X-Charger for the 4.0 Mustang
12/2/05, 08:48 AM
#21
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roots v. Vortech (centrifugal) isn't a direct comparrison of peak HP and TQ. You have to look at the whole power curve.
Remember, the roots will make more power throughout the band. The Vortech increases power output with RPMs and is more of a top-end power-adder.
Roots would typically be better on the street as you would get much more TQ and power down low.
Remember, the roots will make more power throughout the band. The Vortech increases power output with RPMs and is more of a top-end power-adder.
Roots would typically be better on the street as you would get much more TQ and power down low.
12/2/05, 08:53 AM
#22
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Rampant@December 2, 2005, 7:51 AM
Roots v. Vortech (centrifugal) isn't a direct comparrison of peak HP and TQ. You have to look at the whole power curve.
Remember, the roots will make more power throughout the band. The Vortech increases power output with RPMs and is more of a top-end power-adder.
Roots would typically be better on the street as you would get much more TQ and power down low.
Roots v. Vortech (centrifugal) isn't a direct comparrison of peak HP and TQ. You have to look at the whole power curve.
Remember, the roots will make more power throughout the band. The Vortech increases power output with RPMs and is more of a top-end power-adder.
Roots would typically be better on the street as you would get much more TQ and power down low.
Like I said, I wont tolerate twisting my words in my post.. I want the roots, but I need to get what I'm paying for..
Fix it Doug, if you can.. I want to run a Bama chip.. LOL!!
12/2/05, 09:18 AM
#23
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by screaminyellin6@December 2, 2005, 10:40 AM
I agree, at that price - I'm still looking at getting the Vortech in the next couple of months. I may even get it without the intercooloer and save some $$. I'm not looking for an 11sec car either, just something that will smoke most ricers - or atleast keep up with a WRX
I think the Vortech (about $2,700-$3,000 + Injectors, etc... + Install + SCT unless you like most here have one already) will still run you less than this unit installed. Who knows , maybe this has some merit too. I guess we can wait and see, so far - I still like Vortech - But I'm all for impressing me with some numbers ....
I agree, at that price - I'm still looking at getting the Vortech in the next couple of months. I may even get it without the intercooloer and save some $$. I'm not looking for an 11sec car either, just something that will smoke most ricers - or atleast keep up with a WRX
I think the Vortech (about $2,700-$3,000 + Injectors, etc... + Install + SCT unless you like most here have one already) will still run you less than this unit installed. Who knows , maybe this has some merit too. I guess we can wait and see, so far - I still like Vortech - But I'm all for impressing me with some numbers ....
Methonal
12/2/05, 11:42 AM
#24
GT Member
Join Date: November 4, 2005
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Understandable the difference in lower band power, however, if you are not looking for an 11 sec car the lower band power is not going to make that much of a difference to that driver.
Roots is great , but on an economical scale to the Vortech system - so far abit overweighted, if price. HP for HP the $ factor and difference does come into play.
I wouldn't say no to either one if someone wanted to use my car as a demo car ( I'd gladly take a sponsor ) LOL, but if I'm paying for it myself - I'll live with the lower end torque and invest in some other mod's with difference. Hopefully MSP can convince Doug to make it worth or while
Roots is great , but on an economical scale to the Vortech system - so far abit overweighted, if price. HP for HP the $ factor and difference does come into play.
I wouldn't say no to either one if someone wanted to use my car as a demo car ( I'd gladly take a sponsor ) LOL, but if I'm paying for it myself - I'll live with the lower end torque and invest in some other mod's with difference. Hopefully MSP can convince Doug to make it worth or while
12/2/05, 11:50 AM
#25
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by scrming@December 2, 2005, 12:21 PM
Talking with Lidio yesterday.... skip the intercooler and add Methanol instead (or later)... Lidio has it on the 05 GT with a Vortech and is in the process of adding it to his Mach1.. He's got a good article about it here:
Methonal
Talking with Lidio yesterday.... skip the intercooler and add Methanol instead (or later)... Lidio has it on the 05 GT with a Vortech and is in the process of adding it to his Mach1.. He's got a good article about it here:
Methonal
Methonal
12/2/05, 12:00 PM
#26
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of quick comments...
Dont depend on Doug to chance someone else's prices. Im sure he'll forward any comments we make here but thats really too much to expect from him. Look to him to get you the most power out of whichever system you get, but no to control someone else's prices...
