Ford Unveils Next-Generation V-6 Engine
11/9/05, 09:52 PM
#62
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mustang_sallad@November 9, 2005, 8:42 PM
so typically... specific output goes up with displacement? i didn't know that, but i guess i can see how that might work over a certain range... can you explain?
so typically... specific output goes up with displacement? i didn't know that, but i guess i can see how that might work over a certain range... can you explain?
Basically, by increasing the bore and stroke, you increase the cumbustion chamber or CC of the cylinder.. Which each incremental increase in the CC, based on the design of the engine, and all other things being the same, of that of the 3.5L V6 its easy to see how these values would be created.. Now of course this does not take into account the injectors used on said engines.. I would imagine an increase in injector size would have to be accounted for.. As follows-->
4.0L V6 = 19lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 24lbs injectors
3.5L V6 = 24lbs injectors
4.3L V6 = 30lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 30lbs injectors
4.8L V8 = 30lbs injectors
5.0L V8 = 36lbs injectors
11/9/05, 10:03 PM
#63
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now of course, it must be assumed on these numbers, this means cam's are kept the same.. Should you change the grind on the cam, from that of the 3.5L then all bets are off, and all the numbers change.. These numbers are here to show if all things were equal, and all that was changed was a bore and stroke increase, just to give us a rough idea of the engines design characteristics over the previous generation of motors, which are currently available.. Alot of things can change these numbers.. So it must be understood, that these are the numbers I present based on all things being equal but seperated by cumbustion chamber size..
We're just talkin.. We're all buddies in here! LOL!!
We're just talkin.. We're all buddies in here! LOL!!
11/9/05, 10:15 PM
#64
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you really think Ford is going to start building other engines off of this one?
Don't expect the modular engines (4.6, 5.4, and 6.8) to be affected by this new Duratec at all.
The Mustang is going to stick with what it has for over a decade, one V6 (whether it be 3.5 or 4.0) and 2 V8s (one for the GT-4.6, and one for the "SVT Cobra"-5.4). Special editions will have their engines based off the above 3.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Duratec 35 was made to be just that, the Duratec 35. A replacement for the old Duratec 30 (though I am sure the 4.0 will stick around for truck use). Ford is not going to start bulding exotic engines off this new one (ex, the 4.3, 4.8 you mentioned).
And as much as we would all love the, the 5.0 Cammer is a crate engine, and Ford is not going to put a engine that is worth over half of the overall car's MSRP into production.
Not to sound like a jerk, but let's be happy with what we have. 2 great engines, a new V6 and a great special edition with bigger displacement.
Don't expect the modular engines (4.6, 5.4, and 6.8) to be affected by this new Duratec at all.
The Mustang is going to stick with what it has for over a decade, one V6 (whether it be 3.5 or 4.0) and 2 V8s (one for the GT-4.6, and one for the "SVT Cobra"-5.4). Special editions will have their engines based off the above 3.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Duratec 35 was made to be just that, the Duratec 35. A replacement for the old Duratec 30 (though I am sure the 4.0 will stick around for truck use). Ford is not going to start bulding exotic engines off this new one (ex, the 4.3, 4.8 you mentioned).
And as much as we would all love the, the 5.0 Cammer is a crate engine, and Ford is not going to put a engine that is worth over half of the overall car's MSRP into production.
Not to sound like a jerk, but let's be happy with what we have. 2 great engines, a new V6 and a great special edition with bigger displacement.
11/9/05, 10:21 PM
#65
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by bigred0383@November 9, 2005, 9:18 PM
Do you really think Ford is going to start building other engines off of this one?
Don't expect the modular engines (4.6, 5.4, and 6.8) to be affected by this new Duratec at all.
The Mustang is going to stick with what it has for over a decade, one V6 (whether it be 3.5 or 4.0) and 2 V8s (one for the GT-4.6, and one for the "SVT Cobra"-5.4). Special editions will have their engines based off the above 3.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Duratec 35 was made to be just that, the Duratec 35. A replacement for the old Duratec 30 (though I am sure the 4.0 will stick around for truck use). Ford is not going to start bulding exotic engines off this new one (ex, the 4.3, 4.8 you mentioned).
