Fusion Coupe and Boss Stang approved

[igor]

OK; a poster at Focaljet, to whom I usually listen, because he does know posted the following

 

My dad recieved a memo from Ford on Friday saying the Boss 302 is a go, along with the Fusion coupe'.

 

Take it for what it is worth to you - but to me this means what is spells - those two projects were approved for production.

 

link: http://forums.focaljet.com/5644549-post14.html

http://forums.focaljet.com/team-pit-stop/5...02-mustang.html

 

Igor

[RichardJensen]

What I had heard about the Boss is that Ford was going with the 5.4L engine, not the 'cammer'....

[Guest Sixcav]

I wouldn't mind seeing a Fusion coupe. I wonder if they will actually use a 302 in the Boss 302?

[Bluecon]

What I had heard about the Boss is that Ford was going with the 5.4L engine, not the 'cammer'....

Then it would be a BOSS 326?

[RichardJensen]

330, IIRC

[silvrsvt]

Like I posted on FJ, How is Ford going to be able to put a 15K 5L Cammer engine in the Mustang? Hell the GT500 engine is a lot cheaper!

 

Unless this is part of the Hurricane Family or something...hmmmmmm

[igor]

Like I posted on FJ, How is Ford going to be able to put a 15K 5L Cammer engine in the Mustang? Hell the GT500 engine is a lot cheaper!

 

Unless this is part of the Hurricane Family or something...hmmmmmm

 

why cant't they bore out the 4.6l and tune it for HP?

 

Igor

[RichardJensen]

why cant't they bore out the 4.6l and tune it for HP?

 

Igor

That's what the cammer is. The core problem with the Mod is bore spacing. To get 5.0L from the short-deck mod (the 4.6), the cylinder walls end up being quite thin, and apparently are reinforced with a special cylinder liner (not sure about this) in the cammer.

[Guest Sixcav]

The 4.6 is sleeved, I don't know if you can bore it out that much, possibly I guess. On the other hand, Ford has only been making the 302 motor since shortly after the earth cooled. This notion that they can "only" make the cammer version just doesn't wash. They can make a standard 302 anytime they want to. Say about 320 or 330 hp, something like that. Its only one of the most proliferated motors of the last 40 years. A Boss 302 that doesn't have a 302 in it isn't really a Boss 302. Maybe just call it a Boss Mustang then I guess. Course I'm the one that doesn't really give a shit what they call the damn things so long as it appeals to me. But in this particular case it would be kind of like a 350 Z28 with a big block 400 in there or something. If you're going to name the car after the size engine, put that size engine in there right?

[RichardJensen]

1) The rumors I've heard are that the "Boss" moniker is being revived without reference to a displacement, and that a tuned up version of the 5.4L will be installed in the vehicle.

 

2) Ford cannot put the Windsor 302 in any vehicle sold for street use. It does not meet today's emissions standards (the fact that they are no longer putting it in production cars is a BIG HINT)

 

3) The Cammer in the Grand Am Mustang is a 5.0L displacement short deck Mod.

Edited August 1, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Guest Sixcav]

LOl, You know it's just amazing. You rascals sit around here and complain about "Why doesn't Ford do this and why don't they do that?" I mean we know they have the resources, talent and capital to pull of whatever wild ass idea you guys pull out of your ass at the moment. Apparently Ford has no bounds and its repeatedly stated here that Ford is supposed to be "taking the lead". Leading what, and to where? They make and sell cars, they aren't out to save the universe. Anyway, all of a sudden there's things Ford can't do. Apparently they can't make a damn 302 engine meet emission requirements. Of course they can. Of all the off the wall, pie in the sky ideas that get put forward on here that Ford is supposed to be capable of but they aren't capable of making a 302 meet emission standards. Bullshit.

Ford dropped the 302 / 351 because they felt (rightly so) that the motors were outdated from a technology stand point. They had been around for nearly 40 years when they were replaced with the new modular line of engines. Over those years the 302/351 recieved many upgrades for the ever changing market and ended up a hodge podge of sorts. Ford wanted a new, modern line of V8's, and the V10, to modernize their product line and bring better, more powerful and more efficient motors to the market. Rather than spend money further upgrading the already dated 302 motor, they decided instead the modular OHC and DOHC motors were the way to go, and they were right. So once again the score is Ford 7, Blue Oval experts 0.

Now given that Ford gets the 4.6 and the 5.4 out of the same block It stands to reason that they could make a 5.0 version by means of rod length, crank, sleeve size or some combination there of. Technically then it would be a 302. It may not be the original 302, but then of course that's just not plausible on todays market for obvious reasons.

With respect to the Fusion coupe, I'd really like to see that, or at least a prototype of one to see how it comes together. Sounds like it could be a good idea.

[RichardJensen]

Now given that Ford gets the 4.6 and the 5.4 out of the same block

Um, they don't, though.

 

The 5.4 has a taller deck height.

 

Also, perhaps you should look at the emissions regs being put into place for 2010. Pretty stiff. No OHV engines on the market today meet them.

[Traveler]

I believe Saleen was selling a special edition Parnelli Jones edition that was actually their own "Boss" without the reference with similiar markings and a 5.0L to keep it more authentic. I wonder if Ford may be planning on increasing displacement of the 4.6 to 5.0. Saleen actually blazed the trail with the IRS in the previous Mustang and maybe the Jones edition will do the same with the factory Boss.

