Fords new alloy 5.4 engine
10-18-2003, 06:51 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
You are just the kind of person that embarrasses us in the automotive world. Do you ever read any automotive publications? (even have a subscription to an automotive magazine?) Know anything about the high performance aftermarket industry? Ever go to a car race? Car show? Build a hot rod? Do you even change your own oil in your own car? I doubt that you are even a car enthusiast! In short, I think you are someone who would be just as comfortable designing vacuum cleaners as automotive engines if the right job came along.
Don't give me this crap that you really care about the automotive performance industry. You must really be proud of yourself, turning that truck engine into a sports car engine!
You will never convince anyone in the automotive world that you fools are car enthusiasts, not with the 5.4L engine, thats for sure. You should be ashamed of yourself and all of the pompous fools that work for Ford.
Why don't you get going now, the cat show or flower show is starting and you don't want to miss any of it (every one knows you would never attend a car or boat show!)!
Dennis Moore
Don't give me this crap that you really care about the automotive performance industry. You must really be proud of yourself, turning that truck engine into a sports car engine!
You will never convince anyone in the automotive world that you fools are car enthusiasts, not with the 5.4L engine, thats for sure. You should be ashamed of yourself and all of the pompous fools that work for Ford.
Why don't you get going now, the cat show or flower show is starting and you don't want to miss any of it (every one knows you would never attend a car or boat show!)!
Dennis Moore
10-18-2003, 07:33 PM
#12
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fresno, CA, 93722, USA
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
I'd have to say that the GT40 engine is an incredible piece, 500HP on pump gas and I guarantee you that is a conservative rating. Those that have driven the GT40 cannot rave enough about the power.
Along with Mercedes, Ford has seen the huge advantages of the screw compressor and I'm mighty proud to say that its the same 2.3L compressor we offer in our 500HP, 496, 454/502, etc. SC kits. Were currently developing our SC system for the 3V and 2V 5.4 and once again, I'm impressed. Especially with the 3V package, while meeting SULEV emission standards and still producing 475hp, that's pretty amazing. If you want to see them, just go to Fords booth at SEMA.
I'm impressed with the new versions of the 5.4L.
Dustin
Along with Mercedes, Ford has seen the huge advantages of the screw compressor and I'm mighty proud to say that its the same 2.3L compressor we offer in our 500HP, 496, 454/502, etc. SC kits. Were currently developing our SC system for the 3V and 2V 5.4 and once again, I'm impressed. Especially with the 3V package, while meeting SULEV emission standards and still producing 475hp, that's pretty amazing. If you want to see them, just go to Fords booth at SEMA.
I'm impressed with the new versions of the 5.4L.
Dustin
10-19-2003, 07:39 AM
#13
Charter Member
Charter Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lake Orion, MI. USA
Posts: 1,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stock 500 HP NA engine
or
Stock 500HP supercharged engine
I would choose the NA in a boat every time. While SC has come along way, to me it makes common sense to keep things simpler.
I think it's good Ford and Chrysler are getting into the Marine industry, With added competition it can only benefit the consumer in the long run.
or
Stock 500HP supercharged engine
I would choose the NA in a boat every time. While SC has come along way, to me it makes common sense to keep things simpler.
I think it's good Ford and Chrysler are getting into the Marine industry, With added competition it can only benefit the consumer in the long run.
__________________
Ray
Ray
10-19-2003, 09:55 AM
#14
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Continental,United States
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree that anyone can band aid a poorly designed engine by throwing a supercharger on it. Look what a BBC or SBC does with a supercharger on it. I don't think that that 5.4 is anything to be jumping up and down about. Lee seems to be proud of his work, but wouldn't you expect that since he spent several thousand hours to make supercharged 500 hp emission legal hp, out of a 340 cubic inch motor. Look at the bore and stroke combos from around the world and see how many of the other engineers agree with you Lee. Admit that you were handed a project to build within constraints to make existing Ford products work, and you did the best you could. Certainly don't try and feed us the line of crap that if you started form scratch this is where you would have gone, or maybe you would have, who knows. Look around at the best of the best, and take some tips from people who know high performance. Maybe you can talk some of the Ford nascar teams into switching over to this bore and stroke combination, maybe even add some more stroke, that would be awesome.
10-19-2003, 09:58 AM
#15
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: st. clair shores mi ,us
Posts: 1,620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dennis Moore
You are just the kind of person that embarrasses us in the automotive world. Do you ever read any automotive publications? (even have a subscription to an automotive magazine?) Know anything about the high performance aftermarket industry? Ever go to a car race? Car show? Build a hot rod? Do you even change your own oil in your own car? I doubt that you are even a car enthusiast! In short, I think you are someone who would be just as comfortable designing vacuum cleaners as automotive engines if the right job came along.
