Why the Detroit Three should merge their engine operations

[akirby]

I could have done without the 4V heads with the cooling problem on cylinder 8. Thankfully it was under warranty on our 2003 Aviator.

[jpd80]

I could have done without the 4V heads with the cooling problem on cylinder 8. Thankfully it was under warranty on our 2003 Aviator.

That's odd because our 5.4 4V Boss engines in Falcons were pretty much fuss free.

Perhaps that had more to do with the larger port size and differences with the two engine blocks..

[Stray Kat]

Another "what if". I was and still am a Ford Lightning fan, especially the supercharged 5.4 second gen version. I had always wished that instead of the 2- valve 5.4 it would have been epic if that truck utilized the 5.4 4-valve Navigator engine. I just think that would have been so over the top for it's time. Ah well it was a great package anyway.

[CurtisH]

I probably shouldn't "enter the fray", but I am. My brother runs a fleet of Ford vehicles in his company. For almost 30 years, he has been almost 100% Ford. His fleet always includes several E-150 vans. He has always gotten the 4.6 Mod in the vans (since they started putting the Mods in the vans). In general the vans have been reliable, more so since some suspension and frame update in 2008 (I think). In all that time, he has never had a problem with the 4.6. He usually sells the vans at around 225K to 250K miles. I know this is anecdotal evidence, but I'd say the Mod is a pretty good truck engine.

 

BTW, I really like the 4.6 3V in my 2005 Mustang GT.

[silvrsvt]

I could have done without the 4V heads with the cooling problem on cylinder 8. Thankfully it was under warranty on our 2003 Aviator.

 

Wasn't that only found on that engine in the Aviator?

 

I can think of Spark plug issues on the mods also...but for the most part they've been pretty stout engines without major issues.

[akirby]

That's odd because our 5.4 4V Boss engines in Falcons were pretty much fuss free.

Perhaps that had more to do with the larger port size and differences with the two engine blocks..

Wasn't that only found on that engine in the Aviator?

 

I know it was on the 4.6 32V 300+ hp engines on the Aviator and Cobra. Insufficient cooling on cylinder 8 caused head failures on many engines. There were even some aftermarket mods available to fix it. I guess they never fixed it because it was about to be cancelled and the volume was small by comparison to the 2V and 3V versions. Not sure if it affected the 5.4.

[sullynd]

The Marauder had the 4V too, right? I think those were the only three vehicles.

[akirby]

The Marauder had the 4V too, right? I think those were the only three vehicles.

Yep - forgot about the Marauder.

[SoonerLS]

That's odd because our 5.4 4V Boss engines in Falcons were pretty much fuss free.

Perhaps that had more to do with the larger port size and differences with the two engine blocks..

My understanding is that the 5.4 V8 that went Down Under was built at Romeo by the same guys who built the GT's mill, not on the line at Windsor with the 5.4 Tritons. That might've had something to do with its better reputation.

[akirby]

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/showthread.php?t=69586

[jpd80]

My understanding is that the 5.4 V8 that went Down Under was built at Romeo by the same guys who built the GT's mill, not on the line at Windsor with the 5.4 Tritons. That might've had something to do with its better reputation.

Nope, they were assembled locally by ProDrive, a company in 50/50 partnership with FoA for FPV, Ford performance Vehicles.

The engines wre assembled on a mini assembly line.

 

The only engines that came complete were the 5.4 3V from Windsor which were a (gulp) $8,000 option

and not worth the time when you could get an XR8 4V for similar money and a shit load more go.

 

I don't have the video for the Mod but here' the new S/C 5.0 Miami being assembled at FPV.

About 12 months ago, FPV was wound up and the assembly line moved in house at Ford Broadmeadows.AP.

 

...

 

Edited January 2, 2016 by jpd80

[matthewq4b]

 

And what conceivable use would LARGER mod motors be put to? CARS?

 

Trucks, sort of like the 6.2L A mod with larger bore spacing. Ford eventually went that route in the end.

[matthewq4b]

 

 

If that's what you want to think, fine. But don't come around here trying to convince the rest of us that Mods weren't designed for use in trucks.

 

Oh, by the way, the mod wasn't shoehorned into the Continental until 1995. Four years after it was first used in the Town Car.

 

I guess that must prove that the Mod was never designed for use in a FWD vehicle.

 

 

 

Design work on on the ninth gen Conit was completed in 1991 Richard The Final design prototype was unveiled in 1992 with a Mod under hood. Here it is. (see below) So yes the Mod was planned for FWD applications. With the 4.38" bore spacing of the SBF and 335's the Mod's would not fit under hood of a laterally mounted FWD. In addition It also was needed to keep the planned V6's length down for FWD applications.

