In all reality it probably would gain no weight...The hartley is full billet aluminum and is lighter than the engine used in the atom by A LOT if i recall correctly, I could br wrong, but just get some plenums he has for it and strap some small turbos on..its a 10k rpm redline, turbos would be great!

 

I'm kinda' disappointed by that shot. The Hartley is impressively small, small enough not to need any 'home cooking' or slight of hand on the part of these folks to prove that point. And yet, in this photo, were getting more than a little of exactly that.

That Zetec motor is still fully dressed including an oil pan, accessory drive, and full factory emissions equipment all of which add greatly to just how large the Zetec looks. The Hartley is, by contrast, a run of the mill, off the shelf long block that is barren by comparison. Again, the worst part is that a fairer comparison would still more than make their point while this approach could leave a portion of their audience a bit skeptical to say the least.

If they are going to go through the trouble of making a comparison at least take the time to do it well
.

 

for an svt focus/fusion.....that would be awesome

 

never heard of the hartley V8. its pretty cool.

 

The point is that it's a V-8 sitting next to a I4. But just because it doesn't have engine accessories means its less impressive I guess.

 

Wow, it's amazing how easy it can be to miss the obvious. Take the emissions equipment, oil pan, and accessory drive off that Zetec and it's going to look considerably smaller than it does if not much smaller than the Hartley. Would the Hartley still be impressively small? Yep. So, assuming Hartley is responsible for the comparison photo, then why not do it and go just a little out of their way to at least feign a concern for accuracy?

For a bunch of guys who can go through the trouble of putting together two Suzuki inline fours the half hour it would have taken to pull all of that off for a pic, and present a far more accurate comparison, seems a pretty pathetic oversight. It's called professionalism...it never hurts to be as above board as possible and these guys apparently cannot be troubled to go out of their way even in this small matter.

If this isn't their photo then it isn't their problem. But if Hartley is responsible for that photo, which seems likely given the fact that this engine was initially designed to replace the Zetec in Hartley's Caterham, and these guys are so lazy and indifferent that they can't be bothered to strive for utmost accuracy here then it casts a shadow of doubt over the accuracy of anything that they might say. I don't personally believe Hartley intended or intends to BS anybody, but taking so little care in matters like this is brazen to be kind and stupid to be blunt......particularly in todays aftermarket where more than a few well known vendors and tuners are now seen as little better than overblown hack-artists bent on making a buck.

 

Ford already has some awesome v-8's. They are called the Lions. 3.6 and 4.4 twin turbo diesels available in Europe only. They also have a 2.7 v-6 that puts out 320lbs of torque@1900rpm and gets 49mpg on the hiway. Maybe we could get them and soon as the greedy oil b-----ds die!

 

Awesome info on the V8.

LimeGt - any links to those diesels? I've been following the diesel stuff for years now and am both anxious and sceptical that our elected officials (state and federal) will allow so much tax money go up in a cloud of smoke.

V10 - bingo! Corn ethanol doesn't help anyone but the farming industrial lobby. ... But what about alternative sources of ethanol? There have been very promising studies done on algea based ethanol, something like 10 times the amount of ethanol per acre and requires very little water, and no arable land. Of course it's probably not politically popular....

Moosetang - We keep trying to vote for people to fix it, but every time there's an election, the winner turns out to be a politician. Who could have known?


I think the new diesels would have done wonderfully here if they would have hit here before Europe. As it is, every politician with any say on energy knows full well that the UK lost a very significant amount of tax revenue when 60% of new cars started getting 25-50% better gas mileage. Trust me, US politicians are dreaming vividly about new taxes to replace lost oil revenue - they'll need it 25 years from now when petroleum isn't used for fuel anymore....

 

MEMO FOR THE RECORD REGARDING THIS POST ... (please)

I just got back from Vietnam this January. I was in Saigon the whole time (about 2.5 weeks). While there, the only pick-up truck I saw there was a FORD RANGER.

