A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Hurricane" To Use Pushrods?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 8th 04, 04:31 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Hurricane" To Use Pushrods?

As some of you have probably heard, Ford has an engine under
development coded named Hurricane. There are all kinds of rumors
circulating about the location of the cams -- OHC or OHV -- in this
motor.

Well here's another one:

Per Hemmings:

"Perhaps Lightning [pickup] will return with the
currently-in-development pushrod Hurricane engine, should it come to
fruitation: it too is said to be due around 2009."

SVT has said they wanted to cut the fat from future products. Perhaps
the big cammers with their supercharger plumbing weigh too much. Maybe
a compact, big-displacement, normally-aspirated, pushrod motor is
lighter and cheap to build.

If if happens, it sure will be ironic. Since the 70's it has been less
cubes and more cams... and lately power adders. Now it sounds like
they'll soon be weaning us of the blown cammers and back on to big
cranks and cylinders.

This is all getting just too weird for me... I think it either means
the end of the world is coming, or we've all been casted in a Rod
Sterling Twilight Zone episode...

Patrick
'93 Cobra
'83 LTD

Ads
  #2  
Old December 8th 04, 05:23 AM
Backyard Mechanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wot goes around, comes around.... just got through looking at a page on
porting new aftermarket FE heads...

Nothing wrong with the old basic designs... new alloys and casting
refinements... Imagine an all aluminum FE 427!!!

Then slap a sooopercharger on that thang!


>
> If if happens, it sure will be ironic. Since the 70's it has been less
> cubes and more cams... and lately power adders. Now it sounds like
> they'll soon be weaning us of the blown cammers and back on to big
> cranks and cylinders.
>
> This is all getting just too weird for me... I think it either means
> the end of the world is coming, or we've all been casted in a Rod
> Sterling Twilight Zone episode...
>
> Patrick
> '93 Cobra
> '83 LTD
>
>




--
- Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! -
  #3  
Old December 8th 04, 09:44 AM
Garth Almgren
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Around 12/7/2004 8:23 PM, Backyard Mechanic wrote:

> Wot goes around, comes around.... just got through looking at a page on
> porting new aftermarket FE heads...
>
> Nothing wrong with the old basic designs... new alloys and casting
> refinements... Imagine an all aluminum FE 427!!!


No need to imagine:

http://www.genesis427.com/Alum.htm
http://www.genesis427.com/images/alumblocksm.jpg
http://www.genesis427.com/images/Gen..._Crate_Med.jpg

> Then slap a sooopercharger on that thang!


Heck yeah.

--
/ Garth - '83 GL V6stang Hatch <Former MW #7> \
| My V6stang: http://www.v6stang.com/v6stang |
| RAMFM Merchandise: http://www.cafeshops.com/ramfm |
\ Mail for secure reply information /
  #4  
Old December 8th 04, 06:41 PM
MadDAWG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

about freaking time!

MadDAWG


  #5  
Old December 9th 04, 05:27 AM
Dan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A little more compact, yes. Weight? The FE blocks weigh 650 to 670 lbs
dry in cast iron. If they made this new motor aluminum it'd probably
save about 80 to 100 lbs off those numbers but I'll bet it winds up
close to that if they are going for large displacement. The cast iron
5.4 DOHC weighs 540 lbs and the cast iron 5.4 SOHC weighs 525 lbs. With
a supercharger and intercooler (dry) you'd add about 150 lbs. Make
those aluminum block 5.4's and you've got about the same weight even
with the huffer. The 6.8L Modular V10 weighs in at 640 lbs (cast iron,
I believe). I don't see the weight benefits jumping out at me.

Cheaper to build? Possibly, it will depend on the engineering that goes
into the heads and block. However, the Ford OHV Windsor-based crate
motors that are out there are so inexpensive because there are so many
folks, inlcuding Ford, making and using a ton of them: well over 50
million Windsor/Cleveland 302 and 351's have been built by Ford alone
since 1961. The design and tooling are very well established. Ford only
made something like 6500 of the original FE 427's. If this "Hurricane"
is a brand new design there's no way it'll come in at equivalent
pricing. Where's the tooling for this one at? Australia? I don't see
where the cost is going to improve on this one without most of the
process already existing somewhere.

It'll be interesting to see since they just put a new cammer Modular
motor with larger displacement on the market and it's more than
powerful enough normally aspirated. Certainly another offering would be
a fine thing but it's clear that the fleet companies have already
accepted that they can service cammers as well as pushrod motors. I'd
be interested to see what the long term reliability numbers are on the
cammers versus pushrod motors. It's a given that it takes a little
longer to service the top end of a cammer because of the care that has
to taken in aligning the cams and chains. But it they are doing this
less often, then they may be seeing an actual benefit instead of a
cost.

I dunno. I actually don't care. It's clear the Modular family is here
for a long while so I'll just keep my cammers .
..
Dan
2003 Cobra convertible
With some stuff and things

  #6  
Old December 9th 04, 07:19 AM
Kathy and Erich Coiner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It means that old fossil CobraJet was ahead of his time.

