I would put a 351 Windsor engine in it instead of the Rube Goldberg take up all your engine compartment with wacky chains and expensive heavy valvetrains that don't achieve very much at all engines that Ford is putting into the cars now. Pushrods are simple, cheap, and easy. That engine would easily match the power output (what 320hp?) of the much physically larger and complex engine that will actually go into the car.

I know it's not ever going to happen, and people will say that modular is (was) the future but look what Chevy has done with its pushrod engines. Ford went the wrong way and will never backpedal or admit it.

That engine (or a technologically revamped counterpart) and a six-speed transmission and I would buy one tomorrow with cash.

Edit:
Here is a picture to drive home the point (the 351 is not much larger than the 302 shown - which one do you think weighs more, is more complex to build, maintain, and work on, more likely to bust your knucles trying ?)

 

351 Windsor? How about an aluminum version of the 4bbl 351 Cleveland, now THERE was a motor!

As for (D)OHC motors vs. OHC, well, there's a trillion engineering variables in action here, but each can have significant advantages over the other.

For the multivalve OHC motors:
+ more potential breathing ability
+ faster valve actuation
+ better thermodynamic efficiency
+ greater rev range
+ abilty to vary cam phasing
- weight
- size
- complexity

OHV:
+ tighter packaging
+ lighter
+ simpler
- heavier valves
- more restrictive ports (pushrod clearance)
- smaller rev range

An OHC motor, in very general terms, probably has the greater power and efficiency potential for a given displacement.

An OHV motor, while perhaps not as theoretically as capable of Nth degree power, can be more than powerful enough (to wit, GM's LS7) and, given its smaller size and less weight, can use larger displacement to equal the power of an OHC motor of similar package size and weight.

In any case, I'd be happy with any well designed performance motor.

 

I would think the possibility of bringing back other engines not in present applications is non existent. The 2K Cobra R 5.4 or a 32v 4.6 variation I thought was the best we could hope for.

 

I'll actually agree with you there, but respond with a question. Why should we care about the displacement of an engine?

Isn't the amount of power that is extracted from an engine of a given size and/or weight really what is important as opposed to its displacement?

That is, if you can manage to get 500 horsepower out of 4 reciprocating Chef Boyardee Spaghetti cans at 2.0 liters total displacement, but it takes a set of heads and other valvetrain components that are so big and heavy that the engine barely fits in an engine bay and the car understeers like a fat pig, is displacement really the number that anyone should worry about?

A 4.6 mod motor (4 cam or 2 cam) with all of its valve gear is physically larger and heavier than an old 351 (and probably a 428 or 460 for that matter) made out of the same material. So for the same space you can have 4.6 liters or 5.7 (or 7.0+ in the case of the old FE motors). You can guess which one has more power and is faster on a drag strip or a road course.

 

Yeah, but the thread title didn't mention that it had to be politically doable at Ford.

There are plenty of Ford engineers that would agree with me off the record. The money spent on the mod engine program could have been spent on much more productive avenues.

 

highland green
no plastic add ons(ie spoiler, shelby gt side scoops)
c/s front bumper with no fog lights
original gt500 show car hood
new clean rocker panels
5.4 aluminum block n/a w/ about 380hp
3.90 gears with limited slip and 31 spline set up
hurst short throw shifter
gt500 brakes
tuned suspension with adjustable panhard bar(ride similar to 01 bullitt)
big h pipe with frpp mufflers
36k msrp price tag!

 

Colors: Dark Highland Green, Dark Vista Blue, Tungsten, Black

Engine: 4.6 4v 335-350 hp/ 4.6 3v S/C - 420 hp

Transmission: Stock T-5 with 3:73:1 Gear Ratio/5spd Auto with 3:55:1 Ratio

Exterior: No Pony, No Fogs, flat black grille with small 'egg crate' design, unique fascia, pony badges, BULLITT faux gas cap

Interior: Black Leather with body color tubing, chrome shift ****, black IUP, Unique Gauges

 

T-5?

 

+1 Yes, even my Chevy friends respected the 351C !!!

 

I'll take from the showroom as is, maybe get rid of the fugly rims (they look nice polished or chromed but stupid as he11 when painted with just the rim edge polished IMHO), put an MGW shifter in and a Bama Chips tune...










