Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-01-2007, 12:34 AM   #1
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Ford 4.6L. Good or Bad?

What do you guys think of the Ford 4.6 liter V8.

Personally I really think they dropped the ball on this motor. People always say that these motors love boost, but come on really no High Comp N/A motor love boost. People just say that because they dont make any power N/A.

Sure Ive always hated mustangs cause im a GM and Mopar guy, but I try to give everything a chance, and I almost bought a 2V 4.6 mustang that was Supercharged until I found out the dang thing only made 335rwhp on 10 lbs.

The 4 valves are slightly different though. I really like these motors. They have a lot more potential but parts are also extremely expensive. The only relatively affordably ported 4 Valve Ive found is from Patriot and Ive heard of some quality issues with patriot. And the cams in a whole nother thing. Most mustang guys Ive talked to all say the same wether it be 2Valve or 4V, Cams in a Mod motor arent worth it. They say that for all the money it costs and the HUGE pain in the ass it is to install them, they arent worth the gain. Plus some of the 4V mach 1 guys I know are running top of the line parts and only making around 380 rwhp on H/C/I.
Dont get me wrong the heads are great but the lack of cubes and expense seems to cancel it out.

And on the 3V i think Ford should have just thrown some 4V heads on there and charged a few grand more. Id actually want a new mustang if they had like a 350hp 4V.

Whats your guys take on the Mod Motor, excluding the Terminator motors?
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2007, 12:42 AM   #2
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Oh and on a side note I know two local guy very into racing their cars. One is a 02 SS it has a Lid, Catback, Welds and a Stall. It runs 7.70s and is daily driven.

The other is a 99-04 Mustang GT. It has EVERY BOLTON available for the car, plus cams, nitrous, and welds, and it also runs a 7.70.

Seems like a lot of work to run with a near stock LS1.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2007, 04:31 AM   #3
PontiacFan27
CF Extraordinaire
 
PontiacFan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Grove City, PA
Posts: 1,332
For one, I seriously hope you don't mean 1/4 mile for that SS.

Second, the 4.6L is a very good motor. I wouldn't let one example of a 4.6L making only 335 rwhp with an unknown compressor size supercharger running 10psi on an unknown state of tune.
__________________
PontiacFan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2007, 02:31 PM   #4
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by PontiacFan27
For one, I seriously hope you don't mean 1/4 mile for that SS.

Second, the 4.6L is a very good motor. I wouldn't let one example of a 4.6L making only 335 rwhp with an unknown compressor size supercharger running 10psi on an unknown state of tune.

No the closest local track we have in an 8th mile, Kennendale.

Well its was a Procharger HU. I odnt know about the size but doesnt really matter the car was runnin 10#s. Also the tune was done by a local shop which, Ive seen a lot of strong running cars come out of.

After looking up into low boost street setups on the 2V 4.6 it seemed to be about right. Ive seen S/C converts run door to door with only a bolt on LT1
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2007, 10:07 PM   #5
giant016
My mom says I'm cool
 
giant016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 1,274
Are you thinking of buying a Stang now? Whatever happened to the ZR1?

I think if you're going to buy a 4.6 then add a supercharger, just get a SC'd one out of a Lightning or Terminator. I don't know a ton about the (originally) NA engines being good on boost, but from what I've seen with the 03-04 Mustangs, those things can handle a lot of power on stock internals.
__________________
Submitted for the approval of the Midnight Society

giant016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2007, 12:05 AM   #6
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by giant016
Are you thinking of buying a Stang now? Whatever happened to the ZR1?

I think if you're going to buy a 4.6 then add a supercharger, just get a SC'd one out of a Lightning or Terminator. I don't know a ton about the (originally) NA engines being good on boost, but from what I've seen with the 03-04 Mustangs, those things can handle a lot of power on stock internals.

I gave up on the ZR1 because aftermarket parts are so damn expensive and Im just not one to leave well enough alone, I am lookin into a few LT4 C4s though.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2007, 03:16 AM   #7
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
You're basically comparing apples to oranges when you compare a factory rated 260hp CONVERTIBLE with a factory rated 320hp hardtop...I guess you didn't read any of the MM&FF articles comparing the GTO to the Mach 1 or the top of the line fully optioned SS with the 03 Cobra.....For what it's worth, a stock '99-'04 2v 4.6 can run in the 13's stone stock with a 5-speed, a good track, and good conditions.....the 4.6L in N/A form isn't a torque monster like your beloved LT-1, LT-4, or LS series engines...it takes a bit more finesse and driving skill to get them to where they should be.

The new 3v is an excellent engine and responds amazingly to the slightest of mods...you've got to try and look at what you're talking about in a much less biased manner...I used to be a die-hard Chevy guy too, but even I saw the light.

-Don
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2007, 03:50 PM   #8
jslow913
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: orlando
Posts: 13
03-04 mach 1

im getting either an 03 or 04 mach 1 auto for my first car i dont like the setup of the whole shifting and gearbox on the manual mach 1's and im not going thru the hassel of replacing it all. so im getting an automatic transmission with either a vortech SC, or procharger SC i just need help deciding i mean the vortech with intercooler would put me upto 484hp 420lbs/ft and the procharger would put me upto about 520hp but im asking myself do i really need that much
jslow913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2007, 02:13 AM   #9
crazycarl88
CF Newbie
 
crazycarl88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9
i'm a ford boy and i find myself constantly diappointed by the lack of a 302 in the lineup... it's not so much that the 4.6 is a bad motor, but it sounds like shit and that is an all important part of any hot rod. when your mustang sounds like it is going down the road with severe diarrhea, it doesn't really matter how fast it is...
crazycarl88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2007, 02:17 AM   #10
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
You're basically comparing apples to oranges when you compare a factory rated 260hp CONVERTIBLE with a factory rated 320hp hardtop...I guess you didn't read any of the MM&FF articles comparing the GTO to the Mach 1 or the top of the line fully optioned SS with the 03 Cobra.....For what it's worth, a stock '99-'04 2v 4.6 can run in the 13's stone stock with a 5-speed, a good track, and good conditions.....the 4.6L in N/A form isn't a torque monster like your beloved LT-1, LT-4, or LS series engines...it takes a bit more finesse and driving skill to get them to where they should be.

