First 2011 5.0 pics leaked on Mustang Heaven
Twin Independent Variable Cam Timing - not only tweaks the cam timing at different rpm's like the 3V SOHC, but now with 4 cams + iVCT, you can independently tweak the cam timing - and therefore the opening/closing/overlap of intake & exhaust valves of each bank. This can improve performance at both low rpm's and high rpm's.
Last edited by cdynaco; Dec 25, 2009 at 02:12 PM.
Beat me to it.
At first glance this morning I was more impressed than I am now. They did a good job of imitating the look of a high tech individual runner intake with the plastic cover but in the end it is still mostly just a plastic cover. And I agree those look like plastic covers on the valve covers as well. At least they look better than the ones on the Camaro, if that's any consolation. Thought I would post the original spy photo again so everyone could see what the engine should look like without all the plastic.

At first glance this morning I was more impressed than I am now. They did a good job of imitating the look of a high tech individual runner intake with the plastic cover but in the end it is still mostly just a plastic cover. And I agree those look like plastic covers on the valve covers as well. At least they look better than the ones on the Camaro, if that's any consolation. Thought I would post the original spy photo again so everyone could see what the engine should look like without all the plastic.

Last edited by blksn8k; Dec 25, 2009 at 02:25 PM.
Beautiful...Thank you Ford...
If a simple tune and intake does the same for this as it did for my 07...Look out...This is the new Kid on the Block... I could only imagine what a Whipple or Kenny Bell would do...At least we can Dream... Now will it be a 2011 or 2012 for me...
If a simple tune and intake does the same for this as it did for my 07...Look out...This is the new Kid on the Block... I could only imagine what a Whipple or Kenny Bell would do...At least we can Dream... Now will it be a 2011 or 2012 for me...
Each of the 8 extra valves has it's own return spring. With the elimination of the followers, the reciprocating mass PER SPRING is reduced. That it what affects the maximum rev's the valve train can support.
Beat me to it.
At first glance this morning I was more impressed than I am now. They did a good job of imitating the look of a high tech individual runner intake with the plastic cover but in the end it is still mostly just a plastic cover. And I agree those look like plastic covers on the valve covers as well. At least they look better than the ones on the Camaro, if that's any consolation. Thought I would post the original spy photo again so everyone could see what the engine should look like without all the plastic.


At first glance this morning I was more impressed than I am now. They did a good job of imitating the look of a high tech individual runner intake with the plastic cover but in the end it is still mostly just a plastic cover. And I agree those look like plastic covers on the valve covers as well. At least they look better than the ones on the Camaro, if that's any consolation. Thought I would post the original spy photo again so everyone could see what the engine should look like without all the plastic.


Absolutely, it's all extra plastic we see. But they have also put effort into cleaning up the engine compartment. Notice how the sound tube has been re-routed, along with the fact they have moved the air mass flow sensor on the cold-air intake tube. All in all, I think there was a concerted effort made to improve the appearance of the engine compartment. Kudos Ford.
Also, it looks like the strut sits lower in the strut tower... did they change struts or modify body in some way?
The cams' mass doesn't count because the extra mass is attached to the cams, the valve springs don't have to do extra work on that mass.
Each of the 8 extra valves has it's own return spring. With the elimination of the followers, the reciprocating mass PER SPRING is reduced. That it what affects the maximum rev's the valve train can support.
Each of the 8 extra valves has it's own return spring. With the elimination of the followers, the reciprocating mass PER SPRING is reduced. That it what affects the maximum rev's the valve train can support.
What is the redline of the 5.0? My Bullitt is 6500. How much was gained?
While I see what you are saying about the extra cams not adding to 'valve train mass', they are nevertheless a drag on overall output performance. And the lever roller followers (#26) aren't cumbersome like rocker arms in a pushrod engine - they simply rest on a fulcrum in the cam tower and actuate the hydraulic lash adjuster.

So I've always been interested in learning the gains/losses by using 4 cams (& gaining more exhaust valves) vs 2 cams - all other things being equal.
I'm still of the thought that the only reason to go back to a 4 cam is because of the development of the iVCT. But I could be wrong...
Last edited by cdynaco; Dec 25, 2009 at 03:30 PM.
Interesting.
What is the redline of the 5.0? My Bullitt is 6500. How much was gained?
While I see what you are saying about the extra cams not adding to 'valve train mass', they are nevertheless a drag on overall output performance. And the lever roller followers (#26) aren't cumbersome like rocker arms in a pushrod engine - they simply rest on a fulcrum in the cam tower and actuate the hydraulic lash adjuster.