Don't give me this crap that you really care about the automotive performance industry. You must really be proud of yourself, turning that truck engine into a sports car engine!
You will never convince anyone in the automotive world that you fools are car enthusiasts, not with the 5.4L engine, thats for sure. You should be ashamed of yourself and all of the pompous fools that work for Ford.
Why don't you get going now, the cat show or flower show is starting and you don't want to miss any of it (every one knows you would never attend a car or boat show!)!
Dennis Moore
You are just the kind of person that embarrasses us in the automotive world. Do you ever read any automotive publications? (even have a subscription to an automotive magazine?) Know anything about the high performance aftermarket industry? Ever go to a car race? Car show? Build a hot rod? Do you even change your own oil in your own car? I doubt that you are even a car enthusiast! In short, I think you are someone who would be just as comfortable designing vacuum cleaners as automotive engines if the right job came along.
Don't give me this crap that you really care about the automotive performance industry. You must really be proud of yourself, turning that truck engine into a sports car engine!
You will never convince anyone in the automotive world that you fools are car enthusiasts, not with the 5.4L engine, thats for sure. You should be ashamed of yourself and all of the pompous fools that work for Ford.
Why don't you get going now, the cat show or flower show is starting and you don't want to miss any of it (every one knows you would never attend a car or boat show!)!
Dennis Moore
Pretty unproffesional of you. I've watched some of your posts and replied to a few and have come to the conclusion that the only advice you give is what you have learned from other people or read not real world expierence.
Keep up the good work and watch that book circulation go up
Last edited by 26scarab; 10-19-2003 at 10:05 AM.
10-19-2003, 10:56 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Who exactly do you think that you are?
Dennis Moore,
As time has passed I have watched you dispense mediocre (and sometimes entirely inaccurate) advice based upon your "expertise" and have I chosen to step away, as your comments more often then not demonstrate your own technical inexperience (and possible ignorance). Occasionally, I have read your answers to peoples questions where you completely contradict the advice you gave only a week before - often to the point that I wonder if you might not be better of signing your posts "Sybil".
When people have remarked on your technical inaccuracies with specific and "on point" comments, rather than concur, or even reply, you fade away without remark, rebuttal, or apology. As a "journalist" and a "master technician" I would assume that you would be either (a) be sure of your information before going on the record as a source of fact or (b) in the interest of helping answer the technical questions posted in this forum, be willing to admit that you were wrong.
I have watched you slam the engineering of excellent products because...honestly, to this day I do not know why. Your issues with Mercury Racing aside, your apparent disdain for almost any American built product is absurd and, all to often, is contradictory in itself.
Last month, you posted a scathing diatribe regarding Mercury Racings "old technology" (big inches, low rpm, big camshaft, too few valves) and remarked how you wished they would keep up with the Japanese/European engineers. Today, you complain that the Ford powerplant is antiquated and of poor design for the opposite reasons. I have begun to doubt that anything would satisfy you that did not come out of a box shipped from Germany or Japan.
Sorry for the rant, I am just fed up with so called experts or professionals who act like anything but while providing inaccurate advice to those who seek answers. To further act as a knowledgeable engineering source capable of providing usefule criticism is annoying. The fact that it is all done to increase book sales is ridiculous.
Heaven help the poor bastards that send you the twenty bucks in the hope that you can help them.
As time has passed I have watched you dispense mediocre (and sometimes entirely inaccurate) advice based upon your "expertise" and have I chosen to step away, as your comments more often then not demonstrate your own technical inexperience (and possible ignorance). Occasionally, I have read your answers to peoples questions where you completely contradict the advice you gave only a week before - often to the point that I wonder if you might not be better of signing your posts "Sybil".
When people have remarked on your technical inaccuracies with specific and "on point" comments, rather than concur, or even reply, you fade away without remark, rebuttal, or apology. As a "journalist" and a "master technician" I would assume that you would be either (a) be sure of your information before going on the record as a source of fact or (b) in the interest of helping answer the technical questions posted in this forum, be willing to admit that you were wrong.
I have watched you slam the engineering of excellent products because...honestly, to this day I do not know why. Your issues with Mercury Racing aside, your apparent disdain for almost any American built product is absurd and, all to often, is contradictory in itself.
Last month, you posted a scathing diatribe regarding Mercury Racings "old technology" (big inches, low rpm, big camshaft, too few valves) and remarked how you wished they would keep up with the Japanese/European engineers. Today, you complain that the Ford powerplant is antiquated and of poor design for the opposite reasons. I have begun to doubt that anything would satisfy you that did not come out of a box shipped from Germany or Japan.
