Chad

Random thought thread

17,650 posts in this topic

Let's talk about start up temperatures.   Put a mechanical gauge on an engine and start it when it's 20 degrees. Compare gauge response times to 80 degrees.  Moral: don't rev a cold engine for a minute, or more.   That's one of the big benefits of "thin" oils.

ls1adam84 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JohnC, @Disney, @66sprint6stay 2v or go 4v? Boost will be applied. 

Coworker wants to build his 2004 gt. He was talking about buying A 4v engine and swapping it. I was thinking just keep the 2v and put better internals in it and boost the hell out of it.

What would yall do?

66sprint6 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tino said:

@JohnC, @Disney, @66sprint6stay 2v or go 4v? Boost will be applied. 

Coworker wants to build his 2004 gt. He was talking about buying A 4v engine and swapping it. I was thinking just keep the 2v and put better internals in it and boost the hell out of it.

What would yall do?

If he can afford it, a forged 4.6L DOHC (4v).

2v sucks....

66sprint6 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4v all the way.  You can have some fun with a boosted 2v sure but there's something bout a 4v that does it for me!!!  Termi-swap would be awesome as well.  Ide buy a 4v before I ever put better internals in a 2v.

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.6L SOHC 2v ain't nothing but a weak-sauce Ford truck/van/vic engine.

I swapped a PI in my GT from an 04 Exploder with only changes intake, exhaust, oil pan and pick-up tube.

FBO on street tires, 3:73's only got me 8.7 1/8 and 13.5 1/4.

You'll get beat by Infinity and Nissan 4 door family cars with a FBO 2v nowadays. :lol:

Ford modular 2v are a total waste of money.

Do the 4v if you have to do a modular Ford.

Coyote would be your best, but they're pricey.

Think about it.

Base modular n/a 4v engines were 320hp. It took a supercharger and forged bottom end for Ford to make a rated 390hp with a modular 4v.

It costs a lot of money to make modular Fords fast. The n/a pistons and the rods are weak too. So for power adders probably 400rwhp or more, it's going to need a forged bottom end.

The time and money he'll spend catching up to the Coyote, LS3 and LT1's will likely cost him more than a turn key Coyote swap in the long run.

Disney likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly on the internets the people say that you can build a fast 2v cheaper than building an Ls 5.3... It's true, the internet says so.

Anyone else check out Cars and Coffee yesterday? It was packed, and there were a lot of angry Mustangs there. I am glad no victims came about from their carnage.

Tino likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 9:16 PM, ls1adam84 said:

Supposedly on the internets the people say that you can build a fast 2v cheaper than building an Ls 5.3... It's true, the internet says so.

Anyone else check out Cars and Coffee yesterday? It was packed, and there were a lot of angry Mustangs there. I am glad no victims came about from their carnage.

Well, a stock 5.3 is faster than a built 2V sooooooo.........

Tino likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019 at 3:13 AM, Tino said:

@JohnC, @Disney, @66sprint6stay 2v or go 4v? Boost will be applied. 

Coworker wants to build his 2004 gt. He was talking about buying A 4v engine and swapping it. I was thinking just keep the 2v and put better internals in it and boost the hell out of it.

What would yall do?

Define "build".   Does he want the joy of dirty hands, winning timeslip, or both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, gammey4 said:

Did you notice you are shifting at almost 7,000rpm?

Yeah, it was set to shift right about 6,800 n/a.

For whatever reason, it's never consistent and will rev a little lower or higher.

I do want to bring it back down because it's making too much boost for a stock motor spinning that high.

It's hitting 15psi boost. :fear: 

What do you think about backing the shifts to 6,500? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, it was set to shift right about 6,800 n/a.

For whatever reason, it's never consistent and will rev a little lower or higher.

I do want to bring it back down because it's making too much boost for a stock motor spinning that high.

It's hitting 15psi boost. :fear: 

What do you think about backing the shifts to 6,500? 

Something to consider before uncle Rodney breaks up with his main squeeze.

JohnC and Disney like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2019 at 3:41 PM, gammey4 said:

Something to consider before uncle Rodney breaks up with his main squeeze.

@gammey4

I looked at my logs after backing all my shifts down to stock mph and rpm...

The reason it is over revving is because in some gears it's taking too long to complete the shift.

I'm not sure if that means it needs more line pressure, or what. :shrug:

For instance, I commanded a shift at stock 6k rpm's and the stock mph for that, but by the time it shifted, I am a few hundred rpm's above the target.

I had one WOT shift commanded at 6k and it made it all the way to like 6700-6800 rpm's once.

It shifts very inconsistent....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP pistons

29133552_10155858770326273_2964434035763278347_n.jpg

The grooves are on the top of the piston to replicate the approach of anti-detonation or contact reduction grooves on the ring lands. It helps atomize the air/fuel mixture and create tumble by swirling the mixture in the combustion chamber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

CP pistons

29133552_10155858770326273_2964434035763278347_n.jpg

The grooves are on the top of the piston to replicate the approach of anti-detonation or contact reduction grooves on the ring lands. It helps atomize the air/fuel mixture and create tumble by swirling the mixture in the combustion chamber.

Hmmmm....'bout like the 70s approach of dimpling pistons with a punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.