AND THEN DRIVE IT LIKE I STOLE IT!

 

Just so you know the 05's 3v engine is lighter then the gm LS engines.

 

Dark Highland Green only
No bullitt markings or GT markings of any kind on the car.
Basially looks the same as Mustang GT minus the fog lights and is DHG.
Black only interior (same as mustang GT)
no spoiler of any kind.
Complete 07/08 Shelby GT500 drivetrain under the hood.

Yeah, that would be awesome

 

Show me.

I'm not talking about just the block. I'm talking about the whole engine ready to run with heads, sans flyweel. (I don't think the flywheel should be included because it is usually heavier depending on the power/torque of the engine and how much the factory wants to risk people breaking them)

This is all that I can find - most specs don't include engine weights.
http://www.vorshlag.com/tech_weights.asp
and
http://www.vorshlag.com/pictures/LS1_weight.jpg (weight includes the flywheel)

That indicates a difference in block weight of 16-18 pounds (the Ford being lighter) toss on the heads that goes the other way...not to mention the differences in power output. The Ford has to have forced induction to do what the LSx does naturally aspirated. That's an extra 15 - 25 pounds added to the Ford for a supercharger.

Note that the 302 and 351W listed are iron blocks not aluminum ones.

You can see the relative weights of the heads a little lower on the page. A single DOHC for a 4.6 weighs 60 pounds versus 31 for an aluminum OHV head. (That is a 4V head and not a 3V.)

(I'm not a Chevy guy. I've never owned anything except a Ford, but I'm not a fanboy to the extent that I'll blindly support something just because it is a Ford. I just hate that Chevy makes the engine I always wanted Ford to make.)

 

Hah, traitor!

Y'know on my last "this is how I'd do a bullitt post, I decided against mentioning using a 5.4 for fear of the litany of posters that would [censored] about how pig heavy a iron block 5.4 would be (nevermind that a 3v 5.4 is probably a good 150-200 pounds lighter than the S/C'd GT500 motor).

anyways, if I were to do the Bullitt

1. I agree with a low key appearence; Bullitt only colors, V6 front end with maybe some kind of hood featuring the faux extractors echoing the 67-68 mustangs, painted Bullitt wheels with a bright finished barrel (not polished or chromed), no trunk adornment, and the dual exhuast bumper with Bullitt only tips.

2. 3v 5.4 featuring the CNC'd heads, special Bullitt intake modelled after the FR500C 5.0 Intake, lsightly bigger cams and a revised tune with a Bullitt specific set of mufflers.

3. 6 speed trans mission from the GT500 combined with the planned for 3.73 rear gears - maybe consider a driveshaft with less mass, maybe still a two piece unit, but much lighter.

4. Unique to Bullitt suspenison (a trademark of the 1st car), slightly lower with more neutral handling, but not at the expense of a harsh ride. Tires should be the front units from the GT500 as well - P255/45R18's

5. GT 500 Brakes with body color calipers

6. Unique to Bullitt interior with bright trim and a variation if UIP just for Bullitt along with seats designed to hold the occupants better.

 

The dressed engine weight for an LSx motor is about 440 pounds

the 3v 4.6 is 420 pounds dressed (courtesy of FRPP catalogue http://www.fordracingparts.com/downl...gs/2007-pp.pdf page 69)


Y'know interestingly a 5.0 HO motor was about 525 pounds dressed.


In the everyday world, displacement is very important, it is really the secret to GM's LS motors success (well that and killer cylinderheads), but when your talking a mass produced, emmissions legal engine, they are all nearly making the same amount of torque/liter (cylinde pressure), just adjusting in the powerband where it comes into play. As for the 3v 4.6, it is capable of nearly 500 hp (highly tuned and not street legal, but the airflow is there)


Well that depends, if your a hotrodder, then yeah the physical dimensions and weight vs. power produced are important, when your talking OE, and they can design the car around the engine, does it really matter? Ford didn't design the current Mustang for windsor engines, nor big block Boss motors (although they will fit if your inclined to put a nice big motor in there - fore/aft dimensions might be a bit tight, but width would be no problem). They designed it to fit the Mod motors and possibly the new Boss motors, ergo a moot point.