And as much as we would all love the, the 5.0 Cammer is a crate engine, and Ford is not going to put a engine that is worth over half of the overall car's MSRP into production.
Not to sound like a jerk, but let's be happy with what we have. 2 great engines, a new V6 and a great special edition with bigger displacement.
Do you really think Ford is going to start building other engines off of this one?
Don't expect the modular engines (4.6, 5.4, and 6.8) to be affected by this new Duratec at all.
The Mustang is going to stick with what it has for over a decade, one V6 (whether it be 3.5 or 4.0) and 2 V8s (one for the GT-4.6, and one for the "SVT Cobra"-5.4). Special editions will have their engines based off the above 3.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Duratec 35 was made to be just that, the Duratec 35. A replacement for the old Duratec 30 (though I am sure the 4.0 will stick around for truck use). Ford is not going to start bulding exotic engines off this new one (ex, the 4.3, 4.8 you mentioned).
And as much as we would all love the, the 5.0 Cammer is a crate engine, and Ford is not going to put a engine that is worth over half of the overall car's MSRP into production.
Not to sound like a jerk, but let's be happy with what we have. 2 great engines, a new V6 and a great special edition with bigger displacement.
Your right.. We're just looking at the numbers, based off of the 3.5L is all.. We're all stuck with what we have of course.. Its all just a dream my friend.. Your 100% right in all aspects.. But wouldnt it be nice to be able to walk into a dealership some day and the saleman ask you if you want a 361HP Duratec GT, or a 446HP Duratech GT-R, or perhaps you would like this "Ice Cold Black" with "Ice Blue Ghost" Ralley striped Cobra with a 536HP N/A Duratech 5.0! LOL!! Wouldnt be nice?
11/9/05, 10:36 PM
#66
Post *****
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,613
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
read the whole thread and this is what arin thinks lol
its a nice motor. i think it's gonna be one helluva good workhorse for most of Ford's vehicles. but i dont expect to see it in the stang for at least another 5-10 years, whenever they decide to phase out the 4.0L
im very interested to see where this motor will go.. MSP, while i too would love to see some of those exotic variants of the Duratec35, i reaaaaaly doubt thats gonna happen lol. if only...
but then again, if Arin had his way, we'd have an available 5.8L V10 mod motor in the stang too lol.. but alas, such dreams arent meant to be realized... a shame really.
want wait to see whats gonnahappen in the SVT fusion. anyone think we'll see an SVT 500? you never know...
its a nice motor. i think it's gonna be one helluva good workhorse for most of Ford's vehicles. but i dont expect to see it in the stang for at least another 5-10 years, whenever they decide to phase out the 4.0L
im very interested to see where this motor will go.. MSP, while i too would love to see some of those exotic variants of the Duratec35, i reaaaaaly doubt thats gonna happen lol. if only...
but then again, if Arin had his way, we'd have an available 5.8L V10 mod motor in the stang too lol.. but alas, such dreams arent meant to be realized... a shame really.
want wait to see whats gonnahappen in the SVT fusion. anyone think we'll see an SVT 500? you never know...
11/10/05, 01:11 AM
#67
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 2, 2005
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MSP,
This does not make any sense. A bigger motor is not automatically more efficient. According to Audi, the most efficient design is .45 to .55 liters per cylinder. So a 2.7 to 3.3 liter V6 would be the most efficient size. BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Nissan, Honda, etc all offer varying sizes of the same motor. The famed Nissan VQ ranges from 2.0 to 4.0 liters. Basically they have they same efficiency, just different tuning depending upon application. Injectors will not improve efficiency. The internals are forged but the pistons are not. If you don't blow a head gasket, I fear for the pistons.
Break Break
I really like this new engine. I agree we won't see it in a Mustang for awhile. Blueovalnews showed the production applications for this motor thru 2008. The Mustang was not on the list. That said things can change. It might lack low end torque but somes gears and a high redline can make up for that. My concern is the cost of the engine. It could push the base price up over $1000. One of the nice things about the V6 Mustang is its low price.