 

[jpd80]

Richard was being sarcastic about the time span until the mod showed up in FWD, but didn't pick that up....

 

He just used your "not designed for truck" reasoning against you.....

[matthewq4b]

 

- No. The Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, citing Ford Engineering World of September 1990 contains this significant tidbit: "Ford has adopted "key" manufacturing dimensions such as bore spacing, bolt patterns, and journal sizes"

 

This is another instance of Ford saying things that were subsequently carried out. Are we to infer that what they meant was something entirely different?

 

- Decking the block would allow you to use the same heads, the same valves, the same springs, the same cams, the same finger followers, the same pistons, the same rings, the same rod bearings, the same main bearings, the same bearing caps, etc., etc. Shortening the block and using the same deck height would mean you'd get to share the conrods and timing gears, I guess?

 

- No. It was specifically mentioned in an engineering journal as a TRUCK ENGINE.

 

- that last line is worth highlighting because it illustrates just how biased you are. You are saying that the mod program 'went nowhere'--which I guess is fair if you want to ignore the fact that mod motors won the Daytona 24 outright and power medium duty trucks.

 

Richard that artical was a bit of fluff all Manufacturers adopt those with engine designs. What was revolutionary about the mod was the ability to use common design across all engine applications irrespective of number cylinders bore spacing, Bore size stroke size or engine configuration. That is what was revolutionary about the mod architecture. As NO engine had been designed to do that previously We finally seen some expansion in the Mod architecture with the 6.2L. It is a large displacement larger bore spacing MOD.

 

 

Tightening bore spacing would allow you to use everything, but the heads crank and cam and of course the block. Every thing else would transfer over. Same thing applies to widening the bore spacing but of course widening it you would take advantage of the larger available bore and larger available bearing surfaces.

 

There was enough material in the bottom end of the mod to allow for them to squeeze bore spacing a bit this is why Ford was able to widen the bearings in later iterations to try to solve bottom end issues as that extra material was already there to allow a squeeze in bore spacing with out compromising the the rotating assembly. This part of the fore though that went in to the MOD's

 

It is not bias it is the truth the architecture was planned to be the base for all of Ford's engines From 4 cylinders to 6 to 8's and V12's and we got none of 6's none 4s and the GT 90's V12. That was never produced en mass.

So there was so much planned potential never utilized. Has nothing to do with bias but facts.

Edited January 2, 2016 by matthewq4b

[J-150]

The Marauder had the 4V too, right? I think those were the only three vehicles.

And the Mark VIII.

[matthewq4b]

 

Wait, that didn't get cancelled. Wasn't that what the GT from 2004-2007?

 

Bingo it was planned to enter production but that never materialized either.

[matthewq4b]

Matt, there are things designed into modern engines that we would have sworn would never work 20 or so years ago. Look at piston ring design and the obvious lack of thickness and tension. How about the super short skirted pistons that look like short burst racing parts but survive in millions of modern engines in day to day use? How about those lightweight single row timing chains now being used in virtually all the new OHC engines from any manufacturer? What about 5W20 oil? Aluminum heads? Composite intakes? The list goes on.

 

The narrower main bearings in Ford Moduar engines do not seem like such a big deal in light of all the other incredible stuff the auto engineers are doing these days. I worked at Ford dealerships from the 1970's till 2004. I do not remember the Modulars to be all that problematic. Yes there were revisions to main bearing design and material but it was not a widespread problem at least in those days.

 

Later on I was in charge of a small fleet of a variety of trucks. We had three 5.4 powered F250 4 X 4's. Those were bought at auction and had already fulfilled their investment goals for the prior company. The 5.4's while not anything you'd call a drag race engine, were excellent truck engines. They had plenty of low end grunt, and were reliable.

 

Just last week while doing a little work for that construction company I found out their current mechanic had to repair 2 spit plugs in one truck. This at over 200,000 miles of hard work. He did the job WITHOUT removing the cyl heads.

 

It is my understanding that GM truck engines have had internal challenges as well. I've heard tales of lifter, piston and coolant loss in some cylinder heads. Problems are not the exclusive domain of Ford engines. In fact I'll take my chances on repairing spark plug threads vs. fixing lifters in an LS.

 

Which brings something to my mind. Is the almighty GM LS under the hood of Corvettes and Camaros really just a truck engine that has been pressed into duty as a sports car engine?

 

 

 

The bottom end the was problematic enough to require multiple bearing revisions and an increase in surface area. It was an issue big and wide spread enough to require dimensional changes to solve it.

