rhumb

That's roughly 75hp/l. Presuming a Boss 302 (4.9l), that would work out to about 370hp. A Boss 351 would be about 425hp while a Boss 429 would be 525.

Obviously this is all very speculative and everything, but it does give a very general indication of the possible power potential of a Boss engine family that's developing the same levels of specific power output as the mild Duratec 35 running on 87 octane swill.

Go top shelf with some 93 octant: Nissan's VQ motors are pumping out 300hp out of their 3.5l for an 85hp/l specific output. Plug those numbers in and you get around 425hp for a Boss 302.

Plug in a direct injection system, which the Duratec 35 is designed for: You can get an Audi RS power level of 100hp/l and you have yourself a 500hp Boss 302. Account for the extra intake valve on the 5V Audi, dial down to a 95hp/l level and you still get 475hp Boss 302.

Do your own math on a Boss 351(5.7l) or 429 (7l)...

As these examples illustrate, this is all quite possible on current production technologies out on the road today.

Ahh, to dream, boldly!

future9er24

I didn't mean to come off as slamming the new motor. I just thought it was just an all aluminum 2v mod motor. lol oops.

I'm definately excited for this motor. Hmm... If Ford does make this V8 based off of the Dtec, I wonder if they will also make more than just a V8 out of it (V10, V12, etc). While they may be quite outlandish, it's still a pretty nifty performance application if you ask me.

btw... Isn't a 351 5.8L? I see 5.8L logos and such all the time so....

Man this engine is going to just plain rock. I wonder how long the Mod motor will stick around after that... Hopefully for a long while. It could be like the 60s again where there are multiple V8 options (and if they keep the cologne V6, multiple 6 cylinder options as well!)

TomServo92

351ci = 5.75L. Some round it up to 5.8, others don't.

future9er24

I don't see why anyone wouldn't round up or furthermore, why they would round down. We're taught to round up at 5 aren't we?

Meh, its all really trivial I suppose. Everyone knows ci is the REAL way to measure displacement

Boomer

isn't that the reason the 'legendary' 5.0 is a 5Liter....

4.96 IIRC

Evil_Capri

I'm pretty sure the 5.0s are 4.942. Car and Driver also printed the engine as 4.9 instead of 5.0.

TomServo92

That's correct. I believe Ford rounded up to 5.0L to make it sound better as compared to the Chevy 305 (which is 4.998L).

rhumb

I doubt the new Boss V8s will be direct derivatives of the Duratec 35, but rather, that the Duratec 35 may give a good preview of Ford's current directions in engine design in general. Hopefully this is so as the Duratec 35 looks to be an excellent design with a lot of future growth and potential designed in, both in terms of size (larger displacements) and technologies (VVT, direct injection, turbo).

V10

You are correct. A Ford "302 / 5.0" is actually 301.593 CID / 4.9422 L

And for the record, a Ford "351" V8 is 351.86 CID or 5.76 L
I'm sure Ford called them "351" to differentiate them from the old 352 CID FE engine which had the exact same 4.00" bore x 3.50" stroke as the "351" engines.

kevinspann

Remember how the 3.8s in '03 were changed to 3.9s for '04, despite being the same motor? And since i drive a 2.3, saying it liters makes it sound less pathetic than 144ci. (and cc's would be a more accurate way to measure anyway)

True_HP

Saw your note and thought I'd add my $.02....
It is a Ford Only program.

Also some unknown truthes about VDE (variable displacement engines)
VDE is a marketing option only. Both Chrysler's HEMI and GM's V8 with VDE are junk. Most people don't know it but to actually get the vehicle to go into its Variable displacement mode you have to be traveling under 70mph and on flat ground. Any hills or speeds greater generate enough load on the engine that VDE is never used. In fact one of the major complaints about the system is that no-one is experiencing the projected MPG advertised. Dealerships are reporting some not so happy customers.

rhumb

I wouldn't say VDE's are junk, they are only supposed to operate in partial displacement mode (is that a real term?) in very light duty situations such as ambling down a highway. Otherwise, they operate as regular big, powerful V8s with commensurate mileage, or the lack thereof. Given the joy that's given stuffing one's Florsheim into the throttle of a Hemi or other rumbling V8, it probably would take saintly restraint to actually get the potential mileage benefits possible with a VDE.

Variable timing and DI, I think, may actually offer better overall and more readily observable increases in efficiency as they benefits of these systems work across the load and rpm range and not just in some narrow driving parameters.

Hollywood_North GT

I suspect few who drive a Hemi or a "rumbling V8" even know what a Florsheim is, much less own a pair.

You do crack me up though.

Treadhead

Go ahead and tell all of us dumb people who drive a rumbly V-8 what it is. I drive one and I know it's a shoe but, I don't own a pair so you got me on that one. Do you think we are a bunch of cavemen because we drive a "rumbling" V-8? Seems kind of condecending to me.

Hollywood_North GT

I drive a rumbling V8 and own all kinds of brands of shoes. My intention was to make fun of the erudite undertones of Rhumb's post. If you couldn't discern that, well, it ain't my responsibility how you take things that aren't directed at you. It isn't all about YOU, you know.

On the other hand, if you feel you've been somehow singled out personally, well, if the shoe fits...

JETSOLVER

There are some calibrated leaks here http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums...opic=8522&st=0
One needs a bit of skill to separate out the chaff from the kernel, but we are getting an idea of the possibilities.

Boomer

The last post mentions the 5.8 as what is supposed to go into the 'BOSS'

I could see the GT500/Snake getting the 6.2 and the BOSS getting the 5.8
Wondering if at that point the 4.6 3v still stays in the GT or does a 5.4 rear its head.

V10

What kernel. All I could see there was chaff.

68 fastback

116mm bore spacing (the old 427FE was about 115mm) -- says to me we can have Boass 429 that still nicely oversquare ...nice kernel, no?

.

V10

That really doesn't look official to me.
116mm sounds reasonable, but even if that post is for real, it doesn't look like a planned leak to me.

And BTW, all FE's had the same bore spacing of 4.63" or 117.6 mm