This does not make any sense. A bigger motor is not automatically more efficient. According to Audi, the most efficient design is .45 to .55 liters per cylinder. So a 2.7 to 3.3 liter V6 would be the most efficient size. BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Nissan, Honda, etc all offer varying sizes of the same motor. The famed Nissan VQ ranges from 2.0 to 4.0 liters. Basically they have they same efficiency, just different tuning depending upon application. Injectors will not improve efficiency. The internals are forged but the pistons are not. If you don't blow a head gasket, I fear for the pistons.
Break Break
I really like this new engine. I agree we won't see it in a Mustang for awhile. Blueovalnews showed the production applications for this motor thru 2008. The Mustang was not on the list. That said things can change. It might lack low end torque but somes gears and a high redline can make up for that. My concern is the cost of the engine. It could push the base price up over $1000. One of the nice things about the V6 Mustang is its low price.
Originally posted by MSP@November 10, 2005, 1:55 PM
Sure no problem.. There may be some people who debate me on this but here goes!
Basically, by increasing the bore and stroke, you increase the cumbustion chamber or CC of the cylinder.. Which each incremental increase in the CC, based on the design of the engine, and all other things being the same, of that of the 3.5L V6 its easy to see how these values would be created.. Now of course this does not take into account the injectors used on said engines.. I would imagine an increase in injector size would have to be accounted for.. As follows-->
4.0L V6 = 19lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 24lbs injectors
3.5L V6 = 24lbs injectors
4.3L V6 = 30lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 30lbs injectors
4.8L V8 = 30lbs injectors
5.0L V8 = 36lbs injectors
Sure no problem.. There may be some people who debate me on this but here goes!
Basically, by increasing the bore and stroke, you increase the cumbustion chamber or CC of the cylinder.. Which each incremental increase in the CC, based on the design of the engine, and all other things being the same, of that of the 3.5L V6 its easy to see how these values would be created.. Now of course this does not take into account the injectors used on said engines.. I would imagine an increase in injector size would have to be accounted for.. As follows-->
4.0L V6 = 19lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 24lbs injectors
3.5L V6 = 24lbs injectors
4.3L V6 = 30lbs injectors
4.6L V8 = 30lbs injectors
4.8L V8 = 30lbs injectors
5.0L V8 = 36lbs injectors
11/10/05, 06:56 AM
#68
GT Member
Join Date: February 2, 2004
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 1trickpony@November 10, 2005, 2:14 AM
Blueovalnews showed the production applications for this motor thru 2008.
Blueovalnews showed the production applications for this motor thru 2008.
11/10/05, 08:30 AM
#71
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@November 9, 2005, 11:35 PM
Just so things are kept precise..
2005 4.0L V6 = 52.5HP Per Liter= 210HP V6
2005 4.6L V8 = 65.2HP Per Liter =300HP V8
2005 3.5L V6 = 71.5HP Per Liter = 250HP V6
Future engines which could be created
2006 4.0L V6 = 75.10HP Per Liter= 300HP V6
2006 4.3L V6 = 77.20HP Per Liter= 332HP V6
2006 4.6L V8 = 78.65HP Per Liter= 362HP V8
2007 4.8L V8 = 92.95HP Per Liter= 446HP V8
2007 5.0L V8 = 107.25HP Per Liter = 536HP V8
2007 5.4L V8 = 136HP Per Liter = 734HP V8
For your reference the GT500 - 5.4L V8= 83.3HP(SuperCharged) Per Liter = 450HP V8, so you can see how the design of this particular engine, when comparing both versions of the 5.4L..
Just looking at the numbers on face value, this is pretty much what we could see with a bore and stroke increase, based on the same design.. Of course these values could be changed by Ford with computer manipulation for various marketing reasons.. Or insurance profile catagories.. But using the same reference design, and provided they all used 65mm throttle body, these are the numbers..
I just like to look at it, to understand the impact of the design based on HP per Liter.. Ford would never give us this kind of power though.. This would be to good for us.. We dont deserve such a nice set of engines..
Just so things are kept precise..