 

With my previous employer we had a large fleet of mostly Ford trucks we generally kept them till 300K KM or about 185K miles as by that point they were basically worn out and beat to death. By far the biggest reason trucks did not make it to 300K was due to bottom end failures in mod equipped vehicles. it got to the point that it was becoming endemic enough we went to Ram for a short period of time. Good drive lines but crap trucks. We just resorted to getting rid of the MOD powered trucks at 200K. This was never an issue in SBF or 385 series powered vehicles. In those the bores wore out before the bottom end's cratered.

 

And plug mounting should never have to be repaired period. That is not what you would call a service item. And the only reason the heads did not have to be is because the issue is so prevalent and common a whole cottage industry has sprung up offering solutions to fix it. Initially Ford was replacing cylinder heads on mods with spit plugs. And pulling heads with with stuck 3V plugs. Until tools were designed and built to remedy the issue in truck, and even there is no 100% guarantee you wont have to pull the head in the end.

 

 

The LS was designed as replacement for the SBC it was not designed as truck engine, but to do service in the trucks. Which it has done with out component failure due to lack of load carrying ability. The failures have been design related not load related. The issues in the LS are not more prevalent in one application than another but pretty much evenly spread across all the applications it is used in. Such was not the case with the mods. The Mods were excellent motors in the cars. Such was not the case in the trucks.

[matthewq4b]

I'm also going to point out that the breadth of application and the versatility of the Mod motors is unmatched in Ford's modern history. This is an engine design that has proven equal to use in race cars, in pickups, in medium duty trucks, in exotic cars, in sports cars and in luxury cars.

 

This is an engine design that can reliably put out 950hp on pump gas and still pass emissions tests.

 

Perhaps the only engine family that has been comparable is the FE--but that was never used in Lincolns, nor was it used in medium duty vehicles. And its lifespan wasn't as long as the Mod.

 

Sorry Richard you are wrong on the FE bit The Fe did serve in the MD's They had the 330, 359,361 and 391 Motors. There were the heavy duty versions of the FE and were actually called FT's They had higher nickle content blocks steel cranks and forged roads. Their application was in the medium duty trucks. The 391 Crank is popular swap for the 390 it just needs the crank snout turned down to match the 390's Diam.

 

And the SBF actually has been the most versatile engine Ford has ever made with displacements from 221 to 351 . it;s architecture spawned the 240 and 300 I6 the 3,8L and 4.2L V6 are based on the SBF. 335 series it is basically an SBF Ford with a dry intake to limit intake charge heating, the 385 Series which is just an over grown SBF with larger bore spacing. The SBF has by far been Fords most versatile engine design to date. The architecture has seen use from Luxury cars to Indy to trucks both pick up and MD to Le Mans in Marine applications to NASCAR, in mid sized cars in I6 and V6 Configurations, industrial applications heck you have think hard for an application the SBF or it;s derivatives have not been used in.

 

The Mod is no where near the most versatile engine architecture Ford has made.That title goes to the SBF

 

The Mod was planned to be the most versatile architecture, think of it as SBF 2.0, but it never materialized, so again so much potential wasted.

 

The mod was introduced and the architecture stalled other than giving us a V10 and a V12 it went no where for years and only just recently gave us the larger bore spaced 6.2L.

So what did Ford do in the end exactly what was originally planned from the onset. Spread the bore and offer a truck engine based on the Mod. How has the 6.2L performed ? No bottom end failures, no spit plugs no major issues at all. In time it will prove it's self to be the best gas V8 Ford has ever offered in the trucks.

Exactly as a mod should be, too bad this was not done 15 plus years ago. It would have saved Ford untold millions and they would have not had to be doing damage control over plugs and cratered bottom ends. We can thank Nasser for that, for his profits at any cost mentality want to point the finger at someone as why the mod was never developed to is full potential, there is the guy. And we all know what his directorship of Ford led to.

Edited January 2, 2016 by matthewq4b

[matthewq4b]

I would argue that the Ford Modular series has been one of the most successful engine designs of all time. What kills them in some people's jaundiced eye is the fact that they are visually wide. People don't think about the fact that even the widest 5.4 fits quite well in everything from Fox bodies to pick up trucks.

 

With the Coyote now the Ford engines are a bit or quite a bit more compact in physical size. Remember this is only width since these OHC Fords are low and short.

 

The mistake that Ford made was at beginning by coming in too soft on power and torque the Mods got a weak reputation. In just a couple years though the "PI" heads came into production and that really got the ball rolling.

 

Also here's a fun fact: the only American V8 factory block and heads drag race car to ever run in the 5's in the 1/4 mile is a 280" Modular Ford powered Mustang Pro Mod car owned and driven by John Mihovetz. The cars that run this fast typically are powered by billet hemi's and mountain motors. So much for the mains being too narrow to bear sufficient loading. This is 2500hp in a 4.6 Teksid block with Ford GT heads.

