I think so. Nissan gets 330hp from their 3.7 without DI, but using premium. Looking at a number of 1/4 mile times, the Nissan 3.7 seems to have about 1/2 a second on the GM 3.6, so the extra 25 horses are healthy.

Again, the claims, as I read it, are that they made their numbers without DI, at lower cost, and that they development they did on it reduced the advantage of DI, making it not worth the extra cost on a volume car.

Look at Porsche. Even they do not use DI on the base Boxster/Cayman 2.9, but you'll find it on every other model -- at least here in the U.S.

 

I see a clever adaptation that works well with the coyote cylinderhead (which is pretty much a straight shot into the compbustion chamber). Had the cylinderhead been designed with alot of swirl and tumble in mind Ford might not have been able to take advantage of its fuel injection strategy.

Is D.I better? That depends I think, if Ford were to bump the compression ratio any higher or run a high compression turbo/blower motor then D.I would be the more favorable technology. The charge cooling bit reminds me of a well tuned carb setup, which always seems to put down better peak numbers compared to an F.I setup (although F.I always seems to get better throttle response and generally better average power).

Yes, Ford has the capability to adpat D.I to the engine. IIRC this engine is desinged to last another 10 or 15 years before a clean sheet design is called for.

 

Wow, really? 10 or 15 years?

Displacement is maxed out at 5.0L and the engine already has bigger cams in it than even the Ford GT did. I was thinking this was a shorter term engine. Maybe 5-7 years.

The way I figure it, Ford is going to need to change the design to deliver competetive power and fuel efficiency sooner down the road than 10-15 years. As it sits currently, the car makes less power than the LS3, and gets only 1 mpg better than the 250lbs. heavier Camaro while riding on skinny tires.

When the Gen V V8's get here, Ford is going to need to do something. Perhaps direct injection and higher gearing (will hurt performance) will be enough to keep up, but it may fall further behind in power.

The more I think about it, even with a 7,000rpm redline, factory headers, tuned exhauast, variable intake/exhaust valve timing, excellent 4V heads and large cams, the Mustang is behind on power and only edging out the heavy Camaro in fuel mileage.

I really think Ford is going to need to make a change down the road.

When are the Gen V V8's slated to get here?

 

Keep in mind the coyote is the 1st 5L in the family.
I'll leave it at that.

 

But the 5.0L is basically a revised modular. It has the same bore spacing as the 4.6L. It is not the entirely new architecture that many were first expecting.

I'm not following you?

 

That's pretty much the only thing that was kept the same. I wouldn't exactly called it 'revised'
There's a 19 or 20 page article on its engineering in 5.0 Mustang this month.

There's more to come.

 

IIRC, the LS1 kept the same bore spacing as the SBC / LT1 (or was that only the LT5 compared to the SBC / LT1?). And I think it is safe to say the Gen III LSx engines were clean sheet redesigns.

 

LS1 was a clean sheet design alright! The only thing in common with the LT1 was the 4.4" bore spacing.

However, did anybody else hear the rumor of the GenV copying the R07 powerplant's 4.5" bore spacing?

Yeah, the Ford 5.0 is a completely new engine. It's also physically smaller than the 4.6L modular. Not even remotely similar.

 

I'm not sure if his point was that bore spacing is small compared to the GM V8 or that using the same bore spacing means it's not a new design. The latter would not follow.

Relative to the former, I wonder if Ford kept the same bore spacing because they thought it was pretty much optimal for what they were trying to do or if they were limited by manufacturing processes or having already design cars that could not take a longer engine.

 

Quoting from 5.0:

That's the only reason it carried over, because of manufactering. Otherwise it would have costed too much to retool.

 

It was a manufacturing choice, By keeping the MOD motor bore spacing Ford didn't have the reinvent the wheel saving not only a bundle in money but also time since they did not have to significantly retool the plant.

IMO the 5.0's only visible weakness is its limited capacity for creating a wide range of displacements out of the basic configuration. It would have been nice if they would have engineered a block that could match the LSx motors in displacement capacity since the heads flow so damn well.

 

Yuppers.

 

Well, maybe Ford figures that the days of the large cube V8 are limited, due to CAFE requirements.

Thus, they may be planning for a future with smaller V8's, not larger.

 

the LSx lifter dimensions are very close to the LTx also. They changered the oiling stuff to require a few other changes, but LS7 lifters will fit an LT1.

If the Gen5 SBC goes to 4.500" bore centers, then woohoo!

 

Interesting. All this while I believed the bore size was due to enforced packaging constraints, for fitment across various car applications.