Fusion Coupe and Boss Stang approved

[RichardJensen]

There is enough room to do it reliably.

Undoubtedly they've been running around 5.0L mod prototypes. I'd be surprised if they weren't, and perhaps these prototypes are displaying solid reliability, and I could be all wet on this, but my first instinct is not that Ford engineers are too stupid to think of boring and stroking the mod, but that such an engine presents certain challenges that have not yet been resolved. They may be on the cusp of resolving them, which would be nice, but I don't want to assume that.

[mkoesel]

They may be on the cusp of resolving them, which would be nice, but I don't want to assume that.

 

I think its just a matter of ROI. Unless its going to be a high volume (i.e trucks) motor then its not worth it. They don't put in new tooling for a Mustang motor.

[wr70beh]

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.

 

So does this mean that the HEMI will go away after 2010? It's OHV.

[Watchdevil]

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.

 

Why are people stuck on the idea that there has to be a Boss 302 or a Mustang 5.0.. They were just engine displacements basd on engines available at the time. It doesn't matter really that it is part of a naming scheme as long as there is expected perfomance with available engines. My god can't some new heritage be carved out in this modern world?

 

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!

 

There were lots of coupes in history that carved a sexy image just being based on or shared with sedan models.

[Watchdevil]

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

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

 

 

Igor

 

Yep that is sexy... If anything it harks back to the days of Torino coupes with nice fastback rooflines and quarter window profiles... If Ford can distinguish the Fusion coupe that way instead of just making it look like a coupe version of the sedan then they may be on to something. It needs to be special in some way apart from the sedans.

 

If done right I would buy one because I yearn for a larger sized coupe like the Thunderbirds and Torinos of yesterday, just not on the scale of the size of a yatch...

 

As a matter of fact I am happy to be in a two door coupe again after the last three vehicles I had were four door boxes... There is just a feeling i get owning a coupe... No matter how austere and basic the one is that I have right now... I had a choice of gettting a four door or two door this last time and I enjoy the coupe styling more.

Edited August 2, 2006 by Watchdevil

[Blue II]

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.

 

The 4.6 and 5.4 use different blocks. The 5.4 has a 4.170 stroke and a 3.55 bore and it packages horribly bacause of it's tall architecture. The Boss/Hurricane 5.8,6.2,7.0 is no bigger.

 

The Windsor family was slated for a redesign to a more modern cylinder head and be emissions compliant. The Modular Mafia won and the Windsor assembly was ripped out and scraped before more intelligent minds had an opportunity to review the program. Same for the 460, the real heavy duty truck engine.

 

The power train managers were just as stupid as the car planners.

 

Rumor has it that there is a Boss/Hurricane Mustang mule somewhere on Oakwood.

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.

[tim kakouris]

THAT two door fusion would be in my driveway. how can we make that happen???

[Bluecon]

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.

The cast 4.6 is sleeved?

Where would they make that standard 302 anytime they want?

 

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.

Wrong again.

Why do you post on topics you have no knowledge of.

Just make stuff up and spout off.

 

There are 2 ways I know of to increase the displacement of the 4.6l to 5.0l cost efficiently in a production setting.

 

One is to deck the 4.6l block and stroke the crank like Ford did to build the 5.4l. In this way you can use the same pistons and rods.

 

Method 2 is to use the 4.6l block and move the location of the wrist pin in the piston. This method requires a new piston and crank.

Edited August 2, 2006 by Bluecon

[NickF1011]

Is there a 5.4L AL block outside the GT?

 

They've got to have the molds and tooling from the Cobra R and Navigator aluminum 5.4 blocks laying around somewhere still.....

[White99GT]

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.

 

The 5.4L has a taller deck height.

 

In the "Cammer" and the numerous aftermarket "big bore" engines, they achieve the 5.0L displacement through an overbore alone. You have to resleeve the block, but you can get a 3.700" bore (aluminum blocks only, won't work with the iron blocks) out of them and with the 4.6's 3.54" stroke it works out to true 5.0L but about 304 cubic inches.

 

You can get 302 cid out of a stroker, but I would much, much prefer the big bore. A more agressively tuned n/a 5.4L 4V would be cool too though, they just better make more power than the Aussie "Boss" engines. They need to beat the LS2 numbers, with the right intake and cams it would be easy.

 

They've got to have the molds and tooling from the Cobra R and Navigator aluminum 5.4 blocks laying around somewhere still.....

 

Those both had iron blocks.