So I've always been interested in learning the gains/losses by using 4 cams (& gaining more exhaust valves) vs 2 cams - all other things being equal.
I'm still of the thought that the only reason to go back to a 4 cam is because of the development of the iVCT. But I could be wrong...
What is the redline of the 5.0? My Bullitt is 6500. How much was gained?
While I see what you are saying about the extra cams not adding to 'valve train mass', they are nevertheless a drag on overall output performance. And the lever roller followers (#26) aren't cumbersome like rocker arms in a pushrod engine - they simply rest on a fulcrum in the cam tower and actuate the hydraulic lash adjuster.

So I've always been interested in learning the gains/losses by using 4 cams (& gaining more exhaust valves) vs 2 cams - all other things being equal.
I'm still of the thought that the only reason to go back to a 4 cam is because of the development of the iVCT. But I could be wrong...
From the drawing, you may be able to appreciate that because of its relative size (diameter) the biggest drag on performance will be the cam gear and the TiVCT mechanism, more than the cam, which is slender.
One of the biggest gains is the valve seat area that helps with increasing the air flow.
From the drawing, you may be able to appreciate that because of its relative size (diameter) the biggest drag on performance will be the cam gear and the TiVCT mechanism, more than the cam, which is slender.
From the drawing, you may be able to appreciate that because of its relative size (diameter) the biggest drag on performance will be the cam gear and the TiVCT mechanism, more than the cam, which is slender.
One of the biggest gains is the valve seat area that helps with increasing the air flow.
From the drawing, you may be able to appreciate that because of its relative size (diameter) the biggest drag on performance will be the cam gear and the TiVCT mechanism, more than the cam, which is slender.
From the drawing, you may be able to appreciate that because of its relative size (diameter) the biggest drag on performance will be the cam gear and the TiVCT mechanism, more than the cam, which is slender.
Increasing to 32 valve springs from 24 adds a lot of resistance to be overcome by HP. And increasing to 16 (smaller) exhaust valves from 8 (large), increases - but does not double - the exhaust flow.
EDIT (pic didn't show)
The 3V has large ex valves:

However, with iVCT you can control the valve timing at lower rpm's for improved 'city' mileage, without sacrificing valve timing at higher rpm's for desirable overlap & the scavenging of exhaust gases to increase flow.
I guess a "HP per liter" is about the only way to guage the difference between the 4V DOHC & 3V SOHC.
Last edited by cdynaco; Dec 25, 2009 at 05:05 PM.
I'm with you on the 5.0. I do like yours better, but what we have isn't bad. I'm a fan still
Well I guess I'm hesitant because of my Lotus DOHC 4V days. On the bench, you can really see/feel the massive resistance of the valve springs on each pair of cam lobes as you turn the cam sprocket with a breaker bar (which probably explains the mediocre low end torque).
Increasing to 32 valve springs from 24 adds a lot of resistance to be overcome by HP. And increasing to 16 (smaller) exhaust valves from 8 (large), increases - but does not double - the exhaust flow.
However, with iVCT you can control the valve timing at lower rpm's for improved 'city' mileage, without sacrificing valve timing at higher rpm's for desirable overlap & the scavenging of exhaust gases to increase flow.
I guess a "HP per liter" is about the only way to guage the difference between the 4V DOHC & 3V SOHC.
Increasing to 32 valve springs from 24 adds a lot of resistance to be overcome by HP. And increasing to 16 (smaller) exhaust valves from 8 (large), increases - but does not double - the exhaust flow.
However, with iVCT you can control the valve timing at lower rpm's for improved 'city' mileage, without sacrificing valve timing at higher rpm's for desirable overlap & the scavenging of exhaust gases to increase flow.
I guess a "HP per liter" is about the only way to guage the difference between the 4V DOHC & 3V SOHC.
The Lotus 907 used cup style cam followers and there were no 'hydraulic lash adjusters' (or valve seals LOL). The cam towers were a separate aluminum casting that bolted onto the head. A shim rested on the top of the valve stem, the cam follower sat on top, directly underneath the lobe of the cam. You adjusted valves by using different shims. It was a tricky job - but solid when you were done. Timing belt, adjustable cam sprockets (fixed not hydraulic), redline at 7k, the power band started around 3k (similar to the 4.6 3V) and would scream right to the top.
1974 Jensen-Healey/Lotus:

As for the 5.0, there will be no need for a 'roller follower' on the Quad Cam 4V for the same reason.
Last edited by cdynaco; Dec 25, 2009 at 05:33 PM.

Cuz that thing clearly grew!
I would have like to have seen it far more chiseled. Being that there are so many new lines in the 2010's body. That circular, (well) rounded, font doesn't flow overall. That being said, it's not that I don't like it- for it's decent... But on first glance I'd give the badge a 7.5/10.
What I had wanted, just as an example, was like "50" in the F150. not the same, but similar-ish
Hey Mustang Heavans web site is down!!! I wonder if we all crashed it or someone at Ford shut it down!!!



