6 litre Pushrod Motor...Anyone ????

[CAMS290]

I have heard rumour that Ford in the good 'ol US of A, are talking about discontinuing the 5.4 litre motor, and are currently evaluating the possibility of making a 6 litre pushrod motor, for their range of light commercial, suv's and passenger car ranges.

Will the whole Modular range be axed ?

If the 5.4 motor is discontinued, where will it leave Ford in Australia ?

If it is true, the pushrod motor would be a lot cheaper to produce than the 3 valve and the quad cam, it would be easier to fit to cars, due to smaller heads.

It certainly would be keeping with the trend that GM and Chrysler/Dodge have set.

What are your thoughts ?

[5speedeb]

sounds like a good idea

injected 6litre in a falcon sounds really good actually id get one for sure

[SSBUB]

Would be interested to see the reaction of the FF crew on this one.
I welcome it, but im driving a pushrod at the moment so im not the best person to ask. :monkes:

[T3rminator]

For V8s I think its better to keep it simple stupid.
Big donk...air in air out.... :sm_headba


Having owned a soarer with 4L quad cam V8 and now the 5.4L BOSS quad cam V8.....I don't think it lives up to all that it's suppose to be. They seem to be very sensitive to things like heat, exhaust backpressure etc. It might win the bragging rights for KW/L, but it just doesn't drive like a V8.

[rodderz]

Originally Posted by fullthrottle

For V8s I think its better to keep it simple stupid.
Big donk...air in air out.... :sm_headba


Having owned a soarer with 4L quad cam V8 and now the 5.4L BOSS quad cam V8.....I don't think it lives up to all that it's suppose to be. They seem to be very sensitive to things like heat, exhaust backpressure etc. It might win the bragging rights for KW/L, but it just doesn't drive like a V8.

Thats it in a nutshell isnt it...we have had our OHC/multi valve vs pushrod arguments but put simply a motor is just a big air pump, and as long as it goes, sounds and performs well it's a good thing

[Psycho Chicken]

I can't see Ford dropping the Mod for a pushrod jobbie. I'm sure if the 5.4 option was gone in the states we'd just start making our own parts ala Clevo, or they would run up a bit of stock for us ala EFI Wheezer.

[5speedeb]

well if they ever decide to bring this 6litre it really give the gen4 a real run for its money
will make things very interesting the power wars that ford/holden are having now

[gtfpv]

mmmm so all of a sudden the BOSS 5.4 ISNT competitive hey . things change quick around here.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

mmmm so all of a sudden the BOSS 5.4 ISNT competitive hey . things change quick around here.

Funny how people were bagging Holden still using the pushrod motor and Ford is moving towards newer technology, now its a great move.

I'm pretty sure the 3v is going to get dropped ny Ford Oz and the FPV sereies will be getting quicker motors to give the gen 4 and the F6 real competition (on the rumor mill at Ford).

[XCGS351]

All alloy Cleveland, now that would be nice.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Funny how people were bagging Holden still using the pushrod motor and Ford is moving towards newer technology, now its a great move.

I'm pretty sure the 3v is going to get dropped ny Ford Oz and the FPV sereies will be getting quicker motors to give the gen 4 and the F6 real competition (on the rumor mill at Ford).

WHAT CAN I SAY ISN'T THE MODULATED BOSS 5.4 supposed to have all this unleashed power. why would they change the engine other than cost.???? nothing wrong with pushrods that would be my choice but quad overhead cams have to be better, and allow so many differant states of tune due to camm shafts.
if they want a better simpler engine . they will have to change BORE/STROKE. tried and proven dinasour method. but i would stick with the boss 5.4 otherwise it would be deemed a major engineering error by ford . and i do think staying with those heads and camms are the go .

[xr8ute]

Originally Posted by fullthrottle

Big donk...air in air out.... :sm_headba

LMAO!!! Very well said

Who gives a ferk what technology they use to do it. Just give it big grunt, a wide/fat power curve, and the most compact package possible...

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by xr8ute

LMAO!!! Very well said

Who gives a ferk what technology they use to do it. Just give it big grunt, a wide/fat power curve, and the most compact package possible...

well doesnt the 290 already have that 290kw 520nms. holdens new 6 litre 260kw 510nms . or 297 530nms. and according to aftermarket manufacturers bmc filters give 8 RWKWS extra. which takes the 5.4 too 300kws. and the dyno shows consistancy on the boss engines and higher figures than the 6 litre hsv engine. shall i go on.