 

 

 

 

They also use aluminum rods not sure you would want those in a truck engine. What applies to drag racing has little to no relevance to road vehicles getting an engine to hang together for a few passes before rebuild is a little different than getting to hang to together for a couple hundred K under conditions from -40 to 100F plus..

[matthewq4b]

The Marauder had the 4V too, right? I think those were the only three vehicles.

 

 

The 4.6 Intech (4V) was used in the Mk VIII, Continental, Mustang , Marauder, and the Aviator. it was also used by others like Koenigsegg, and Panoz plus a few others if I remember right.

[akirby]

The MK VIII and Continue versions were lower HP than the Marauder, cobra and aviator version.

[Fgts]

While we are talking about V8 truck engines will someone please convince me that there is another manufacturer in a better position than FoMoCo as far as 2025 EPA and CAFE standard compliance?

 

Toyota , Mercedes......

I've seen on this very forum talk that Marchione does not have any practical options. The hemi gassers are not going to make it and replacing them with a new engine family is cost prohibitive, hence the desire to merge power trains with someone else. Right now they have the Ecodiesel carrying the entire Ram nameplate in the half ton arena. The hemi is a dead man walking and without serious expenditure or outright replacement apparently it will not survive in the long term.

 

From what I read FCA is working on an PHEV, a turbo Pentastar and/or an improved Hemi for the CAFE. Expect the 5.7 reduced in car use while a turbo 6 may take it's place. The 300 might go fwd to fit the PHEV system or go turbo 6. Ram probably would get a boosted 6 but right now it's too much of a smokescreen of S/Ms Euro bs to know what's going on.

 

GM is behind Ford as well, at least as far as long term goes. Yes the new DI v8's are good but they are now expensive and it's not clear if they can make it past 2025. They have already shown us their future in a sense and at least in the half ton arena that is a small Duramax 4 or 6 banger in a lighter or smaller and lighter truck. How many gas v8's do you think will be sold when the marketplace gets there?

 

Im sure the LT v8s are compliant, GM didn't even complete the engine till the new CAFE rules were written. Notice the main engine in the pickups and suvs is the "small" 5.3, also like Ford they have the hybrids, cars and cuvs to lean on for CAFE credits.

 

The ironic part of all this is I suspect the DI GM 5.3 V8 is very close if not more costly to build per unit than Ford's 5.0 OHC.

 

I hope a engine that basically been here for decades would cost less the an all-new engine.

 

I could easily see Ford having a huge manufacturing cost advantage if they simply built like a 4.0 - 4.5 liter "nano" V8 related to the Coyote/Mod architecture. The bore size is already where it needs to be and a shorter stroke engine allows you to pull the deck height down and all of a sudden the beauty of the Mod family comes to the fore yet again. All of the expensive design and development of this architecture has been already bought and paid for.

 

For all that they can just go to the 3.5 Eco instead.

 

Then of course there is Ecoboost. Already well into 2nd and 3rd generations of engineering maturity, these are very viable Diesel engine alternatives. These are the engines that could actually fit the bill as a product that could serve under the hoods of other manufacturer's products.

 

Unless it's a boutique manufacturer no manufacturer's ego would allow a Ford engine in their products.

 

Ford already has a strong presence in powering the "cottage" sports car industry. It is not a huge leap to imagine Ford power being utilized in more mainstream non- Ford autos. In that arena I think it makes a lot of sense.

 

Haven't seen any Ecoboost hot-rods yet it may take a while since v8 are still on the scene. I can imagine a 3.5 track-star.

 

I don't think Ford is going to have too much of a problem if there is a wholesale switch to diesel in half ton trucks and other lightweight vehicles. They have done a great job with the 6.7 diesel and, while I'm no expert, I think Ford is very strong in Diesel engine development in its European and Aisian products. I'm confident Ford could fill that void.

I don't think they'll do many diesels under 6.7 because they may do Ecoboost instead. I would imagine just one common-core smaller diesel for Euro market, Transit and F150 and one for fwd application from here on out.

[theDuff]

I have some anecdotal evidence as well. I have been a Ford mechanic since shortly after the mods were introduced in trucks. They never had bottom end issues. In other words, our service department hasn't replaced engines for spun rod bearings that couldn't be blamed on lack of maintenance.

[RichardJensen]

 

Richard that artical was a bit of fluff

 

Like I said, we're done. I've provided published sources that establish everything I've alleged about the design parameters of the Mod. You have suppositions and faulty memory on your side. That's it.