Posted on 05/21/2012 1:11:56 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
The 400M’s torque peak was at a higher RPM than the 300’s.
Again, why did Ford even bother?
I’d also point out that your exact criticism was raised when Ford dumped the old 5.0/302 Windsor motor in favor of the 4.6L SOHC V8. The torque peak came at a higher RPM and people claimed that it would wear out faster and use more fuel than the engine it replaced, as well as the competition. In reality, it didn’t - it used less fuel and put the 302 to shame in terms of longevity.
I will cheerfully accept “the car lied to me” as an answer. :D And I was the one that pointed that out.
The only cars that you can actually trust (without external verification such as radar, lidar or GPS) to have accurate speedometers are those that used to be or are police models and they have “certified calibration” written on their face. If you check magazine reviews, you’ll sometimes find a note of how inaccurate the speedo was, and almost every make out there has an optimistic speedometer to some degree.
You know that had nothing to do with RPMs. different fuel systems, better manufacturing techniques.
The last 302 had the same EEC-IV fuel system the 4.6 did. In fact, they revised the heads on it (the so called GT40P heads used on the last 5.0 Explorer) one last time to get more power out of it. The truck 5.0s and truck 4.6s were both made at the same Windsor Ontario plant. The same techniques were used to make the last 5.0s that were used to make the iron-block 4.6s.
If you are trying to claim higher RPMs are better for towing you are a fool. I’m sorry but that is just dumb. It has been proven over and over again in all uses(trucks boats generators planes) that slower RPMs improves TBO and efficiency...if all else remains equal. More displacement and fewer RPMs will always be superior for a workhorse of a motor when weight, bulk, and acceleration are not too terribly critical.
All else being equal, you are correct. Problem is, not everything is equal.
The last truck 302/5.0 in 2000-2001 made 215hp at 4200rpm and 288lb/ft torque at 3300rpm. The contemporary 2001 281/4.6 SOHC, installed in trucks at the same time made 231hp at 4750rpm and 293lb/ft at 3500rpm. Both had EEC-V in that year, IIRC, and both were made on the same line in Windsor Ontario.
In reality, the 4.6 made a much better engine, despite the higher RPM peak power points, for towing and lasted longer, much longer, when placed in service. The iron block 4.6 is actually heavier than the old Windsor 5.0, too.
I will always prefer a straight six over a v type motor and pushrods over overhead cams. The more displacement the better. When ford dropped the 300 six I was depressed. I thought they should’ve turned it into a 350 six and added port fuel injection and a turbo...then eventually direct injection...while keeping BOTH peek performance numbers UNDER 3500RPM...and peak torque below 2500RPM. I also like cast iron heads.
That would’ve been my dream motor for a heavy duty pickup.
I am impressed by the john deere “big wheel” tractor engine, and by the older cummins motor of the dodge trucks of the 90s, the old hudson hornet engine, continental engines used in lincoln electric welders, old checker taxi cabs, and old Yale forklifts...also generators, and aircompressors. And also the air cooled flat 4 continental engines used in cessna airplanes. And the flat twin engines by Onan.
“When ford dropped the 300 six I was depressed.”
Back in the early 90’s most of the Fed Ex Econoline delivery vehicles were powered by the 300 six. Good engines in those vehicles. And they had big alternators to provide the power for all their communication needs. And those motors moved the vehicle or idled from the time they set out on their delivery runs ‘til they returned in the evening.
“The only cars that you can actually trust....”
Several ways to calibrate your speedometer...
1. Carefully hold a given speed on the interstate or toll road for at least 10 miles and measure the time using the mileage markers.
2. If you have a good GPS you can verify actual speed (GPS) vs speedometer speed. Best over enough distance at constant speed to stabilize the GPS.
3. Take it to the Salt Flats and let ‘em check your actual speed. :)
4. Borrow a radar gun from your closest Major League Ball Club and use that to verify your speedometer speed.
Moral of the story...do not let native Singaporians drive anything faster than a donkey cart.
The 300/6 *had* port fuel injection for years before the end. The problem, in the end, was that it weighed too much, cost too much to make and trying to make it competitive with the new generation of engines coming out of the competition would have cost far too much money. Not to mention it couldn’t meet pollution specs any more.
Iron heads severely limit performance and increase emissions.
However, you can still get a Dodge Ram with a big diesel inline six, peak numbers are both below 3500rpm as I recall.
Yes, but then how do you make the speedometer accurate? Sure, you can apply a mental corrective factor, but most speedometers don’t have an easy corrective control. (Fords with the electronic speedometers -the ones with the LCD or LED odometers- do, but it’s not easy to get them into corrective mode.)
Iron heads severely limit performance and increase emissions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
bullshit
However, you can still get a Dodge Ram with a big diesel inline six\
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
different motor
NOT bullshit. If they didn’t, GM sure as hell wouldn’t have spent the money to put aluminum heads on the iron block LS-series V8s, not after how well the iron-headed iron-block LT1 from the Impala SS (that was also installed in the trucks) did.
Info on Chevy iron heads: http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/howto/97458/index.html
Nope, that engine you liked in the 90s Dodges? That’s the B-series diesel. The current 6.7 is the developed form of that original 6BT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cummins_B_Series_engine
5.9 lasted longer
No, the MTBO for the 6BT and both versions of the ISB are the same, and from talking to diesel mechanics (I did a lot of research prior to selecting a truck) all of them last just as long. The problem is that as the trucks get newer, the transmissions get worse, but that’s hardly Cummins’ or the engine’s fault, now is it?
bullshit
you don’t increase efficiency of a combustion chamber by taking away heat faster and operating at a lower chamber temp.
Again, not bullshit. These are the reasons given by almost all manufacturers for dumping iron heads. It isn’t like they want to - iron heads are immensely cheaper than aluminum, especially these days - but you cannot get the cooling you need to make power *and* meet emissions with iron heads. Iron heads are, as you should know, far more prone to predetonation when hot, especially if you are having to sit and idle in traffic a lot. You therefore have to dial back the timing quite a lot.
Iron heads work great on the dragstrip. Not so great on a street car that has to sit in traffic, produce decent emissions, be reliable - remember, iron heads are more likely to crack all else being equal - and all of that while making good power in all conditions.
Even old “we make everything out of Arrhn” Harley pitched their iron heads long ago. And they’re still using 1920s suspensions!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.