Only if you bolt them onto a Non-PI car. Compression was the same with Non-PI and PI head cars. The compression bumped a little in '01 for 9.0:1 to 9.3:1.
If you bolt PI heads onto a NPI, the compression will go over 10.0:1.
how does the fox 5.0 compare to the 99+ 4.6 ?
- Thread starter fordraceing_man
- Start date
Only if you bolt them onto a Non-PI car. Compression was the same with Non-PI and PI head cars. The compression bumped a little in '01 for 9.0:1 to 9.3:1.
If you bolt PI heads onto a NPI, the compression will go over 10.0:1.
The main reason you can 'feel' it, is because it was an old car, and doesn't have the luxuries/suspension/smoothness of a new car.
Ever been in a 'new' 14 second car and then been in an 'old' late 60-early 70's muscle car than ran 14 seconds?
The muscle car feels way faster...although they run the same time
Exactly. The brute force of my R code CJ was awesome, but my moderately modded Cobra would take it in the 1/4.
Everyone keeps mentioning the 5.0 as a muscle car. Don't take any offense, but please, it isn't a muscle car by any means. As someone mentioned earlier, it is a Pony car.
I have grew up in the muscle car ear, have driven 440's, 426 hemi's, Chevy LS-6's, B9's, those were muscle cars. When you hit the accelerator, you were pegged against the seat because of the torque, and stayed that way for quite some time.
Engine for engine, the 5.0 is very easily modded and will cost less to do so. The big thing with the 4.6's, they respond to power adders very well. The big downfall, is the crappy internals. The major positive, once you get good internals, the iron block can withstand lots of HP, way past what a stock 5.0 block can handle.
My whole point in my post was how the cars feel, which is a very personal thing. 10 people will have 10 different opinions. I know the 4.6 on paper and on the track similarly equipped will outperform the 5.0 and that they have somewhat similar powerbands...it jst doesn't feel like it when I am behind the drivers seat if you know what I mean.
millhouse
Founding Member
I don't think anyone had a problem with that. The point we were trying to argue was, simply because the 4.6 is a higher revving engine (both sohc & dohc) does not make it unfit for a mustang. In the same token, it does not make the mustang more like high revving imports.
The bottom line is muscle are all about strong low end torque.
To get low end torque you need "BIG" displacement! The 302 was too small, the 281 o well......................
I race cobras all the time. 281s have no bottom end, by the time they start making power my turbos have taken over. Going 351 would only make this gap wider. The 281 heads are amazing, but their is no replacement for displacement.
millhouse
Founding Member
Which is why a set of 410 gears really wakes em up. The torque multiplication goes a long way…and quickly makes up for the low end deficiencies.
You do realize too that adding turbo's to the modular engines adds gob's of low end torque don't ya? They also respond very favorably to forced induction…even more so than the 302W or 351W. Let's not forget either that the block itself is far stronger than both 302W and 351W.
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
millhouse
Founding Member
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
millhouse
Founding Member
Pretty much…although there are different variations that are known to be slightly stronger/weaker.
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
Damn. I didnt realize the numbers were THAT high. What controls the variations? U mean like 96-98, 99-04, 05-present? Or do u mean DOHC vs. SOHC ?
Im not too 4.6 literate.
Im not too 4.6 literate.
millhouse
Founding Member
The difference are between all of them really. I myself am not 100% literate on it, but for starters there are 4.6l Romeo and 4.6l Windsor blocks which were different. There was also the 4.6l aluminum cobra block as well as a 4.6l iron block. Each one seems to be stronger/weaker in some regards. Here is a bit of info on some of it.... http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/eb40228.htm
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
Im stuck between trying to find a 94-95 5.0 or maybe a 96-98 GT. I had a 95, and i kinda want something different, but im scared i'd regret the 96-98 from how people talk about them.
I didnt mean to imply that the 4.6 is not a worthy Mustang engine...but I do think it will be outclassed by the Dodge 5.7 and 6.1 Hemi and the Chevy large displacement small block (I dont know what is going into the new camaros other than I know it has a lot of cubes). If they want to keep the 4.6 around then great, as I already admitted it is a great engine. I do think Ford should at least offer up the option of getting a GT with a lot more displacement without having to step up to a Shelby. What I personally would REALLY like to see Ford do is offer a stroked version of the 4.6 as the standard GT engine and then as a $1k-$4k option have a close to or over 6.0 motor that makes excellent naturally aspirated hp like Fords competitors will have.
