i'm lost as well. The 4.6L blocks are even wider then the 429/460 big blocks.BSRacing said:Not the case in reality? what reality is that?
Its widely known the 4.6L blocks are much wider than the 302s because of angle of separation between the two banks.
FRPP catalog.SVTdriver said:Not that I am trying to start a debate or anything. But where are people finding the dimensions of the blocks? I have looked and can't find the information. I can find the overall motor dimensions, but not the block. And it would be handy for any engine swap ideas.
SVTdriver said:Since when has it been about big engine big power? You are the one complaining about it having a small displacement motor. And not enough hp. Are you trying to be confusing? Or just not reading your own posts.
How bout this scenario. Since what is realisticly going into a mustang. Since you don't like it. But a hemi and stop complaining about mustangs.
SVTdriver said:Buy a hemi and stop complaining about mustangs.
Yellow99Saleen said:Oh yeah z28x.....you are dead on with almost everyone of your comments.
BSRacing said:Not the case in reality? what reality is that?
Its widely known the 4.6L blocks are much wider than the 302s because of angle of separation between the two banks.
foghorn67 said:i'm lost as well. The 4.6L blocks are even wider then the 429/460 big blocks.
How is my 289 that wide in somebody's reality?
Not really...lolmustang sallad said:hey does anybody else get a kick out of the number specifically?
i heard some guy saying 4.6 just doest sound right. i like some numbers better than others. for instance, i like 6, 5, and 8, i think those are some good numbers. 2's pretty good too
so i think 6.2 sounds pretty awesome.
i also like nissan's 5.6 L in those giant suvs they just released. 5.6 sounds so much better than 5.5 would. even better than 5.7, i think.
6.2 is pretty sweet, and those numbers represent a pretty big engine too, so that side of me that ignores bad things likes it a lot that there's gonna be a 6.2 in an F-150.
Another weird thing: i think the 3.8 L v8 in the LS and thunderbird sounds like a cooler number than 4.6.
This is a very important issue, and i think car companies should start lying about the displacements of their engines so that the names will sound cooler.
Mercedes has it all backwards with the new ML350 though. The engine's actually a 3.7, me thinks. ML370 sounds cooler. But what would really be cool would be like, ML680, so i think they should call it that and just lie.
Anybody else see what i'm talking about?
mustang sallad said:hey does anybody else get a kick out of the number specifically?
i heard some guy saying 4.6 just doest sound right. i like some numbers better than others. for instance, i like 6, 5, and 8, i think those are some good numbers. 2's pretty good too
so i think 6.2 sounds pretty awesome.
i also like nissan's 5.6 L in those giant suvs they just released. 5.6 sounds so much better than 5.5 would. even better than 5.7, i think.
6.2 is pretty sweet, and those numbers represent a pretty big engine too, so that side of me that ignores bad things likes it a lot that there's gonna be a 6.2 in an F-150.
Another weird thing: i think the 3.8 L v8 in the LS and thunderbird sounds like a cooler number than 4.6.
This is a very important issue, and i think car companies should start lying about the displacements of their engines so that the names will sound cooler.
Mercedes has it all backwards with the new ML350 though. The engine's actually a 3.7, me thinks. ML370 sounds cooler. But what would really be cool would be like, ML680, so i think they should call it that and just lie.
Anybody else see what i'm talking about?
Z28x said:the Camaro out sold the Mustang. In the last years of the F-body they still sold 70,000 cars,
PlatinumDevil said:ya theres a good reason why my 3.4 DOHC's engine bay is bigger and more tightly packed then my 86 5.0's engine bay was. Its sad when a 5.0 V8 AMG engine will fit better then a 3.4 V6 Chevy. (~ 4 inches from the radiator in the v8, ~2 with the V6)
Theres also a good reason why the 5.0 stang couldn't compare in track times.
Its called technology.
The mustang needs a 302 or 351... the 4.6's just dont sound right to me.
3.4 DOHC = 280hp, 285 torque.... 5.0 = 200hp, not sure on the torque.. 250?
and guess which one gets 330 miles to a tank, ill give u a hint, its not the mustang.
DOHC's are better, more valves = more power... thats why hemis were such a big deal back in the day.
1995cobraR said:Hmm, I just looked it up. The Mustang has averaged 140,000 cars per year for the last 10 years. According to my research the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 2 to 1 (total production per year).
I know enough that you're argument is pointless. can't make a motor run without heads. not to give you a hard time or anything...but nice try digging your way out of that.351CJ said:See above. You are lost because you are confusing overall engine dimesions (which are the only dimensions given in even the latest SVT catalog) with block dimensions.
I NEVER said that the 4.6 block was smaller, but I know the block itself is not bigger. The way to determine the perspective in the photo is to take a reference point on the engine and compare....Do you guys know the difference between the block and the heads?
1995cobraR said:Hmm, I just looked it up. The Mustang has averaged 140,000 cars per year for the last 10 years. According to my research the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 2 to 1 (total production per year). In it's entire production run the Mustang has out sold the Camaro 8,600,000 to 1,225,000.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?