Edited August 2, 2006 by White99GT

[Bluecon]

The 5.4L has a taller deck height.

 

In the "Cammer" and the numerous aftermarket "big bore" engines, they achieve the 5.0L displacement through an overbore alone. You have to resleeve the block, but you can get a 3.700" bore (aluminum blocks only, won't work with the iron blocks) out of them and with the 4.6's 3.54" stroke it works out to true 5.0L but about 304 cubic inches.

 

You can get 302 cid out of a stroker, but I would much, much prefer the big bore. A more agressively tuned n/a 5.4L 4V would be cool too though, they just better make more power than the Aussie "Boss" engines. They need to beat the LS2 numbers, with the right intake and cams it would be easy.

 

If you went to all that trouble you might as well build some ohv 302s.

 

Those both had iron blocks.

Ford had an aluminum 5.4. I don't know if it made it to production, but they did plan on putting it in the Cobra. Apparently the block wasn't strong enough.

[silvrsvt]

Ford had an aluminum 5.4. I don't know if it made it to production, but they did plan on putting it in the Cobra. Apparently the block wasn't strong enough.

 

Didnt the 03 Cobra R have a aluminum 5.4L?

[White99GT]

If you went to all that trouble you might as well build some ohv 302s

 

Yea, because resleeving a aluminum 4.6 block is more difficult than retooling for an old school 302. Besides, the big bore 4V would destroy a pushrod 302 any day.

 

Ford had an aluminum 5.4. I don't know if it made it to production, but they did plan on putting it in the Cobra. Apparently the block wasn't strong enough.

When did they have an aluminum 5.4 block? Are you sure it wasn't a GT block machined for a regular starter and wet sump oiling?

 

 

Didnt the 03 Cobra R have a aluminum 5.4L?

 

The last Cobra R was built in 2000. It had an iron block 5.4L

 

The 2003 Cobra had an iron block 4.6L.

Edited August 2, 2006 by White99GT

[NickF1011]

The last Cobra R was built in 2000. It had an iron block 5.4L

 

The 2003 Cobra had an iron block 4.6L.

 

My mistake. Good ol' Ford being cheap bastages again.

Edited August 2, 2006 by NickF1011

[Bluecon]

Yea, because resleeving a aluminum 4.6 block is more difficult than retooling for an old school 302. Besides, the big bore 4V would destroy a pushrod 302 any day.

 

All the drag racers I know that run small block Ford use 351 Windsors. That race car that runs the 24 hr races(Panoz?) very successfully runs a pushrod Ford.

Edited August 2, 2006 by Bluecon

[Walt]

Furthermore, I've said all along that what Ford needs to revive (at least by historical reference) the older displacement engines.

 

 

I would settle for Ford just up'ing the size of the 4.6l just a little bit to 4.7l.

 

Why? Well, 4.7 could be 289, and somehow seems more appropriate for a Mustang. :D

[Traveler]

The 289 definitely has historic value to it but few layman actually refer to the cubic inches of the motor anymore and the 5.0/302 ci has been a focal point of the Mustang for years as well as finding itself in both truck and sedan applications. Obviously the old motor is long gone and perhaps increasing the displacment is not practical. However, from a marketing perspective, I think it would be great.

 

Sure, Ford can create its own history with new engines without having to reflect the past. However, look at where Ford is now 20 year from when they were soaring in automotive sales. They rode the Taurus into the ground, invested heavily into the SUV craze and now are puttering along while Toyota beats their time. To me, Ford needs to reclaim for themselves a hint of their former selves or 10 years from now Hyundai will be surpassing them. Ford's glory is in what they're most known for and the had better capitalize on every aspect of it for the sake of the company. I've read the automotive media jargon that says "the Five-Hundred has to be successful" or "Ford is dependent on Fusion" and those two cars (as good as they are) aren't getting it done for Ford. Ford needs an image overhaul and I don't think remodeled Mazdas and Volvos are the sole savior for Ford. They need to recall their history as a symbolic gesture to say, "Hey look...Ford is back and we're proud to polish the big blue oval once again". One of the company's most successful ad campaigns was "Have you driven a Ford...Lately?" Most people in 2006 has not and will not likely do so.

Edited August 2, 2006 by Traveler

[Tony Alonso]

There are 2 ways I know of to increase the displacement of the 4.6l to 5.0l cost efficiently in a production setting.

 

One is to deck the 4.6l block and stroke the crank like Ford did to build the 5.4l. In this way you can use the same pistons and rods.