Methanol rocks. Ill be working on that later. Its really unreliable though because no two batches are ever mixed the same. Its really hard to tune for as such, and is going to be alot harder on these cars. You really need to have the car dynotuned each time you use it.. that means a dyno tune each time you buy a different batch.
Second, Id prefer not to have a roots type system. Two reasons stick out in my head right now. One, Im worried about breaking things on hard off-the-line launches. Secondly, my old philosophy and Ill say it again: Make power up high and compensate with gears down low!!
Dont depend on Doug to chance someone else's prices. Im sure he'll forward any comments we make here but thats really too much to expect from him. Look to him to get you the most power out of whichever system you get, but no to control someone else's prices...
Methanol rocks. Ill be working on that later. Its really unreliable though because no two batches are ever mixed the same. Its really hard to tune for as such, and is going to be alot harder on these cars. You really need to have the car dynotuned each time you use it.. that means a dyno tune each time you buy a different batch.
Second, Id prefer not to have a roots type system. Two reasons stick out in my head right now. One, Im worried about breaking things on hard off-the-line launches. Secondly, my old philosophy and Ill say it again: Make power up high and compensate with gears down low!!
12/2/05, 12:02 PM
#27
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks!
12/2/05, 12:59 PM
#28
GT Member
Join Date: November 4, 2005
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zodiac - I couldn;t agree with you more! Gears and rear below and higher end power with the blower. Besides if the s/c doesn;t kick in until 3000 rpm or so, no more wear and tear or strain. I don't feel like launching of a blower every time from a standstill. I prefer having the power there when I go WOT around town.
It's going to be exciting to see all these new power adders for the 4.0 - Atleast companies see there is a market for them and that 4,0 can keep up with the 8's when done right. Lets get dyno's and see... Wonder what in another few months from now we'll all be talking about using a "flux capacitor" or is that just in the movies - LOL
It's going to be exciting to see all these new power adders for the 4.0 - Atleast companies see there is a market for them and that 4,0 can keep up with the 8's when done right. Lets get dyno's and see... Wonder what in another few months from now we'll all be talking about using a "flux capacitor" or is that just in the movies - LOL
12/2/05, 07:08 PM
#29
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of huge factors to consider here...
1.) NO TUNING IS INCLUDED WITH VORTECH'S KIT's. Niether one. So now add atleast $600 for dynotuning to the kit's intial cost.
2.) The Vortech is a good high end s/c and it helps the bottom end too. A 4.0 is dead at anything above 5200-5500 rpm's with stock heads. So with the Eaton you have power from 1500-5200 rpm's, with the Vortech your power starts low and then builds to the upper end number.
3.) The Vortech kit has to have an Oil return fitting Drilled and tapped into the oil pan as it uses engine oil to lube the headunit. The Eaton has it's own oiling system.
The Explorer Express kit is designed for installation on a stock engine and to last 100K miles from there. It installs in a day and canbe done by most with just basic handtools. No drilling of the pan required. Then drive away happy. Sure you may be able to make more power with the Vortech if you go with a tiny pulley and an intercooler but you better start thinking of the weak clutch/ tranny and the Hyperutechtic pistons.
But that's just me thinking aloud....
Thanks, Doug.
1.) NO TUNING IS INCLUDED WITH VORTECH'S KIT's. Niether one. So now add atleast $600 for dynotuning to the kit's intial cost.
2.) The Vortech is a good high end s/c and it helps the bottom end too. A 4.0 is dead at anything above 5200-5500 rpm's with stock heads. So with the Eaton you have power from 1500-5200 rpm's, with the Vortech your power starts low and then builds to the upper end number.
3.) The Vortech kit has to have an Oil return fitting Drilled and tapped into the oil pan as it uses engine oil to lube the headunit. The Eaton has it's own oiling system.
The Explorer Express kit is designed for installation on a stock engine and to last 100K miles from there. It installs in a day and canbe done by most with just basic handtools. No drilling of the pan required. Then drive away happy. Sure you may be able to make more power with the Vortech if you go with a tiny pulley and an intercooler but you better start thinking of the weak clutch/ tranny and the Hyperutechtic pistons.
But that's just me thinking aloud....
Thanks, Doug.
12/2/05, 07:33 PM
#30
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by Doug904@December 2, 2005, 10:11 PM
Couple of huge factors to consider here...
1.) NO TUNING IS INCLUDED WITH VORTECH'S KIT's. Niether one. So now add atleast $600 for dynotuning to the kit's intial cost.
