idea I had was the development of a 45 Degree V8, combined with the implementation of Ford's T-Drive.

 

Actually, I thought of an Idea for a new Midsize, and Fullsize (D,E,and F-size) architecture to be co-developed by Ford and Nissan-Renaulit. It would be flexible enough to replace all but the most premium of each companies luxury cars in those size classes. Using Ford's T-Drive, it could be implemented in Front, Rear, Or AWD, without the compromises in torgue distribution complexity usually found in transverse rear and AWD cars, the packaging problems of Longitudinal AWD, or the weight distribution problems of Audi's Quattro system, which places the engine in front of the wheels. In addition, it would eliminate the weak link of the Audi style chain drive CVT in favor of Nissan's Xtroid CVT.

 

The Icing on the cake is that the modular suspension bracket design would allow MacPherson Struts, Double Wishbones, Triple Wishbones like the Ford Territory Suspension, The Nissan/Renault multilink system, and Even Ford's Control Blade IRS that is deemed perfect for rough Australian but despite the fact that it's lighter and more compact than the Mustang's it isn't worth the extra $300 a car.

 

Could anyone see themselves in an AWD 45 Degree V8 Mustang? Cougar, Volvo P100? Three Rotor Mazda Cosmo or RX7? Anyone?

[jlsaylor]

Actually, one Idea I had was the development of a 45 Degree V8, combined with the implementation of Ford's T-Drive.

 

Actually, I thought of an Idea for a new Midsize, and Fullsize (D,E,and F-size) architecture to be co-developed by Ford and Nissan-Renaulit. It would be flexible enough to replace all but the most premium of each companies luxury cars in those size classes. Using Ford's T-Drive, it could be implemented in Front, Rear, Or AWD, without the compromises in torgue distribution complexity usually found in transverse rear and AWD cars, the packaging problems of Longitudinal AWD, or the weight distribution problems of Audi's Quattro system, which places the engine in front of the wheels. In addition, it would eliminate the weak link of the Audi style chain drive CVT in favor of Nissan's Xtroid CVT.

 

The Icing on the cake is that the modular suspension bracket design would allow MacPherson Struts, Double Wishbones, Triple Wishbones like the Ford Territory Suspension, The Nissan/Renault multilink system, and Even Ford's Control Blade IRS that is deemed perfect for rough Australian but despite the fact that it's lighter and more compact than the Mustang's it isn't worth the extra $300 a car.

 

Could anyone see themselves in an AWD 45 Degree V8 Mustang? Cougar, Volvo P100? Three Rotor Mazda Cosmo or RX7? Anyone?

 

I too have found myself wondering is Ford might have missed the boat, relative to certain applications, regarding the possible implementation of their T-Drive setup. My thoughts on the subject are a good bit more restricted in their scope than are yours however.

 

I've often thought that van platforms could make superb use of Ford's T-Drive setup...and the flexibility in drive options that system offers. I have also considered the fact that it would make a very innovative drive setup for Volvo, who claims that transversely mounting their engines improves safety and maximizes space, both of which are based on sound arguments. T-Drive would allow Volvo to move back to rwd without asacrificing packaging and safety, and do so with a T-Drive system which seems well suited to AWD...an option Volvo has never pushed as much as they should IMHO.

[LincolnFan]

What the hell is T-Drive?

[Edstock]

IIRC, T-Drive was a concept from the early 80's.

 

It was a straight-8 set sideways in the chassis, with the power take-off in the middle of the engine, via a worm-gear.

 

Google doesn't throw up any hits.