why do yall not like the 5.4L

SXYXC said:

sorry to bring this up if it causes drama.
But there seems to be a lot of hate towards even the thought of a 5.4L or a 5.4 2V anyways..
why is that??

the way is see it, if you want to stay N/A why not go to the 5.4, more power to be made, and lots more torque is available.. but why is it a such disliked subject

Click to expand...

I have been around a long time and have followed the 5.4 scene. What I am about to present is FACTS as to why a 5.4 is not going to overcome a 4.6 in a 2V N/A project. I did about 4 years of research including talking to 3 Ford Engineers who work around the Modular Engines daily before I had my 2V N/A project built. This is what I have got on the 5.4 2V N/A cars.

A 5.4 2V N/A car WILL NOT make more HP than a 4.6 2V N/A car with the exact same mods. The best to date I have seen of a 2V 5.4 N/A car get is about 20 RWHP LESS than an equal 4.6 2V. This comparison is J.Miller's 96 5.4 2V Cougar compared to Mike V's BullittBird when it was N/A. In fact Miller's car has a better supporting cast of mods than the BullittBird had and was like I said 20 RWHP short of the 4.6. That is the closest a 5.4 2V N/A car has gotten to equal a 4.6, most that I have seen are about 50+ RWHP short.

Part of the problem is that the 4.6 and 5.4 have the exact same Bore( 3.55" ). The 2V heads in stock form are not adequate enough for the 4.6 to be a performance motor, how the hell can they be adequate for the 5.4 which is moving more air. This is the reason for the big Torque of the 5.4. The best ported 2V heads are barely good enough for a 4.6 N/A performance car, BARELY good enough. Those heads are still not good enough to see results with a 5.4.

The other part of the problem is that the longer stroke of the 5.4 has more frictional losses than the 4.6. Again it goes back to the heads as they do not flow enough air to overcome the friction losses. With the same grade of parts internally, the 5.4 will not be able to Rev as high as a 4.6 would be able to safely. A 4.6 built properly with the best 2V heads can see 9000 RPM. You would need a hell of a 2V setup to rev that high and make horsepower which Ken B did. A 5.4 with those same grade of parts would be limited to just less than 7500 RPM and it would probably not be making significant power at that level.

Forced Induction changes things quite a bit because you are now forcing and cramming the air in. With the right set of mods, the 5.4 2V FI will make more power than the equivalant 4.6. You will need FI to do it with a 2V.

If you are truly considering the 5.4 and want to stay N/A, you need to go with a 4V. With the best ported 4V heads, it will show gains over a 4.6 with the same mods. That is the route you need to go to get there.

5.4 4V is great and very expensive.
5.4 2V does not make enough power to justify the cost.
4.6 2V forged and blown will make more power than needed for a street car.

you guys are funny.

Gearbanger 101 said:

I don't hate them, but for the next to no horsepower advantage and little torque return you get after the fact, it hardly makes the transplant worth the effort IMO.

Click to expand...

it's just nice that you can say you got a 5.4L now. doesn't it feel a lil big down there (i mean downtown) when you say that? especially to a 1.8L import?

r3dn3ck said:

you guys are funny.

Click to expand...

That is what I say about guys like you...

Gearbanger 101 said:

I don't hate them, but for the next to no horsepower advantage and little torque return you get after the fact, it hardly makes the transplant worth the effort IMO.

Click to expand...

exactly what I was going to say.

Anyone see the recent MM&FF article about Steve Matusek's Pro 5.0 modular? He's running a 5.4L BUT, destroked it.

http://www.nmratv.com/index.php?str...green07/20071007_NMRA_BG_Intro.flv&playlist=1

most people dont like them b/c the swap wont yield more power.

i would not spend any money on a 5.4 when a less expensive s/c will give more power. unless you want over 1000rwhp a 4.6 will support everything you will want.