The new 3v is an excellent engine and responds amazingly to the slightest of mods...you've got to try and look at what you're talking about in a much less biased manner...I used to be a die-hard Chevy guy too, but even I saw the light.

-Don

Yah and a Stone stock LT1 from 93 can run in the 13s, under good conditions also.

And an LS1 Can do it in the 12s Stone stock. Ever read GMHTP.

And about comparing a 260hp Convert to a 320hp hardtop. I was revering to 2 local street racers. One is a bolt on LT1 the other is a Supercharged and bolt on 2V 4.6 convertible mustang, they run door to door.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2007, 05:19 PM   #11
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
I have never seen or heard of a stock LT1 running in the 13's...my cousin used to have a '97 Z28 with a CAI, full exhaust, and an LT4 chip...it ran 13.5's once at Atco on a 50* day...perfect conditions...everybody on the net said it was a freak...nobody could understand why it was so "fast"(considering he had less mods than most people who were in the 14's)...I've seen many modded lt-1's running in the low 14's. I've seen LS1's with professional drivers go 13.3's in good conditions.

Apparently, people liked the mustang better...it's still in production...what happened to your camaro/firebird platform...oh that's right, into extinction.

Stock for stock, the LT-1's and LS-1's were faster than the 4.6 'Stangs...albeit not by much...especially when you consider the size gap between the two engines.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2007, 05:39 PM   #12
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
I have never seen or heard of a stock LT1 running in the 13's...my cousin used to have a '97 Z28 with a CAI, full exhaust, and an LT4 chip...it ran 13.5's once at Atco on a 50* day...perfect conditions...everybody on the net said it was a freak...nobody could understand why it was so "fast"(considering he had less mods than most people who were in the 14's)...I've seen many modded lt-1's running in the low 14's. I've seen LS1's with professional drivers go 13.3's in good conditions.

Apparently, people liked the mustang better...it's still in production...what happened to your camaro/firebird platform...oh that's right, into extinction.

Stock for stock, the LT-1's and LS-1's were faster than the 4.6 'Stangs...albeit not by much...especially when you consider the size gap between the two engines.

Okay first there is no such thing as an LT4 chip for these car, there is an LT4 knock module but I dont know what your talking about.

Sounds like your cousin needs some driving lessons.

Second just cause you havent seen it doesnt mean it hasnt happened. Ive seen a Bone STOCK Lt1 auto run a 13.64.

And usually a stock LT1 runs about a 14 flat at 100 or 99 mph. So I dont know who you were talking to on the net, because this is common knowledge on LS1tech and LS1LT1

If you go back and read GMHTP (GM High Tech Performance) they took a BONE STOCK (didnt even change tire pressure) 35th Ann SS and ran a 12.95 or 12.97.
Definetly never heard of a 2V mustang doin that.

Oh just like a ford guy, revert to the "well the mustang is still being made" arguement. Yah people liked yours more and I dont really care, people like civic alot to and it still means they are slow.


And STock for Stock the LT1 and LS1s were MUCH faster than the 4.6s.
And once again dont bitch about our motor being bigger.

And now that I think about it. There are alot of people putting LS1s and GM engines in mustangs see LS1mustangs.com but Ive never seen someone put a 4.6 into a car originaly equipped with a ls1 or lt1. Wonder Why?
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2007, 09:43 PM   #13
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
It was the LT4 knock module...my cousin always used to call it a chip and so did I. And, he also didn't need any driving lessons...it was an auto...I taught him how to launch it and he pulled nice 60's everytime.

I think you need to post up a link to that article from GM high tech performance.

And no, the mustang/camaro did not have a big performance gap between them as you would imply. I guess all comparisons will now have to be made between the '03/'04 Cobra and your LS1's...you can't cry foul about that if I can't cry foul about the diffence in displacement.

For what it's worth, a civic is no where near in the same class as any performance vehicle...so that's completely irrelevant to this situation...even if only being used as an example. Face it man, GM was late to the dance and early to leave.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2007, 01:06 AM   #14
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
The Drivers
Critics have claimed our amazing test results have more to do with the driver behind the wheel than the cars themselves. There is no denying that Evan Smith, our resident hot shoe, has an uncanny ability for running the quarter mile, as evidenced by his 12.89 run in a stock 1999 Z28 (GMHTP 7/99). Often overlooked is the fact that several of our other staff members have netted similar results. Most recently, Rick Jensen ran an automatic-equipped, Collector's Edition Trans Am to a 13.13 at 104 mph for the September 2002 issue of High Performance Pontiac. The argument still exists that our staffers drive these cars all the time and are far more familiar with their nuances than editors at other magazines, who may possess a more intimate knowledge of minvans and SUVs.

Well this is from a different article but Im still looking for the 35th SS article.

Oh and it came from here
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ure/index.html
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2007, 01:10 AM   #15
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
And just so you know the 99s werent even the best performing LS1, they were still sporting the LS1 intake (not the LS6 as 2000 and up were) also the 99s mayb have still had the heavier metal gas tank.

Lets see a stock N/A 4.6 do that.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.