thoughts on fat man mcphereson strut suspension compared to MII?

for went with the mod motors for money reasons and interchangability. 4.6 and 5.4s can use some of the same parts so ford saves. yeah the lsx is a good engine but i still dont like any gm product. i guess not to many people like them either since the camaro and firebird are gone. hemi=trend

Edbert said:

bzzzzzt.

After over a decade where the FoMoCo 5.0 beat the 305ci Z28, the Mustang got it's arse kicked by the pushrod Camaros ever since it went with the OHC. The Vette is still running pushrods, do you think the $80,000.00 Z06 is an inferior product?

Ford is in the business of selling as many cars as possible and maximizing the profit from those sales for it's shareholders, it is not in the business of making the most "superior" product it can.

OHC designs are more efficient with regard to opening and closing valves than pushrods are (in general), that is true. That does not mean that OHC engines are inherently superior. I think of it the same as FWD versus RWD...FWD is more efficient but you don't see many FWD performance cars.

Click to expand...

So now you're changing the terms of the debate on me. I say that the 4.6 is superior to the 302 and the 460 (older Ford motors) and you say that the brand new 7 liter 'vette motor is superior? Of course a large displacement motor will make more power than a smaller one. That doesn't make it superior, just larger and more of a gas hog.

While I do agree that the 'vette motor is nice (they made it a lot more like a Ford pushrod engine now), I don't agree that the 'vette motor is better than the Ford OHC motors. OHC motors breathe better so they can make more horses per cube. Also, you're comparing an engine from an $80,000 vehicle to the engine in a $25,000 vehicle - not a fair comparison. Compare the smaller OHC motor in the Ford GT to the 'vette motor. Which one makes more power? GM is just too cheap to make the leap to OHC. To me it's similar to the firing order change that Ford made in the Cleveland and the 80s 302 - GM finally got around to making that change just recently.

I do think that OHC motors are inherently superior to pushrods from a performance standpoint. They are more complicated, which is a disadvantage. However, I'd rather have an OHC motor in my vehicle rather than a pushrod motor.

Give me a choice of a cammer motor, a Boss 429, a 460, FE, Chevy or Mopar stuff... I would take the cammer any day. There is a reason why Nascar wouldn't let Ford run the cammer. They knew Chevy would be owned!

I also disagree with FWD being more efficient than RWD. IMO there's nothing about FWD that is better than RWD. But I won't address that here. We're already OT far enough.

i'll take pushrods over OHC motors any day. remember that chevy did do a OHC motor and did away with it, the ZR1 vette motor was a DOHC but it still had 5.7 liters of displacement. the 4.6 and 5.4 mod motors are not the best engine for anything. there is a reason that ford and dodge rule the truck world right now when it comes to trucks that can actually work hard. the ford trucks are great don't get me wrong, but anyone that needs their truck to work hard uses a dodge or a chevy (i'm only talking gasoline engines not diesels). the mod motors just plain don't make enough torque, sure they make a lot of hp at the top end but torque rules the street. the 3 valve motor is a decent engine and makes more torque than the 2v and 3v motors but it still can't make as much torque as a pushrod motor. as for the gas mileage factor the gm LSx motors are tons better than a mod motor and that is because of the torque they make. i'm a ford guy to the bone but i can't stand the mod motors.

back on track i would personally use a TCP or GW coilover kit to make room for a larger engine, or the RRS over the fat man kit or the MII suspension so as not to destroy the structural integrity of the car.

Up here, work trucks are primarily Fords. Chevy is second and Dodge a distant 3rd.

Leaving the 4V engines out of the discussion since they are clearly high preformance (but at an enormous cost since SVT lost money on every Cobra it sold).

The 4.6SOHC is more advanced than the 5.0 but not necessarilly superior.

Yes, displacement had a lot to do with the LS1/LS6 F-bodies beating the stangs. GM went from 5 to 5.7 liters at the same time that Ford reduced displacment.

I have daily-driven a 4.6-4V, a 5.4-3V, and a 4.6-3V. They are great little (big...LOL) motors although a bit low on torque for their applications. My F150s could REALLY use more grunt and my 97 and 05 Mustangs are both heavy-arsed pigs. But in all honesty I'd rather have the 5.7LS6 in there any day of the week. The LS6 is the only thing GM has made in 30 years that I like.