2.) The Vortech is a good high end s/c and it helps the bottom end too. A 4.0 is dead at anything above 5200-5500 rpm's with stock heads. So with the Eaton you have power from 1500-5200 rpm's, with the Vortech your power starts low and then builds to the upper end number.
3.) The Vortech kit has to have an Oil return fitting Drilled and tapped into the oil pan as it uses engine oil to lube the headunit. The Eaton has it's own oiling system.
The Explorer Express kit is designed for installation on a stock engine and to last 100K miles from there. It installs in a day and canbe done by most with just basic handtools. No drilling of the pan required. Then drive away happy. Sure you may be able to make more power with the Vortech if you go with a tiny pulley and an intercooler but you better start thinking of the weak clutch/ tranny and the Hyperutechtic pistons.
But that's just me thinking aloud....
Thanks, Doug.
Couple of huge factors to consider here...
1.) NO TUNING IS INCLUDED WITH VORTECH'S KIT's. Niether one. So now add atleast $600 for dynotuning to the kit's intial cost.
2.) The Vortech is a good high end s/c and it helps the bottom end too. A 4.0 is dead at anything above 5200-5500 rpm's with stock heads. So with the Eaton you have power from 1500-5200 rpm's, with the Vortech your power starts low and then builds to the upper end number.
3.) The Vortech kit has to have an Oil return fitting Drilled and tapped into the oil pan as it uses engine oil to lube the headunit. The Eaton has it's own oiling system.
The Explorer Express kit is designed for installation on a stock engine and to last 100K miles from there. It installs in a day and canbe done by most with just basic handtools. No drilling of the pan required. Then drive away happy. Sure you may be able to make more power with the Vortech if you go with a tiny pulley and an intercooler but you better start thinking of the weak clutch/ tranny and the Hyperutechtic pistons.
But that's just me thinking aloud....
Thanks, Doug.
12/2/05, 08:37 PM
#31
Bullitt Member
Join Date: April 24, 2005
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think $3500 is very reasonable.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
12/2/05, 08:45 PM
#32
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by BurntPony@December 2, 2005, 10:40 PM
I think $3500 is very reasonable.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
I think $3500 is very reasonable.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=39976
12/2/05, 10:41 PM
#33
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by BurntPony@December 2, 2005, 11:40 PM
I think $3500 is very reasonable.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
I think $3500 is very reasonable.
The vortech kit will be $5000+ when it finelly hits the street.
Im not going to pay 5k for a s/c.
Im looking at a 85 SVO Comp Prep with 40,000 original miles for under 5K. If it came down to a rare second Stang or a vortech, I'll take the SVO.
I've been considering the procharger, but this looks pretty competitive.
The flexable waterhose has to go. It makes the kit look unfinished and thrown together. If a molded hose cant be found that will work, then it has to be hard plumbed.
No way that flexable hose is going on my 05.
12/2/05, 10:43 PM
#34
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
New info from that other forum. Thanks to "TJ" for finding out all this for us:
"Ok I talked to Dave from X charger.
1. The price will be about $3,500.00 non-emission states $3,700.00 for emission states
2. No intercooler (great)
3, No oil line tap
4. Will work with 6psi and 9psi but recommends rebuilding the bottom end of the engine if you run 9psi.
5. They went with the M90 (more air) over the M60 because they had more room in the Mustang engine compartment vers the Explorer M90 wouldn't fit.
6. He said it will be low RPM range powerband which is excellent IMO for this Mustang 4.0.
7. No Dyno S/C is not ready.
8 Easy install
The picture he sent me that I posted I think is just a mock up, he said mocks up the parts in plastic/metal first to see how they fit first.
I also asked what the HP/TQ will be at 6psi with the M90 he said he doesn’t know yet no dyno but he had a number in his head but wouldn’t give me the number. So I keep pressing from time to time in our conversation and talked him into telling me. He stated he hasn’t given that number out and it was just a number he had in his head I gave him my word I wouldn't go posting it on the net and I have to hold my word. I will say this of course you can expect more than 75HP but I wouldn’t say a lot more depending on what you call a lot vers what I call a lot and the number Dave gave me sounds right to me. If you think about real hard it you should be able to come close
He also said this is an excellent charger for a daily drive and this is the brand/type oem’s use and he really likes how it performs/power on the 4.0.
I have pretty much decided after talking with him I will be going with this charger. The reasons only 6psi@ x of hp, no intercooler to install, no oil line tap, cost effective, know brand/type supercharger oem’s use and proven supercharger history of running on the Ford Explorer 4.0's with no engine failures according to Dave. I do not want to beef up the long block or risk it so it’s a no brainier for me this is the one.