 

Method 2 is to use the 4.6l block and move the location of the wrist pin in the piston. This method requires a new piston and crank.

 

I am curious if method 2 is what Saleen is using to make the 3v 5.0L aluminum engine for the PJ Saleen Mustang. I would think the technology transfer agreements between Ford and Saleen is a natural place to look for how this engine would be produced.

[NickF1011]

I am curious if method 2 is what Saleen is using to make the 3v 5.0L aluminum engine for the PJ Saleen Mustang. I would think the technology transfer agreements between Ford and Saleen is a natural place to look for how this engine would be produced.

 

I'm pretty certain Saleen's method is by use of a larger bore, not through a change in stroke.

 

One thing to consider about the price of the 5.0 Cammer - one reason it's so expensive is because of how FEW of them they build. Economies of scale would dictate that the cost of production should come down considerably if they choose to go that route with a full-on production engine. I imagine the GT500's engine (or any engine for that matter) would cost considerably more too if they were only building a few hundred of them a year.

[mkoesel]

There are 2 ways I know of to increase the displacement of the 4.6l to 5.0l cost efficiently in a production setting.

 

One is to deck the 4.6l block and stroke the crank like Ford did to build the 5.4l. In this way you can use the same pistons and rods.

 

You can increase the deck but that does not necessarily mean you will use the same rods. The 5.4L uses a much longer rod than the 4.6L. A 5L would be somewhere in between.

 

Method 2 is to use the 4.6l block and move the location of the wrist pin in the piston. This method requires a new piston and crank.

 

You would not necessarily need to move the wrist pin. Depending on how much more stroke was needed, you could just use a shorter rod. This would require smaller rod journals however.

[jrod]

Cleveland Casting Plant has been given the new BOSS block. It is a 6.2L gas engine block to be produced at a capacity of 325,000 units annually. This news was announced to us in Cleveland some time ago. While it still needs board approval, we have been told Cleveland has the work. This block was described to us as Ford's answer to the HEMI. It is also my understanding that it will go into a variety of vehicles. I would imagine, although 6.2L's is pretty large to cram into a mustang, that Ford has some sort of plan to put it into the Mustang BOSS. It is called the BOSS block after all!! I have posted this info in the past but I cannot find it anymore on this site. :shrug:

[Edstock]

F.W. Woolworth once remarked, "You don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle."

 

What the bean-counters don't like factoring, because it's an intangible, like "Good Will", is that the existence of a hot coupe version adds lustre to the whole model line-up, in that it makes the dude who bought the 4-cyl base model 4dr feel better about his brand choice. It's one of the reasons Honda still makes the Civic hatch.

 

That chop would look fine with a chrome Z grille. I don't care if it's badge engineering. Add twin turbo's. The Ford could be a supercharged version, with a mech. blower.

[igor]

^^EdStock.. god point .. but just a friendly correction - Honda does not make the civic Hatch anymore ... the Si is a coupe and a sedan now ... te 3door might be brought over, but it is still only a speculation.

 

Igor

[Bluecon]

You can increase the deck but that does not necessarily mean you will use the same rods. The 5.4L uses a much longer rod than the 4.6L. A 5L would be somewhere in between.

 

Of course you use the same rods in the 4.6l and the 5.4l. The change in displacement is achieved by the longer stroke crank and stepped block. That is how they keep production cost down. Even the heads on the 5.4l and 4.6l are the same casting. The 2V 4.6 and 5.4 used the same head casting on the left and right side.

 

You would not necessarily need to move the wrist pin. Depending on how much more stroke was needed, you could just use a shorter rod. This would require smaller rod journals however.

 

Weaken the crank? Plus in a production setting not cost effective. Requires a new crank with different journal sizes and different rods and rod bearings. That is a major problem in production.

The reason they don't want to increase the bore is that all the equipment is setup to produce the existing bore size and it is incredibly expensive and complicated to do that.

The 4.6l, 5.4l and v10 all use the same bore size. When you are making a million plus motors a year it is very dificult to adjust that. You would need to think that it is worthwile to produce the engines in an offsite facility.

Edited August 3, 2006 by Bluecon

[Guest Sixcav]

The cast 4.6 is sleeved?

 

I wasn't talking about a cast 4.6. Does Ford even make a cast version of the 4.6 anymore? It doesn't matter, I was talking about the aluminum 4.6 and yes of course it's sleeved. Who invited you anyway?