2005 4.0L V6 = 52.5HP Per Liter= 210HP V6
2005 4.6L V8 = 65.2HP Per Liter =300HP V8
2005 3.5L V6 = 71.5HP Per Liter = 250HP V6
Future engines which could be created
2006 4.0L V6 = 75.10HP Per Liter= 300HP V6
2006 4.3L V6 = 77.20HP Per Liter= 332HP V6
2006 4.6L V8 = 78.65HP Per Liter= 362HP V8
2007 4.8L V8 = 92.95HP Per Liter= 446HP V8
2007 5.0L V8 = 107.25HP Per Liter = 536HP V8
2007 5.4L V8 = 136HP Per Liter = 734HP V8
For your reference the GT500 - 5.4L V8= 83.3HP(SuperCharged) Per Liter = 450HP V8, so you can see how the design of this particular engine, when comparing both versions of the 5.4L..
Just looking at the numbers on face value, this is pretty much what we could see with a bore and stroke increase, based on the same design.. Of course these values could be changed by Ford with computer manipulation for various marketing reasons.. Or insurance profile catagories.. But using the same reference design, and provided they all used 65mm throttle body, these are the numbers..
I just like to look at it, to understand the impact of the design based on HP per Liter.. Ford would never give us this kind of power though.. This would be to good for us.. We dont deserve such a nice set of engines..
11/10/05, 09:21 AM
#73
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@November 9, 2005, 9:14 AM
Looking at some options in terms of Boost which can be applied, it would appear its real tight.. Unless all internals combined, along with the new pressureized block design and heads can handle it..
Example
4 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 10.90:1
5 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 11.48:1
6 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 12.07:1
8 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 13.23:1
So this means, with a 10.3:1 ratio, very little boost will be needed for this motor.. I would think 3 to 5 PSI kits will be sufficient, but how the motor will respond to it is up in the air..
Looking at 3PSI of boost gives us 10.32:1.. With all things being considered, what will this do in terms of HP/TQ, based on whats available to the engine.. I guess this engine is the ideal canidate for a Turbo.. But 2 to 3psi Superchargers would easily get this motor over 300HP for sure..
Any thoughts?
Looking at some options in terms of Boost which can be applied, it would appear its real tight.. Unless all internals combined, along with the new pressureized block design and heads can handle it..
Example
4 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 10.90:1
5 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 11.48:1
6 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 12.07:1
8 psi of boost = effective compression ratio= 13.23:1
So this means, with a 10.3:1 ratio, very little boost will be needed for this motor.. I would think 3 to 5 PSI kits will be sufficient, but how the motor will respond to it is up in the air..
Looking at 3PSI of boost gives us 10.32:1.. With all things being considered, what will this do in terms of HP/TQ, based on whats available to the engine.. I guess this engine is the ideal canidate for a Turbo.. But 2 to 3psi Superchargers would easily get this motor over 300HP for sure..
Any thoughts?
Yes MSP!! You are correct! Nice Call Sir!
The engine and transmission have plenty of expansion room. The V-6 could easily be scaled up to deliver 300 horsepower and is designed to support turbocharging and direct injection, said Samardzich. The new transmission can also handle up to 300 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../C01-377888.htm
Link provided by "1TrickPony"!
Which pretty much means, without a need to go into too many details, this is Ford's answer to the Toyota Supra Motor!
Yes my friends, this engine eventually will find its way into 1000RWHP Mustangs with fat twin turbo's... This is it guys.. This is what you have been waiting for.. Now its just a matter of will we ever get it!!
11/10/05, 09:42 AM
#75
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92@November 10, 2005, 8:39 AM
Actually, I provided the link in the post just above yours.
Actually, I provided the link in the post just above yours.
http://www.ttmtechnical.com/engine_building.html
At 75bhp per cylinder wall thickness should be 0.11in to 0.13in.
At 85bhp per cylinder wall thickness should be 0.15 to 0.18in.
At >100bhp per cylinder wall thickness should be 0.22 to 0.25in.
If you want an engine to seal well at 8500rmp for long periods of hard use then these thicknesses should be used.
If we can verify that this motor has a cylinder wall thickness of 0.22 to 0.25, we have a winner for sure!!
11/10/05, 09:46 AM
#76
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What we need guys is a .pdf for the block itself.. We need numbers on the block guys!! First to find them wins a bag of 25 chocolate chip cookies, with free FedX overnight shipping!
11/10/05, 09:55 AM
#77
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@November 10, 2005, 11:24 AM
Yes MSP!! You are correct! Nice Call Sir!