These were different models than what we have here. They seemed a little bigger ... kind of along the lines of a Chevy Colorado or maybe even a Dodge Dakota. All of them had the old cargo net hooks along the exterior top of the bed like the old Ford Couriers and Chevy Luv trucks used to have, otherwise the cab seemed to be the same design (a Ford Ranger EXPORT model ... ???).

Interestingly, they also all had fender badges reflecting "TURBO DIESEL". I was unable to stop them and ask them to raise the hoods but my impression is that they were probably turbo 4-cylinder diesels.

None of them seemed to have any problems hauling the cargo they were loaded with (usually to the max).

Might be something FORD is currently trying to certify for use over here in smaller trucks ... (???)

 

There was a engine discussion?

Mustang GT needs a GDI 32 valve 5.0 V8 - and there you go...

 

ROFLMAO ... (Yall are crazy ... heheheheheeeeeeeee)

 

+111111111!!!!!!!! what does GDI mean tho?


"comment removed"

 

GDI - Gas Direct Injection IIRC
and from what I remember reading it was said to be a 4v (32vavle engine)

 

Yup...for the curious what we've heard thus far indicates.....

...5.0L displacement
...DOHC/32-valve heads
...direct injection
...3.6x inch bore size
...400-425hp
...more than 360lb-ft of torque
...more fuel efficient than the existing 4.6L 3-valve design.

 

You sure you don't mean 3.7 bore size?

I figured they were going to use the new BOSS - MOD block they just introduced this year ... (???)

 

I thought they might as well at one point, but insiders are saying the bore size is 3.6 inches and change. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the problems Ford had been encountering with developing and building a production Mod motor derivative with a 3.7 inch bore size just couldn't be overcome simply or cheaply so they moved it down a notch.

 

Thank you ... I appreciate the information.

Cause for some celebration I guess ... first time I've ever heard of more cubes allowing better fuel use ... (must be in the injection and heads, cams ... ???).

I would like to bring the following up for everyone's discussion in this thread:

I'm going to reference the article "BLOCK PARTY" in the March 2008 issue of 5.0 Mustang magazine (pgs. 64 - 71);

Pg. 71: They mention the bock is Siamesed-bored and how it relates to the potential cooling issues being used on the streets. Stated is how they used one for 30-K miles without problems.

My questions (for anyone that may know the answers) are:

Are they going to use the current production aluminum 3-V block bored out to 3.6 or will they use the new M-6010-BOSS50 cast iron block sleeved down to 3.6?

Is the reduction from 3.7 to 3.6 due to cooling issues, or what?

What will the sleeves be made of?

Now, I'm going to reference the article "STROKER ACE" in the January 2008 issue of Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords magazine (pgs. 138 - 146);

They do the stroker build-up using a 3.7 crank. This is a couple of months before Ford announces the 5.0 MOD block above (having the 3.7 bores).

Does anyone think there is any chance of Ford using the 3.7 stroke with the 3.6 block to produce a 320 CID production engine (possibly for an upcoming MACH 1 and/or BOSS car) if they don't use the base 4.6 or 5.4 engine?

I think the 3.7 bore with 3.7 stroke comes out to about 322 CID. If I am not mistaken, Sean Hyland offers a kit using a 3.7 bore sleeve system (for aluminum blocks only) and a 3.7 crank for one of his engine packages.

Does anyone have any experience(s) with Sean Hyland and his products?

Obviously, there are no crank clearance problems with the production aluminum blocks using the 3.7 stroke. Anyone here know anything about this?

Which heads will Ford use (2-V, 3-V, or 4-V) in the new 5.0 ... does anyone know?

Hopefully ... I've asked everyone the right questions (and "rescued" this thread ... LOL) ... ???

By the way ... for those who like to read tech stuff, the two articles I mention above are very good reading indeed.

YALL HAVE A NICE DAY ~ !!!

 

Is this new block going to be quad cam?

 

Stay on topic guys and that doesn't include any crap, name calling, etc. Now to clean up the mess.

 

(believe me I am desperately trying to get us there ... NICE 2005 by the way !!!)