He is going to e-mail me when it’s ready along with the dyno data.
If I remember anything else important we talked about I will edit this post. "http://www.mustangforums.com/m_832586/tm.htm
"Ok I talked to Dave from X charger.
1. The price will be about $3,500.00 non-emission states $3,700.00 for emission states
2. No intercooler (great)
3, No oil line tap
4. Will work with 6psi and 9psi but recommends rebuilding the bottom end of the engine if you run 9psi.
5. They went with the M90 (more air) over the M60 because they had more room in the Mustang engine compartment vers the Explorer M90 wouldn't fit.
6. He said it will be low RPM range powerband which is excellent IMO for this Mustang 4.0.
7. No Dyno S/C is not ready.
8 Easy install
The picture he sent me that I posted I think is just a mock up, he said mocks up the parts in plastic/metal first to see how they fit first.
I also asked what the HP/TQ will be at 6psi with the M90 he said he doesn’t know yet no dyno but he had a number in his head but wouldn’t give me the number. So I keep pressing from time to time in our conversation and talked him into telling me. He stated he hasn’t given that number out and it was just a number he had in his head I gave him my word I wouldn't go posting it on the net and I have to hold my word. I will say this of course you can expect more than 75HP but I wouldn’t say a lot more depending on what you call a lot vers what I call a lot and the number Dave gave me sounds right to me. If you think about real hard it you should be able to come close
He also said this is an excellent charger for a daily drive and this is the brand/type oem’s use and he really likes how it performs/power on the 4.0.
I have pretty much decided after talking with him I will be going with this charger. The reasons only 6psi@ x of hp, no intercooler to install, no oil line tap, cost effective, know brand/type supercharger oem’s use and proven supercharger history of running on the Ford Explorer 4.0's with no engine failures according to Dave. I do not want to beef up the long block or risk it so it’s a no brainier for me this is the one.
He is going to e-mail me when it’s ready along with the dyno data.
If I remember anything else important we talked about I will edit this post. "http://www.mustangforums.com/m_832586/tm.htm
12/2/05, 11:37 PM
#35
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jimp@December 2, 2005, 9:46 PM
New info from that other forum. Thanks to "TJ" for finding out all this for us:
"Ok I talked to Dave from X charger.
1. The price will be about $3,500.00 non-emission states $3,700.00 for emission states
2. No intercooler (great)
3, No oil line tap
4. Will work with 6psi and 9psi but recommends rebuilding the bottom end of the engine if you run 9psi.
5. They went with the M90 (more air) over the M60 because they had more room in the Mustang engine compartment vers the Explorer M90 wouldn't fit.
6. He said it will be low RPM range powerband which is excellent IMO for this Mustang 4.0.
7. No Dyno S/C is not ready.
8 Easy install
The picture he sent me that I posted I think is just a mock up, he said mocks up the parts in plastic/metal first to see how they fit first.
I also asked what the HP/TQ will be at 6psi with the M90 he said he doesn’t know yet no dyno but he had a number in his head but wouldn’t give me the number. So I keep pressing from time to time in our conversation and talked him into telling me. He stated he hasn’t given that number out and it was just a number he had in his head I gave him my word I wouldn't go posting it on the net and I have to hold my word. I will say this of course you can expect more than 75HP but I wouldn’t say a lot more depending on what you call a lot vers what I call a lot and the number Dave gave me sounds right to me. If you think about real hard it you should be able to come close
He also said this is an excellent charger for a daily drive and this is the brand/type oem’s use and he really likes how it performs/power on the 4.0.
I have pretty much decided after talking with him I will be going with this charger. The reasons only 6psi@ x of hp, no intercooler to install, no oil line tap, cost effective, know brand/type supercharger oem’s use and proven supercharger history of running on the Ford Explorer 4.0's with no engine failures according to Dave. I do not want to beef up the long block or risk it so it’s a no brainier for me this is the one.
He is going to e-mail me when it’s ready along with the dyno data.
If I remember anything else important we talked about I will edit this post. "http://www.mustangforums.com/m_832586/tm.htm
New info from that other forum. Thanks to "TJ" for finding out all this for us:
"Ok I talked to Dave from X charger.