The engine and transmission have plenty of expansion room. The V-6 could easily be scaled up to deliver 300 horsepower and is designed to support turbocharging and direct injection, said Samardzich. The new transmission can also handle up to 300 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../C01-377888.htm
Link provided by "1TrickPony"!
Which pretty much means, without a need to go into too many details, this is Ford's answer to the Toyota Supra Motor!
Yes my friends, this engine eventually will find its way into 1000RWHP Mustangs with fat twin turbo's... This is it guys.. This is what you have been waiting for.. Now its just a matter of will we ever get it!!
Yes MSP!! You are correct! Nice Call Sir!
The engine and transmission have plenty of expansion room. The V-6 could easily be scaled up to deliver 300 horsepower and is designed to support turbocharging and direct injection, said Samardzich. The new transmission can also handle up to 300 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../C01-377888.htm
Link provided by "1TrickPony"!
Which pretty much means, without a need to go into too many details, this is Ford's answer to the Toyota Supra Motor!
Yes my friends, this engine eventually will find its way into 1000RWHP Mustangs with fat twin turbo's... This is it guys.. This is what you have been waiting for.. Now its just a matter of will we ever get it!!
The original Ford press release stated this, you must have skipped it.Ford's answer to the Supra motor was the 03-04 4.6L S/Ced V8. This 6 cylinder won't hold that much power.
11/10/05, 10:01 AM
#78
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by max2000jp@November 10, 2005, 8:58 AM
Welcome to yesterday The original Ford press release stated this, you must have skipped it.
Ford's answer to the Supra motor was the 03-04 4.6L S/Ced V8. This 6 cylinder won't hold that much power.
Welcome to yesterday
The original Ford press release stated this, you must have skipped it.Ford's answer to the Supra motor was the 03-04 4.6L S/Ced V8. This 6 cylinder won't hold that much power.
If we can find out whether its at or above 0.22 to 0.25in, then we can leave all speculation at the door for now and just wait.. These are the crucial numbers we need, to understand the exact classification Ford had in mind for this motor.. Without debating it too much more, this info along with the other materials used to build it, can pretty much tell us the "Ford Secret Instructions".. "Build it for the NHRA, Sell it to Grandma!" If this was discussed in the secret meeting, we just wait and relax..
11/10/05, 10:07 AM
#79
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@November 10, 2005, 12:04 PM
LOL! Well, we need to find out what the cylinder wall thickness is.. We know the thickness is atleast 0.11in to 0.13in.... We know this.. This places the engine at the 75Bhp per cylinder area..
If we can find out whether its at or above 0.22 to 0.25in, then we can leave all speculation at the door for now and just wait.. These are the crucial numbers we need, to understand the exact classification Ford had in mind for this motor.. Without debating it too much more, this info along with the other materials used to build it, can pretty much tell us the "Ford Secret Instructions".. "Build it for the NHRA, Sell it to Grandma!" If this was discussed in the secret meeting, we just wait and relax..
LOL! Well, we need to find out what the cylinder wall thickness is.. We know the thickness is atleast 0.11in to 0.13in.... We know this.. This places the engine at the 75Bhp per cylinder area..
If we can find out whether its at or above 0.22 to 0.25in, then we can leave all speculation at the door for now and just wait.. These are the crucial numbers we need, to understand the exact classification Ford had in mind for this motor.. Without debating it too much more, this info along with the other materials used to build it, can pretty much tell us the "Ford Secret Instructions".. "Build it for the NHRA, Sell it to Grandma!" If this was discussed in the secret meeting, we just wait and relax..
11/10/05, 10:15 AM
#80
Cobra R Member
Join Date: November 10, 2004
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, it doesn't matter to me what they do with the engines. 
I like my GT just the way it is. No trade-ins here, but maybe I would jump on the bandwagon if I ever needed a new motor in my existing car. Plus, on another note: Higher HP engine equals higher insurance costs.......and mine is high enough already. Insurance quotes are based off of the VIN #, and any engine swaps the ins. company would never know about....
I like my GT just the way it is. No trade-ins here, but maybe I would jump on the bandwagon if I ever needed a new motor in my existing car. Plus, on another note: Higher HP engine equals higher insurance costs.......and mine is high enough already. Insurance quotes are based off of the VIN #, and any engine swaps the ins. company would never know about....