Sorry for the rant, I am just fed up with so called experts or professionals who act like anything but while providing inaccurate advice to those who seek answers. To further act as a knowledgeable engineering source capable of providing usefule criticism is annoying. The fact that it is all done to increase book sales is ridiculous.
Heaven help the poor bastards that send you the twenty bucks in the hope that you can help them.
10-19-2003, 11:53 AM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've been a mechanic in the marine industry since 1972. Thirty years of working on boats and building Chevy engines. What is it that you do 40-50 hours a week? Sell life insurance? Medical supply's? I will put my practical experiences and professional training up next to anyones for comparison, especially the expertise of a weekend pleasure boater.
I have been reading press reports and advertising coming from these companies for as long as I can remember. In this day of powerful advertising and Japanese and European domination of the automotive performance world I find it pretty sad that people are still so fooled by everything the Ford Motor Company feeds to the media.
Ford needed an engine for the GT40 for their 100 year celebration and the only thing remotely resembling a world class sports car engine was the 5.4L truck engine.
500 horsepower for a world class sports car (double overhead cams and four valves per cylinder) should have been attained with a naturally aspirated engine. The Corvette LS6 small block 5.7 L engine with pushrods and two valves per cylinder makes 405 horsepower naturally aspirated. The Viper is a pushrod engine, NA and makes 500 horsepower!
Dislike Ford or Mercruiser? Not really, but I do question just about everything they do! Any American citizen that wants to get the leadership of technology back into the hands of the American automotive and marine industry should question the expertise of domestic engineering. They need to be held accountable for their own designs and motives!
Complaining that the bean counters are holding them back is getting pretty lame! The bean counters didn't make them design an engine with only a 3.937 bore spacing so the engine couldn't be expanded past a 3.54 bore! The bean counters didn't make them design an engine with a 10.078 deck height making the engine one of the largest (in outside dimensions) of all V8 engines ever built (and it is only 330 cubic inches)! That is poor planning and poor engineering!
Don't be bull****ted by Ford, the 5.4L engine passes extreme durability tests because it was designed as a truck engine, not as a performance engine! Lets install a supercharger on another brand of world class sports car and see the GT 40 race against it! Then we will see how good the 5.4L truck engine is!
Dennis Moore
I have been reading press reports and advertising coming from these companies for as long as I can remember. In this day of powerful advertising and Japanese and European domination of the automotive performance world I find it pretty sad that people are still so fooled by everything the Ford Motor Company feeds to the media.
Ford needed an engine for the GT40 for their 100 year celebration and the only thing remotely resembling a world class sports car engine was the 5.4L truck engine.
500 horsepower for a world class sports car (double overhead cams and four valves per cylinder) should have been attained with a naturally aspirated engine. The Corvette LS6 small block 5.7 L engine with pushrods and two valves per cylinder makes 405 horsepower naturally aspirated. The Viper is a pushrod engine, NA and makes 500 horsepower!
Dislike Ford or Mercruiser? Not really, but I do question just about everything they do! Any American citizen that wants to get the leadership of technology back into the hands of the American automotive and marine industry should question the expertise of domestic engineering. They need to be held accountable for their own designs and motives!
Complaining that the bean counters are holding them back is getting pretty lame! The bean counters didn't make them design an engine with only a 3.937 bore spacing so the engine couldn't be expanded past a 3.54 bore! The bean counters didn't make them design an engine with a 10.078 deck height making the engine one of the largest (in outside dimensions) of all V8 engines ever built (and it is only 330 cubic inches)! That is poor planning and poor engineering!
Don't be bull****ted by Ford, the 5.4L engine passes extreme durability tests because it was designed as a truck engine, not as a performance engine! Lets install a supercharger on another brand of world class sports car and see the GT 40 race against it! Then we will see how good the 5.4L truck engine is!
Dennis Moore
10-19-2003, 03:52 PM
#18
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Wow.
I, for one, am proud that Ford has the balls to make the GT40 and to drop 500 horses in it HOWEVER they decided to do it.
And given the constraints of basing it off of an engine they currently sell, I think the 5.4 is a better choice than the V10. Aside from those 2 motors, name one (that they currently build) that would be a better choice.
Given the target price point ($150k) and timeframe, I seriously doubt that they could have gone to a "ground up" engine design for the car - certifications and tooling and emissions testing and scads of other crap involved in a powertrain getting a DOT stamp of approval and all...
Should they be running a short stroke quadcam V12? No. The GT40 of "old" ran engines based on production engines and the "new" GT40 is entrenched in following the key points of the original. V8 was a MUST. 500 horsepower was the target. Easy to reach with a tweaked 5.4 and a screwcharger. To me it's a no-brainer.