Finally, Ford 4.6 = 300hp/320 ft/lbs - GM 5.3 = 300hp/325 ft/lbs. (which coincidentally is the same hp/liter the old 2v PI motors produced).

 

That is a cast iron block - compare an aluminum 302. If your response is that they never put one in a Mustang my reply is - precisely. They should have (or a 351) instead of going down the path they did.

You missed my point. Displacement matters I agree. It matters a lot. That is why you should use the available space in the engine compartment for more displacement - not gigantic heads that don't work as well as Ford thought they would (so Ford has to use a supercharger to make big HP numbers). My comment was made in response to rhumb stating that for a given displacement a OHC motor is capable of making more HP than an OHC engine. That is true, but my point is why do we care that Ford is able to squeeze 305 HP out of a 4.6 that takes up the whole engine compartment if a comparably sized pushrod engine which would be 7 or so liters could easily make 500+ HP. My point was that comparing OHV vs. OHC on the basis of how much power they make compared to their packaging makes more sense than comparing displacement.
Not really moot. You just changed the topic of contention. There should have never been a mod motor for them to design around. Regardless, a 351W would certainly fit, and I know A LOT of people that would much rather have that engine in a new Mustang than the 4.6L. That is admittedly moot since Ford will never do it, but again the thread topic is about us dreaming.
If you don't have tools or work on your own car then sure ... I guess you just take what the factory gives you, live with it, and pay someone else to deal with the headache - or just sell it before the warranty expires.
As mentioned above - I don't think HP per liter is a good measuring stick for comparing OHV v. OHC when one takes up way more space than the other that could instead be used for additional displacement
But since you mentioned it - it looks like GM is getting the same HP/liter as Ford (66.6 for Chevy LS2 6.0 versus 65 for the 4.6L 3v) So GM is making the same HP/liter using a simpler engine design (easier to work on, less things to break) that takes up less room in the engine compartment (easier to work on and do things like install headers, superchargers, etc.)
BTW - It is a widely accepted fact that the "old PI motors" were underrated from the factory (the HP rating system has changed since then as well). Why did you pick a PI instead of a CJ (mostly same engine different intake)?
Like I said ... I'm no Chevy fan. I just think they are beating Ford in this particular area.

 

The mod motor heads work very well actually, its the bore spacing that tunred the mod motor from hero to zero in the eyes of most. IIRC, a set of 4v heads will pick up about 20 to 30 cfm in flow, just going from a 3.550 to 3.700 bore. Had the mod motor not been hobbled by the need to fit in a FWD application, things probably would have been very different in 2v/3v/4v form. Ford used an SC not because of breathing limitations, but displacement limitations.

As for Hp/liter or Tq/Liter, its really the only useful yardstick when comparing engines. "Power Density" (power produced for a given dimension) is meaningless unless your selecting a V8 to go in that Lotus Elise chassis sitting in your garage.

Methinks "power density" was invented by LSx proponents for the express purpose of beating up on the mod motor (especially after the terminator mustangs arrived). Had they been capable of the same displacements and power output they would have probably invented something like "parts count/power ratio" or "dollar/power ratio" or some other equally useless measure of a engine's capability to perform.

Anyways, I can't help but argue over the mod motor (and I used to part of the fire & pitchfork crowd when the mod motor came out, 215 hp in a frigg'n Mustang, somebody has got to pay!), people give it an undeservedly bad rap, all due to an extra 2 inches of physical dimension missing from the front of the block.

 

HP/liter is meaningless when comparing across engine configurations where a smaller displacement engine requires large, heavy, and/or complicated parts to increase it's power/liter. As an extreme example, if a hypothetical engine has a bore that is the size of a nickel and a 2 inch stroke, but makes 200 HP ... that engine is going to have a huge HP/liter value. If, however, making that much power from such a small displacement requires a set of heads and variable valve timing gizmos that make the whole engine package the size and weight of a Boss 429 engine, that "impressive" HP/liter number is worthless, and no one should care other than it being an engineering curiosity.

My point is that this is what the mod motors are (to a much less extreme degree.)

HP/engine weight is much more informative.

Okay... I'll stop now We need a beating a dead horse smilie.

 

I'll agree to quit as well ( however I admit I could beat this dead horse till I split its dead horse atoms )