So I gather from research that the term "Modular" refers to the parts on the engine being interchangable. First of all, am I understanding this correctly? If so, does that mean my Twin Screw Supercharger on my 4.6 fit on a 5.4 engine?
Modular Q
- Thread starter BlackRod
- Start date
no it will not fit. not many parts are interchangable between the 4.6 and 5.4
by modular i think they meant good for cars and trucks.
by modular i think they meant good for cars and trucks.
tomustang said:
That link seems to say that the rods in pre-03 Cobras are the same as those in the SOHC engines. Wouldn't this seem to imply that the stock SOHC short block is capable of supporting the same rpms levels as the DOHC Cobra engines? So you could safely turn 7000 rpms in a SOHC with an upgraded valvetrain? Am I missing something here?
TGJ said:
See, that's what I thought. You see all these posts where people get all concerned about revving a stock short block past 6000 rpms, as if there is something about the pre-03 Cobras that is wildly different. If you actually look, it seems the crank and pistons are indeed different, but not in ways that would inherently limit the 99+ SOHC's rpm-wise to something much lower. Seems to me that the Cobras have a better crank and pistons, but I would think the rods are what's going to go when you rev an engine too far. And if the rods are the same, I'd think you could safely rev the SOHC at least as high as an N/A Cobra, assuming your valvetrain can make power up there.
That's why I was wondering what I was missing. I hadn't seen a single post over the years about an SOHC tearing itself apart from high rpms. It always seems to be from running lean or trying to push way too much power on the stock long-block, or some sort of spring or valve failure due to install or manufacturing errors/defects.
True, but how often do you see guys spinning up a SOHC to that extent either? I mean, the stock rev limiter kicks in at 6,250rpm and the stock cams stop making power long before that. Sure, I supose you could reprogram the EEC to bypass the factory rev limit, but for what purpose? You'd need a pretty agressive build in order to justify that kind of RPM anyway. I don't see a problem with a SOHC making the odd jaunt up to high RPM, but I wouldn't want to see repetative runs to 6,800-7,000rpm with one of them, like you do with a Cobra.40oz said:
Gearbanger 101 said:
Why not? You have all these aftermarket cams that push peak power up, and a fair number of people moving the rev limiter up to use them, so why be stingy and over-cautious? I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe a 99+ SOHC will self-destruct from too many rpms, and using the N/A Cobras as a guide, you can go quite a bit farther than it seems the most vocal posters seem to claim.
BTW, your stock cams don't "stop making power," they make more power at 6000 rpms than they do at the rpm the next gear puts you at. You'd have to be making less than 200 lb-ft. at 6000 rpms before you could say the stock cams "die" at that rpm. Things like porting and more agressive cams will make more power at higher rpms, so you are just throwing away power by not bumping your rev limiter up. Remember, the longer you can stay in a lower gear, the longer you benefit from the greater torque multiplier of that gear. You make more power at the wheels at 6000 rpms in second than at any time in third. So the longer you stay in second, the quicker you get down the track. And how many 4V N/A Cobras have been staying in gear to 7000 rpms for years and years with no failures while running the same "crap" rods?
I'm not posting just to argue, I just haven't seen any rational reason why people claim revving past the stock limiter is "bad" for the stock bottom. And I am about to shell out for cams and a tuner this spring, so the topic is relevant to me. I don't want to make decisions based on superstition and mysticism :/
Dan_Soprano
15 Year Member
40oz said:
well you would need to upgrade the valve train. the stock 2v head will valvefoat if you try to rev that high.
svttech76 said:
What all besides cam and springs would be needed? I'm not planning to run 10,000 rpm, merely up to ~7000 rpms tops. I mean, at some point, it becomes more cost-effective to just buy new ported & assembled heads. I was thinking just putting in a cam and springs. Maybe I am just being ignorant
Why didn't Ford figure this out before spending all those millions on R&D and manufactureing of the 4V block? Sounds like they could have just bolted 4V upper end on a 2V block, charged the same for the Cobras and made out like bandits. I guess they didn't need the extra main bolts or Manley rods etc. And I don't suppose they are balanced any better. Same as the Crown Vic, Mustang, F150, E150, Exploder, etc motor. Just overkill, or is it all corporate lies? HA HA HA!!!
My point exactly!!! So what do you suppose you're getting in the playdough funfactory 2V motor that they squirt out by the thousands? The "shoddy" 4V assembly is ment to, and does, handle those Rs. So if we apply the same logic to the 2V quality we can only assume it is not as good as the 4V quality since the 2V is a mass volume engine. No doubt you can make it continually handle 7k Rs but with enough money I can do anything. The real question is at what point do you look for a better more cost effective resolution? If your going to spend that kind of money on a 2V block you might as well go stroker. The only replacement is displacement!
The point of the argument is that the stock rods and crank CAN handle it.. it is the valvetrain that cant. with the cams I have now my power is up in the rpm range and I will be spinning mine alot higher than before and I still have stock GT crank. Yes I have forged rods.. but the crank is stock and the 99 and older cobras used the same rods that a 2V came with. So whats the difference?
Similar threads