An argument was made that they should not have based this motor on an outdated production layout. Would it have made more sense, then, to base it on a Windsor motor? Or maybe an FE? Not hardly.
Is this car a showcase for the latest engine technology? Only in the drivel we see printed in Ford propaganda on it. Any motorhead with sense knows that it is a 5.4 with a blower. No more no less.
The car is expected to run with Vettes and Vipers. Preliminary reports says that it will (maybe not on an 1/8 mile drag, but in a general street race it's supposed to rock).
Something to BRAG about? 5.4 liters, blower, 500hp, 500 ftpounds of torque? Mercedes brags about it. A lot.
Their AMG S55/SL55/CL55 Kompressor motor is 5.5 liters. Screw supercharger. 3 Valves per cylinder. 500hp. 500 ft lbs of torque. They brag about them quite extensively. (I am mighty fond of them, too).
Ford doing the same thing to their production motor sounds fine to me. I don't know why it is making Dennis so angry.
If Ford was to go from the ground up with a special powerplant aiming at 500hp and 500 ft pounds of torque, what foundation would one expect them to use? 500 ft pounds of torque means either giant cubic inches or soft low speed number unless you drop a pretty little blower on top of it.
Maybe they should have used a hopped up 5 liter copy of a Lexus motor? Other than a more comfortable oversquare bore/stroke ratio and good rod lengths, what's the beef???
Hey, if the cars hold up well, I'd like to be the second owner of one (let somebody else pay the initial depreciation).
Maybe if the 5.4 destroys itself, I can pay Dennis to build me whatever yanks his crank to replace it with.
I, for one, am proud that Ford has the balls to make the GT40 and to drop 500 horses in it HOWEVER they decided to do it.
And given the constraints of basing it off of an engine they currently sell, I think the 5.4 is a better choice than the V10. Aside from those 2 motors, name one (that they currently build) that would be a better choice.
Given the target price point ($150k) and timeframe, I seriously doubt that they could have gone to a "ground up" engine design for the car - certifications and tooling and emissions testing and scads of other crap involved in a powertrain getting a DOT stamp of approval and all...
Should they be running a short stroke quadcam V12? No. The GT40 of "old" ran engines based on production engines and the "new" GT40 is entrenched in following the key points of the original. V8 was a MUST. 500 horsepower was the target. Easy to reach with a tweaked 5.4 and a screwcharger. To me it's a no-brainer.
An argument was made that they should not have based this motor on an outdated production layout. Would it have made more sense, then, to base it on a Windsor motor? Or maybe an FE? Not hardly.
Is this car a showcase for the latest engine technology? Only in the drivel we see printed in Ford propaganda on it. Any motorhead with sense knows that it is a 5.4 with a blower. No more no less.
The car is expected to run with Vettes and Vipers. Preliminary reports says that it will (maybe not on an 1/8 mile drag, but in a general street race it's supposed to rock).
Something to BRAG about? 5.4 liters, blower, 500hp, 500 ftpounds of torque? Mercedes brags about it. A lot.
Their AMG S55/SL55/CL55 Kompressor motor is 5.5 liters. Screw supercharger. 3 Valves per cylinder. 500hp. 500 ft lbs of torque. They brag about them quite extensively. (I am mighty fond of them, too).
Ford doing the same thing to their production motor sounds fine to me. I don't know why it is making Dennis so angry.
If Ford was to go from the ground up with a special powerplant aiming at 500hp and 500 ft pounds of torque, what foundation would one expect them to use? 500 ft pounds of torque means either giant cubic inches or soft low speed number unless you drop a pretty little blower on top of it.
Maybe they should have used a hopped up 5 liter copy of a Lexus motor? Other than a more comfortable oversquare bore/stroke ratio and good rod lengths, what's the beef???
Hey, if the cars hold up well, I'd like to be the second owner of one (let somebody else pay the initial depreciation).
Maybe if the 5.4 destroys itself, I can pay Dennis to build me whatever yanks his crank to replace it with.
10-19-2003, 04:28 PM
#19
Registered
WOW.. And to think, I paid good money for one of Dennis's books. I dont usually buy a$$holes ramblings..
Scott B
BTW Dennis, I do know a couple of the "insurance salesman" you blasted here, and they have forgotten more about engineering than you ever knew. They are just a bit too classy to rub your nose in it..
Scott B
BTW Dennis, I do know a couple of the "insurance salesman" you blasted here, and they have forgotten more about engineering than you ever knew. They are just a bit too classy to rub your nose in it..
Rag's