Erich

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> If if happens, it sure will be ironic. Since the 70's it has been less
> cubes and more cams... and lately power adders. Now it sounds like
> they'll soon be weaning us of the blown cammers and back on to big
> cranks and cylinders.
>
> This is all getting just too weird for me... I think it either means
> the end of the world is coming, or we've all been casted in a Rod
> Sterling Twilight Zone episode...
>
> Patrick
> '93 Cobra
> '83 LTD
>



  #7  
Old December 19th 04, 07:21 AM
Imants
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kathy and Erich Coiner" > wrote in message
news:E7Std.1183$lZ6.197@trnddc02...
> It means that old fossil CobraJet was ahead of his time.
>
> Erich
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>>
>> If if happens, it sure will be ironic. Since the 70's it has been less
>> cubes and more cams... and lately power adders. Now it sounds like
>> they'll soon be weaning us of the blown cammers and back on to big
>> cranks and cylinders.
>>
>> This is all getting just too weird for me... I think it either means
>> the end of the world is coming, or we've all been casted in a Rod
>> Sterling Twilight Zone episode...
>>
>> Patrick
>> '93 Cobra
>> '83 LTD
>>

>
>


It means that Ford can't do modern engines. How high can you rev a pushrod
compared to an equivalent cammer?


  #8  
Old December 19th 04, 08:22 PM
Dan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Advertised redlines aren't an appropriate measure since those are based
on a combination of crankshaft, piston, and rod material, stroke/bore
ratio, piston speed/acceleration, head/valvetrain design, actual
head/cam flow capacity, desired mileage, and reliability factors. My
guess is that the new Mustang GT redline is limited by its cast crank,
pistons, and rods more than anything. In the end, all else equal and
with the bottom end to support it, because there is less mass in the
valvetrain to overcome, an OHC design will out rev an otherwise
equivalent OHV design.

I am curious to find out the capabilities of the new heads and cams
with a better bottom end. The 32 valve Modular (Cobra) can hit 7500
rpms reliably on the stock valvetrain. The oil pump is the weak link
but the crank is forged and the top end is enough to get there. With
some work it'll hit 9000 rpms. The SOHC has similar redline
capabilities with the appropriate build down low but the heads can't
keep up. I don't know what VVT has done to the valvetrain that might
limit this and I don't know the details of the rest of the cam drive so
it'll be interesting to see what it can do, but it should be close with
some effort.

As to whether or not Ford can or cannot do modern engines, that's a
pretty specious comment. Every domestic manufacturer has produced both
OHV and OHC designs that were "modern" and successful. Ford's Modular
32 valve is used in some of the highest performance arenas in the world
and it does well. And since Ford is not abandoning the Modular family
this "Hurricane" is simply a different engineering approach for some
set of goals or needs that Ford perceives. We'll have to learn more to
figure out what they are thinking.
..
Dan
2003 Cobra convertible
With some stuff and things

  #9  
Old December 20th 04, 11:31 PM
GEB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dan wrote:
> Advertised redlines aren't an appropriate measure since those are based
> on a combination of crankshaft, piston, and rod material, stroke/bore
> ratio, piston speed/acceleration, head/valvetrain design, actual
> head/cam flow capacity, desired mileage, and reliability factors. My
> guess is that the new Mustang GT redline is limited by its cast crank,
> pistons, and rods more than anything. In the end, all else equal and
> with the bottom end to support it, because there is less mass in the
> valvetrain to overcome, an OHC design will out rev an otherwise
> equivalent OHV design.
> .
> Dan
> 2003 Cobra convertible
> With some stuff and things
>

While some of the things you mentioned above might limit the redline of
a motor, the major one is the lift and duration of the camshaft. A
higher lift and/or duration will result in a higher redline. I went from
a basically stock cam in a 84 302, to a .554/.558 lift and .298/.306
duration and my redline went from approx. 6000 rpms to 7000 rpms.
Nothing else was changed, except to replace the pedestal rocker heads
with a stock set of 351w heads. As for a OHC out revving a OHV motor,
that's not necessarily true. The redline is the point at which no more
fuel/air can be delivered to the cylinders. One way to get more fuel and
air into the cylinders is to increase the lift and/or duration of the cam.

Gary

  #10  
Old December 21st 04, 05:09 AM
Dan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes, you are talking flow characteristics and it's relationship to VE
and making enough power to spin the motor at high rates. But you can't
even contemplate that flow rate at that engine speed if the crank,
rods, and pistons can't support the rotation. You can put all the
optimal lift and duration you want in order to make more power, but if
the bottom end breaks at that speed it's meaningless.

Certainly, it's possible to make high revving OHV systems, the NHRA has
oodles of them . In the end, however, assuming enough power to turn
the systems, the OHC version of a motor will out rev the the otherwise
identical OHV version. It's simply because there is more mass and
contact points in the valve train that absorb energy. This is one of
the reason that small motors using OHC systems make alot of power
relative to their size. Yes, there's head design and cam design and all
that but in the end the OHC motor is pushing less around against fewer
surfaces.

..
Dan
2003 Cobra convertible
With some stuff and things

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jeep Hurricane concept equipped with two HEMI engines.jpg Jeepers Jeep 11 January 12th 05 05:41 AM
Hurricane advice Dad Corvette 4 September 24th 04 03:31 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.