[ebxr8240]

They are using the 3v there on the F series..
It would also cost mega setting up another polluion motor..
They also have the v10 there also...
Along with International diesels...

[xr8ute]

In standard form, its certainly got big grunt.

I can't speak for how wide that powerband is, except the anecdotal evidence from "edited" BA V8's making much more power down low.

It's hardly in a compact package though. Its big, wide, heavy, and in the worst possible location with respect to weight distribution i.e. at the top.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by xr8ute

In standard form, its certainly got big grunt.

I can't speak for how wide that powerband is, except the anecdotal evidence from "edited" BA V8's making much more power down low.

It's hardly in a compact package though. Its big, wide, heavy, and in the worst possible location with respect to weight distribution i.e. at the top.

ahhhhh !!!!!! fair enough . no arguement thier . (other than looks)

[JPFS1]

if these new blocks aren't alreay in development and in cars, then it won't happen here until AFTER the all new falcon. Frontal crash is basically done on it, so changing engines now wouldn't be possible. You just need to look at what Ford (globally) have got available to them and this is what we'll get.

[Grechie]

why do they want to go back to the dinosaur technology?

[AUIII XR8 MAN]

I sure if Ford US did drop the 5.4lt, there would be enough left over to keep us going for years to come. It does matter what size it is a long as it performs goods & can hull but over the dark side thats all that matters.

[CAMS290]

I think the major factor in Ford's decision would be cost at actually building the quad cam motors, and even the 3 valve motors, compared to a pushrod motor.

[danv8]

Originally Posted by Grechie

why do they want to go back to the dinosaur technology?

Its no more dinosaur than the Boss V8's,
Only difference is that it has a central located cam than cams located on each cylinder head which is hardly break through technology itself.

[MrSparkle]

I'd like to see it happen for one reason alone - to see what FPV's marketing monkeys could come up with to promote it!!!!!!! :

[merlin]

I'd like to see them stick with what is seen as "better technology". Don't get me wrong I agree that pushrod V8's do just a good a job (better in some applications) but is is percieved as "dinosaur technology" by a lot of people.

Ford want to be seen as innovators not going backwards - the motoring scribes would give them a pounding.

If you ever read ricer forums they laugh (wrongly) at the Holden V8 calling it old tech rubbish ect. - this is just their perception but remember these young ricers grow up into cashed up 30 soemthings who become the target buyers in years to come. Ford want to be seen as the local Aussie company with leading technology when that time comes - you should already see the reaction of the youth today who love Skylines/Sylvia's ect and who hated Ford/Holden - the F6 hits the market and they think it is the ducks guts. They seem to love forced induction, next step would be for Ford to offer a TT V8 on the Boss (supercharger is seen as old tech as well).

[Paxton]

The 4v engine doesn't have VCT in it yet does it? Lets wait until Ford/FPV give it this, and start to work more power through the engine, before calling it "a spent force".

The Boss will be a around a while yet, but work to make it lighter, and more work will be done on getting power out of it. It will be competitive.

[ltd]

Wouldn't happen. Cost of making new moulds $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Losing their enviro friendly appeal $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Losing their trust in the marketplace after telling everyone ohc was better than pushrod $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Keeping on and developing an already proven stable engine Priceless.

[4Vman]

I cant possibly see Ford ever going backwards in technology.
EVERY serious high performance motor uses OHC technology.
If you look @ KW/L of displacement the OHC technology is better than Pushrod for the same displacement look @ F1 or motorbike engines?.
The 5.4 boss 290 in 6L form would make approx 322KW without any mods compared to the Holden 6L pushrod @ 297KW....
Come on guys, get with the times...

[HSE2]

I can especially, when 13 plants and 30 odd thousand workers are on the chopping blocks and suppliers are being cut from the 2000 thousand level to about 600-700. The times; they are a changing.

I suspect the FPV marketing of such an event will be along the same line as the Cast Iron block theory. "Opps we were wrong, really what we meant to say was..........."

Seriously if the LS2 and the Boss were in the same product and consumers had a choice, based on feeling alone I can't see too many people picking technology as it just doesn't come off as being successful when driven back to back.