1. The price will be about $3,500.00 non-emission states $3,700.00 for emission states
2. No intercooler (great)
3, No oil line tap
4. Will work with 6psi and 9psi but recommends rebuilding the bottom end of the engine if you run 9psi.
5. They went with the M90 (more air) over the M60 because they had more room in the Mustang engine compartment vers the Explorer M90 wouldn't fit.
6. He said it will be low RPM range powerband which is excellent IMO for this Mustang 4.0.
7. No Dyno S/C is not ready.
8 Easy install
The picture he sent me that I posted I think is just a mock up, he said mocks up the parts in plastic/metal first to see how they fit first.
I also asked what the HP/TQ will be at 6psi with the M90 he said he doesn’t know yet no dyno but he had a number in his head but wouldn’t give me the number. So I keep pressing from time to time in our conversation and talked him into telling me. He stated he hasn’t given that number out and it was just a number he had in his head I gave him my word I wouldn't go posting it on the net and I have to hold my word. I will say this of course you can expect more than 75HP but I wouldn’t say a lot more depending on what you call a lot vers what I call a lot and the number Dave gave me sounds right to me. If you think about real hard it you should be able to come close
He also said this is an excellent charger for a daily drive and this is the brand/type oem’s use and he really likes how it performs/power on the 4.0.
I have pretty much decided after talking with him I will be going with this charger. The reasons only 6psi@ x of hp, no intercooler to install, no oil line tap, cost effective, know brand/type supercharger oem’s use and proven supercharger history of running on the Ford Explorer 4.0's with no engine failures according to Dave. I do not want to beef up the long block or risk it so it’s a no brainier for me this is the one.
He is going to e-mail me when it’s ready along with the dyno data.
If I remember anything else important we talked about I will edit this post. "http://www.mustangforums.com/m_832586/tm.htm
Thats a very nice write up Jimp.. You have made me proud!! Keep up the good work buddy!!
@Doug
I hope you didnt skim over the part about this being the System I truley desire! LOL!! Sometimes those details can get overlooked, because I like to post things to get a response.. LOL!! See, if I dont post things a certain way, I cant get the proper attention paid to what I want attention paid to.. I trust you Doug!
Jimp knows that I have talked about the Eaton from day 1.. It was my original plan.. I even have a thread about this on another forum.. LOL!!
12/3/05, 12:16 AM
#37
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excepcion13
While looking at the link I read where TJ wrote about a new camshaft, et al. But then he seemed a little defensive when Rygen aked him for the link. darn, I have an 06 and wish I could find some concrete answers!! I have done some searching but I guess the lack of might be an indication that there were no changes.
While looking at the link I read where TJ wrote about a new camshaft, et al. But then he seemed a little defensive when Rygen aked him for the link. darn, I have an 06 and wish I could find some concrete answers!! I have done some searching but I guess the lack of might be an indication that there were no changes.
Excepcion13 I'am TJ from MF check the Ford link below
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2006/2006...d_explorer.html
http://www.mustangforums.com/m_831415/tm.htm]
12/3/05, 04:10 AM
#38
Member
Join Date: November 8, 2005
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the system that I've wanted since I bought my car and started modding it. I was almost going to give up on ever having it, and stop messing with my car until I saw this. I want it....
12/3/05, 07:25 AM
#39
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll be happy to let you know Dyno numbers when we get them. Since I'm doing the tuning for the kit I'll know them soon. I'm itching to get out there to tune it myself so we'll see!
Thanks, Doug.
Thanks, Doug.
12/3/05, 09:09 AM
#40
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ06@December 3, 2005, 3:19 AM
"V-6 certified to same level of ultra-low emissions as the Ford Escape Hybrid. Explorer's standard 4.0-liter SOHC V-6 engine received significant improvements for the 2006 model year as well. Idle quality was improved by 50 percent, thanks to a new camshaft and spark plugs. New engine calibrations and improved emission controls cut smog-forming emissions by 74 percent compared to the previous model. "
Excepcion13 I'am TJ from MF check the Ford link below
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2006/2006...d_explorer.html
http://www.mustangforums.com/m_831415/tm.htm]
"V-6 certified to same level of ultra-low emissions as the Ford Escape Hybrid. Explorer's standard 4.0-liter SOHC V-6 engine received significant improvements for the 2006 model year as well. Idle quality was improved by 50 percent, thanks to a new camshaft and spark plugs. New engine calibrations and improved emission controls cut smog-forming emissions by 74 percent compared to the previous model. "
Excepcion13 I'am TJ from MF check the Ford link below
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2006/2006...d_explorer.html
http://www.mustangforums.com/m_831415/tm.htm]