There is nothing about a OHC that improves breathing per-se. An engine's ability to breathe has more to do with valve size and intake runner/port and combustion chamber design than how close the cam is to the valvestem. Eliminating the pushrod reduces slop and flex thereby increasing efficiency of moving parts, but the additional moving parts (6-foot long timing chains mainly) eliminate much of the reciprocating assembly slop that was saved. I do think it is a similar discussion with the FWD/RWD, eliminating the huge ring and pinion, and the long driveshaft does save a lot of parasitic loss. That is one reason why the typically underpowered commuter cars almost always are FWD, the designers wanted to maximize power and increase mileage. Of course the biggest reason is passenger compartment space but that is even further off-topic

I just think that dollar for dollar you can get as good or better performance from a pushrod motor as you can from a 4.6SOHC, and you don;t have to mutilate the engine compartment and compromise the chassis to fit it in. I know I am a throwback neanderthal, I mean I prefer the sucking sound of a carb over EFI, but this IS the classic section right? Give me $10K to build (and install into a classic Stang) a 427W and put it up against a 4.6SOHC....that budget would have to include the full suspension setup too of course...and my money would be on the pushrod version winning the race...be it a drag strip or a road course.

bnickel said:

but anyone that needs their truck to work hard uses a dodge or a chevy .

Click to expand...

i dont believe that. if that was true the ford truck wouldnt be the best selling/most sold car in the world.

I'm just going to say that we should agree to disagree. I have too much first hand evidence to be convinced that pushrods are better than OHC designs. How many modern 4 cylinder engines are pushrods? Why?

I know a guy who always buys new Chevy pickups every couple years. He was annoyed when his 5.7 was owned by a buddy's 5.4 Ford. However, he did admit, "wow those Fords have a lot of power!" They were both towing boats down a two lane road and the smaller displacement Ford engine was significantly stronger.

Hack said:

OHC motors breathe better so they can make more horses per cube.

Click to expand...

How do OHC engines breathe better than pushrod engines?

Hack said:

They are more complicated, which is a disadvantage. However, I'd rather have an OHC motor in my vehicle rather than a pushrod motor.

Click to expand...

How are OHC engines more complicated than pushrod engines?

after owning four vehicles with SOHC 4.6's, (2 stangs, a t-bird, F150), I have no love for them. They are gutless, difficult and expensive to work on, and get no better mileage than a 5.0. Give me a 302 or 351 anyday. The modular is not a good platform for performance, especially the 2v's. Bore spacing sucks, cost is high, massive physical size, no viable options for stroking, heavy weight. Who cares if the block can take 1000 hp, it'll cost megabucks to build a mod motor to make that power. Aftermarket windsor blocks are dirt cheap when comparing costs of a build like that. They don't have many postives in my book. A windsor can do every thing a mod motor can do, but while weighing less, occupying less space, requiring fewer dollars to build, while at the same time making more power.

LUCAFU1 said:

i dont believe that. if that was true the ford truck wouldnt be the best selling/most sold car in the world.

Click to expand...

If you look at Ford truck sales vs Chevy truck sales, Ford sells more. If you look at Ford truck sales vs Chevy/GMC (same truck same assembly lines) truck sales. Ford isn't quite the winner they lead you to believe.

lauras70mach1 said:

How do OHC engines breathe better than pushrod engines?
Light weight valve train allows an engine to spin faster and therefore more air is passing through it. This allows for greater power from a smaller displacement engine. The valve train can be light without being made from $$$$ titanium or other high tech materials. Compare a 300 hp 4.6 liter to a 205 hp 5.0 made in '93.

How are OHC engines more complicated than pushrod engines?

Click to expand...

You're right, they aren't much more complex if at all than pushrod engines. They have more cams, and they have 2 longer chains running them.

I wasn't going to jump in beause this thread was originally about front suspension, not everyone's opinion on modular vs. pushrod. However.....in befo da lock!

lauras70mach1 said:

1.) How do OHC engines breathe better than pushrod engines?

2.) How are OHC engines more complicated than pushrod engines?

Click to expand...

1.) That is purely dependent on port design. An OHC engine can take advantage of the cam placement and use 4 valves per cylinder, that is all. A 2v 4.6 head(even PI) is not that impressive, but a 4v is because it has more valves and ports big enough to use them. A D-port 2.3L turbo head(OHC, 2v) flows about what an E7 does, for example.

2.) More parts, mostly in the valvetrain and heads.

For those that say more displacement=worse economy, just remember that power=fuel.