Its not technology for technologies sake that’s the argument, its how it has been tuned for the market it competes in. What we read here is pretty much the Ford guys backing the Ford product and the Holden guys doing like wise while the entire argument is pointless having very little merit to how each product gets the job done. Holden’s pushrod is fuel efficient, package friendly and certainly gets the job done in nearly every application that it is utilised in.

I would be very surprised if that smile we rate so highly (respectively) had much of a clue as to valve actuation while it’s forming.

The LS1 was, for my money, not a very good V8. Worked only in a limited rev range much of it being too high and certainly not what many traditional buyers were looking for. Holden, by design or not, addressed the situation through capacity. Now we can sit here and argue the merits and effectiveness of such a process until the cows come home but the results speak for themselves through the driving experience.

The Boss through its technology has a limited rev range that isn't as high as it needs to be given the way it produces its numbers and doesn't come across as having the torque response something of its capacity should have. When faced with the prospect of making the engine 06 emission compliant there would appear to be nothing designated in way of improved drivability, something many owners / reviewers have been crying out for since its inception. Its no wonder the average punter thinks that in 3 years of existence this is as good as this technology gets. In the mean time, us, the Ford enthusiast rush to the defense with proclamations of drive line protection, it’s not really the engine. It simply looks too hard to get improvement, while all the while FPV wonder why owners are going the route of under drives. If you have a consumable product and you want to know how it can be improved, one need look no further then the aftermarket.

Good thing we have the benefit of technology through the internet to set the record straight. Me, for once I would just like to see a product that if it is meant to be performance it is recognized as being such while having no excuses in sight. If that means push rods then so be it. It doesn’t mean the technology is wrong, just that the application it was being applied to with in budgetary constraints knackered it.

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by HSE2

I can especially, when 13 plants and 30 odd thousand workers are on the chopping blocks and suppliers are being cut from the 2000 thousand level to about 600-700. The times; they are a changing.

I suspect the FPV marketing of such an event will be along the same line as the Cast Iron block theory. "Opps we were wrong, really what we meant to say was..........."

Seriously if the LS2 and the Boss were in the same product and consumers had a choice, based on feeling alone I can't see too many people picking technology as it just doesn't come off as being successful when driven back to back.

Its not technology for technologies sake that’s the argument, its how it has been tuned for the market it competes in. What we read here is pretty much the Ford guys backing the Ford product and the Holden guys doing like wise while the entire argument is pointless having very little merit to how each product gets the job done. Holden’s pushrod is fuel efficient, package friendly and certainly gets the job done in nearly every application that it is utilised in.

I would be very surprised if that smile we rate so highly (respectively) had much of a clue as to valve actuation while it’s forming.

The LS1 was, for my money, not a very good V8. Worked only in a limited rev range much of it being too high and certainly not what many traditional buyers were looking for. Holden, by design or not, addressed the situation through capacity. Now we can sit here and argue the merits and effectiveness of such a process until the cows come home but the results speak for themselves through the driving experience.

The Boss through its technology has a limited rev range that isn't as high as it needs to be given the way it produces its numbers and doesn't come across as having the torque response something of its capacity should have. When faced with the prospect of making the engine 06 emission compliant there would appear to be nothing designated in way of improved drivability, something many owners / reviewers have been crying out for since its inception. Its no wonder the average punter thinks that in 3 years of existence this is as good as this technology gets. In the mean time, us, the Ford enthusiast rush to the defense with proclamations of drive line protection, it’s not really the engine. It simply looks too hard to get improvement, while all the while FPV wonder why owners are going the route of under drives. If you have a consumable product and you want to know how it can be improved, one need look no further then the aftermarket.

Good thing we have the benefit of technology through the internet to set the record straight. Me, for once I would just like to see a product that if it is meant to be performance it is recognized as being such while having no excuses in sight. If that means push rods then so be it. It doesn’t mean the technology is wrong, just that the application it was being applied to with in budgetary constraints knackered it.

Very well said Ian.

[Abacus]

In short, what's needed to reconcile all these points of view is a 7 litre Boss....

[gmhdriver]

Originally Posted by Grechie

why do they want to go back to the dinosaur technology?

Sigh... _ Some people really need to get their facts straight. DOHC has been around for just as long as pushrods.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_overhead_cam