 

Furthermore, I've said all along that what Ford needs to revive (at least by historical reference) the older displacement engines. We've all seen supposedly the return of the 5.8L designation on the way so perhaps the 5.0 is on its way back as well. I think that would partially help with their image and their older cars and boost performance in the process. The F-Series, Explorer, Expedition, Mustang and Panthers could probably benefit with standard 5.0L V8s and optional 5.8L V8s offered for the mainstream buyers.

 

I tell ya...even if the majority of the buying public doesn't buy them, Ford needs a very strong showing of their RWD V8 vehicles. They should be working on promoting them heavily along with the FWD/AWD sedans and I believe everythingn will fall into place for FoMoCo.

[RichardJensen]

It would be easier to destroke the 5.4 to 5.0 than to bore out the 4.6 to 5.0.

 

Also, the history of 'heritage' vehicles suggests that there is no long term revival to be had from summoning the ghosts of past engines (or vehicles). Might be good for a short term boost, but that's not the key to any sustained growth. Sustained growth will come from vehicles like the Edge, the Fusion, small cars, and basically being flexible enough to meet the needs of a buying public that is used to being catered to.

Edited August 2, 2006 by RichardJensen

[one2gamble]

that 5.4 better be using a AL block or the BOSS will just be another overweight underperforming boat like the gt500

[RichardJensen]

that 5.4 better be using a AL block or the BOSS will just be another overweight underperforming boat like the gt500

Is there a 5.4L AL block outside the GT?

[Hugh]

Just a crazy idea here:

 

How about bore out the D35 to 3.8 and add another cylinder bank a la Mod 5.4 V8 to 6.8 V10?

 

My math (may be wrong but that's why it's crazy) and you got 5.1L. All rounded off of course, think about it:

 

DOHC 5.1L 32V V8 with a 6M? Very nice.

[Guest Sixcav]

Is there a 5.4L AL block outside the GT?

 

I don't know of one, but even if there wasn't it wouldn't be difficult at all to make one. But then the issue becomes obvious. If they make a 5.4 AL block for the supposed Boss Mustang, then why not for the GT500, the more expensive car? Additionally I know the deck lid for the 5.4 is taller, but the majority of parts between the two are interchangeable, hence the crank, rod, sleeve combination to make a 5.0 in size. The 5.4 was developed from the 4.6, not the other way around. So they could develop a shorter rod for the 4.6, thus increasing the displacement but also the compression ratio. At a minimum it would mean you have to run 93 octane and it may possibly mean too high a compression ratio period. You could try a combintation of bigger sleeve and shorter rods I suppose. But I think if you they want to make it an aluminum motor, the 4.6 is going to be the choice.

[Edgey]

A Fusion coupe? I wonder if the G6 had anything to do with the motivation to try out a coupe. It doesn't seem like Ford's style to split off into lower volume segments.

[igor]

A Fusion coupe? I wonder if the G6 had anything to do with the motivation to try out a coupe. It doesn't seem like Ford's style to split off into lower volume segments.

very likely G6 is the sole or main reason for the model...

 

 

PS.. of course - the best PS'ed Fusion coupe Evar

 

 

Igor

Edited August 2, 2006 by igor

[Guest Sixcav]

Sold! I know the front end will never see a production car, but it's nice. I'd go for that.

[mkoesel]

Like I posted on FJ, How is Ford going to be able to put a 15K 5L Cammer engine in the Mustang? Hell the GT500 engine is a lot cheaper!

 

The Cammer is a low volume part with poor economies of scale, and also has an expensive induction system that would not be necessary for 400hp street motor. Not only that but the markup on it is surely much higher than a stock GT or DOHC 4.6 crate motor. In reality it may only cost twice as much to produce one.

[Edgey]

I never understood the purpose of a coupe if looks like the sedan. A coupe is an image car, it has to look sexier than the practical 4-door version. Ah well, if it works for GM!

[RichardJensen]

The Cammer is a low volume part with poor economies of scale, and also has an expensive induction system that would not be necessary for 400hp street motor. Not only that but the markup on it is surely much higher than a stock GT or DOHC 4.6 crate motor. In reality it may only cost twice as much to produce one.

Well, there's also the question of warranteeing an engine like that for 60k miles. Those cylinder walls are mighty thin, and some harsh starts on a few cold mornings.............

[mkoesel]

why cant't they bore out the 4.6l and tune it for HP?

 

They could.

 

But they don't currently have the tooling to do it in high volume. With the current part, you have to desleeve the block, bore it, and resleeve (with a larger, thinner sleeve). This is, of course, inefficient. Instead, they need to simply cast them at 5L (94mm bore) from the get go. And while they are at it, a 5.9L tall deck block would be great too. (Or lower the deck and destroke it to 5.7L for that matter, but that is probably total pie in the sky.) What would it cost? No friggin idea. There may be issues with the current casting process and thinner sleeves. There are no doubt issues with the current machining being able to scale to the larger bore.

 

Well, there's also the question of warranteeing an engine like that for 60k miles. Those cylinder walls are mighty thin, and some harsh starts on a few cold mornings.............

 

True, but I recall Ford engineers claiming that they could build a warranteeable 5L mod motor using the 4.6L deck height. However, I think that was for a 93mm bore. So, yes, you'd need to stroke it just a tiny bit over the 4.6L.

 

I did the calculations years ago, but I think I remember a 92.7 x 92.7 square bore gives you 5L. 4.6L is 90.2 x 90. There is enough room to do it reliably.