And what I meant earlier when i said Mustang owners had to shell out an additional $10k in the 90's to be competitive with the GM cars was that if you wanted a from the factory Mustang that could at least come somewhat close to keeping up with the Camaros/Firechickens you had to spend an additional $10k and get a Cobra, and you would still be sucking tail pipe. And just to be clear when I say additional I mean that a Cobra cost about $10k more than what a Mustang GT or Camaro Z28 did. Yes the Mustang outsold the F-bodies, luckily for Ford performance does not necessarily equal high sales. I for one was embarassed that Ford stood back and did nothing to make the Mustang gain ground in the performance non-war of the 90's. I hope history does not repeat itself!
And what I meant earlier when i said Mustang owners had to shell out an additional $10k in the 90's to be competitive with the GM cars was that if you wanted a from the factory Mustang that could at least come somewhat close to keeping up with the Camaros/Firechickens you had to spend an additional $10k and get a Cobra, and you would still be sucking tail pipe. And just to be clear when I say additional I mean that a Cobra cost about $10k more than what a Mustang GT or Camaro Z28 did. Yes the Mustang outsold the F-bodies, luckily for Ford performance does not necessarily equal high sales. I for one was embarassed that Ford stood back and did nothing to make the Mustang gain ground in the performance non-war of the 90's. I hope history does not repeat itself!
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
Ok you're arguing two different points. Ford did the RIGHT thing (atleast IMO) in the 90's. Yea, they didnt perform the best but they outsold them by leaps and bounds and who's car got cut from production? Who's aftermarket is bigger?
If Ford tries to pump up their performance, so will their prices. And i bet that will drop their sales which is what they dont want.
But then again, the main sales come from the v6 department, so what they do with the v8's is a different ball game.
Man it must be hard to be that guy(s) who decide what to do to compete with GM/Dodge in the upcoming years....
I really dont buy that Ford will have to spend THAT much more to drop a little biger engine in the Mustang to compete with its new American made competition. If Chevy and Dodge can both do it, so can Ford. Like you said, the bulk of sales come from 6 bangers anyway. And if Ford would have done something in the nineties to equal or surpass the performance of the GM's they still would have outsold them and quite possibly would have sold more since I am sure there were quite a few buyers out here that got one of the GM's just because they read in Motor Trend or R&T that they trounced the GT in performance and beat the Cobra whie costing around $10k less. I am not saying a majority of F-body sales were due to that, but I personally know a couple people that ended up with a Z28 just for that reason.
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
I hear ya bud. But i think its much much more complicated than it seems to our eye. I dont think the price tag will hurt Ford that much, but i'd be more worried about the price tag the consumer sees at the dealer. But like we said, V6 sales were the money is made, but if the v8 price goes up, will the v6? We might say no but u never know how stuff really works behind the scenes.
And besides, when it comes to Ford Vs. GM in the 90's, Ford was smarter than GM period. So why not keep playing the game the way they know how? I know if i whooped you up in basketball by shooting 3 pointers all day, why the hell would i change and want to try to start dunkin on your head? If u want to dunk, thats fine, but im still winning the game.
And look at percentages of the people complaining about the power. I bet its a very small percentage compared to those who buy v6's, or blindly buy it cause its a mustang and want to be cool with a v8, or those who simply like the styling of each car more. And at the end of the day, Ford has to ask themselves is it worth taking the risk to satisfy that small percentage?
I'd love to have some GM/Doge competing motor in a GT, but u know what, i'd be PISSED if it made the mustang get kicked off assembly lines and put on the shelf for 7 years.
I could see if Ford was the one who cancelled their car, then i'd say they better do something different.
I say instead of Ford trying to compete with the failed GM designers of the 90s who were in charge of the F-body....
Those GM boys better take a lesson or 2 from Ford and learn how to actually keep a car in production. Cause clearly, u can have the highest HP car in the category and have us "little guys" who race on the weekend be the happiest people alive, but what does it matter if after 5 years that car isnt being made?
Until a company learns to make a high powered car and have it sell on all platforms will i say ford needs to. Cause none of us know the plan to get it done....and i wonder if its even possible. It'd be like a perfect scenario.
I beleive the Teksid block in the 93-98 Mark 8's and 96-98 Cobras is the strongest 4.6L block. It will handle up to 1000HP.
That would be the block to base a 4.6L stroker motor on.
The regular iron GT block can handle up to 500HP. The internals can't though and must be upgraded
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
See thats a pretty big window of +/- 1000hp on a block.
If u dont get those blocks and yours is stuck at 500hp,
I'd have to put my money on a 351w stroker setup. Im pretty sure 69-71 351 blocks have handled 6-700hp. And im pretty sure u could get the later blocks to handle 500. And you could make it much easier with 400+ cubes rather than 281.
Similar threads
