Who will swap for the new 7.3 V8!

[BmacIL]

I tried my best and this is the comparison between the engines and the problems fitting it in the Mustang. I don’t see a problem in length but agree with hotrod.com that it is the oil pan. The location and depth. That is the problem and not length.

I uSeD mS pAiNt To MeAsUrE aNd ScAlE.

Seriously?

Sponsored

 

[CurtisH]

Just not buying into the idea that Ford plunked down all that money to power motor homes.
The van is already designed for the 6.2 so being compact is pointless.

That wasn’t my primary point. I may not have made my point clear. A prior post said the 7.3 would be much cheaper to build. I don’t think that is the case. The cheapest route would have been to revise the 6.2. Ford chose to go with a clean sheet design. That being the case, they chose a pushrod design for multiple reasons, including its compact dimensions. OHC is definitely better for high rpm. It wasn’t needed for truck applications. For lower rpm ranges, a pushrod design works. Ford reps have even mentioned that the compact dimensions were a benefit.

I also think this could be a good performance engine. I think it would be great as a factory option in the Raptor. I don’t see Ford putting it in the Mustang. Doesn’t mean it won’t find its way into Mustangs.

 

[Erik427]

That wasn’t my primary point. I may not have made my point clear. A prior post said the 7.3 would be much cheaper to build. I don’t think that is the case. The cheapest route would have been to revise the 6.2. Ford chose to go with a clean sheet design. That being the case, they chose a pushrod design for multiple reasons, including its compact dimensions. OHC is definitely better for high rpm. It wasn’t needed for truck applications. For lower rpm ranges, a pushrod design works. Ford reps have even mentioned that the compact dimensions were a benefit.

I also think this could be a good performance engine. I think it would be great as a factory option in the Raptor. I don’t see Ford putting it in the Mustang. Doesn’t mean it won’t find its way into Mustangs.

I got your point, points for that matter.
I just don't see Ford putting out that kind of money that a clean sheet design costs.
Designing the motor isn't the only expense.
All new tooling.
Training for all the techs and suppliers
Logistics.
The recently upgraded 6.2 would of been the better choice.
The motor has already paid for itself.

The 6.7 would of been unique

Something else is going on here.......
This has the makings of a backdoor performance engine.

 

[engineermike]

.....just like the v10....

 

[Fatguy]

I uSeD mS pAiNt To MeAsUrE aNd ScAlE.

Seriously?

Try it yourself.


The fact is the 7.3 is shorter in height than the Coyote, and if you go bottom of the pan on each to top the 7.3 will also be shorter in length (every person interviewed by Ford says the Coyote is taller). So I cropped the extended part of the 7.3 pan off and set the height as the same for each (even though the 7.3 should still be shorter), laid them both vertically and there you go!


It pans out just as hot rod says - it’s the pan! Everything else is a none issue but the pan. Not a deal breaker by any stretch of the imagination but it is not a length issue.


Only one Ford person said it was longer ergo possible firewall issues, but nobody else mentioned it. But don’t believe me, Hot Rod says it’s the oil pan and they have more authority on the matter than you or me.

 

[CurtisH]

I got your point, points for that matter.
I just don't see Ford putting out that kind of money that a clean sheet design costs.
Designing the motor isn't the only expense.
All new tooling.
Training for all the techs and suppliers
Logistics.
The recently upgraded 6.2 would of been the better choice.
The motor has already paid for itself.

The 6.7 would of been unique

Something else is going on here.......
This has the makings of a backdoor performance engine.

I don’t disagree. I don’t know enough about Ford’s plans to figure out why they spent so much money designing this engine.

 

[engineermike]

... 7.3 will also be shorter in length (every person interviewed by Ford says so)....

The 7.3 is 2.5” longer than the coyote, just by shear virtue of the bore spacing.

 

[MasterCylinder]

.....just like the v10....

Still would have liked the option for the boss 351 V10. Even if it did make the same power as the voodoo.

 

[w3rkn]

I figured it out guys....

"Fatguy" doesn't like to buy premium gas! That is his secret abhorrence to supercharging, is that he misses leaded gas. As He freely admits to needing/wanting TQ down low, but only from cubic inches! Not high compression supercharged engines, due to his nostalgia of an ancient era.

So... I've been mistaken this whole thread, since nothing else matters when it comes to owning a 7.3 big block, it seems that "Fatguy" is indeed in the wrong forum and needs to head over to the F-250 Forums. Most of the people there don't track their cars either and are looking forward to the new 7.3 for stump pulling..!

 

[jake_zx2]

But don’t believe me, Hot Rod says it’s the oil pan and they have more authority on the matter than you or me.

And the engineers at Ford that actually KNOW everything about the engine THEY created said it won't fit, but yeah, their authority is wrong LMAO

I just can't believe this is still going on. You have to TRY to be this fucking dense

 

[Fatguy]

The 7.3 is 2.5” longer than the coyote, just by shear virtue of the bore spacing.

That’s it? That’s all?

 

[jake_zx2]

That’s it? That’s all?

It's quite apparent you're not a V8 owner, otherwise you'd know how crucial AT LEAST 2.5" is in these engine bays

And you wouldn't have this inferiority complex, either

 

[Fatguy]

And the engineers at Ford that actually KNOW everything about the engine THEY created said it won't fit, but yeah, their authority is wrong LMAO

I just can't believe this is still going on. You have to TRY to be this fucking dense

We are taking our ques from guys doing interviews probably about questions they didn’t think about before hand. Every one says something else about putting it in the Mustang. If engineermike is correct then 2.5” longer is the number. That is nothing - Nothing!

That oil pan is the big problem.


And we don’t have specs or dimensions on the engine. Only one person ever said there may be a fit problem and didn’t say it with certainty. He didn’t say it would not fit. The others all said it would fit. So the Mustang may exist with a big brawny 7.3 Godzilla motor. How will the Coyote folk carry on...


The horror, the horror...

 

[jake_zx2]

We are taking our ques from guys doing interviews probably about questions they didn’t think about before hand. Every one says something else about putting it in the Mustang. If engineermike is correct then 2.5” longer is the number. That is nothing - Nothing!

That oil pan is the big problem.


And we don’t have specs or dimensions on the engine. Only one person ever said there may be a fit problem and didn’t say it with certainty. He didn’t say it would not fit. The others all said it would fit. So the Mustang may exist with a big brawny 7.3 Godzilla motor. How will the Coyote folk carry on...


The horror, the horror...

So yeah, you're ignoring the authority of the people who CREATED the engine, and putting all your faith in a magazine editor...

Got it

 

[Fatguy]

It's quite apparent you're not a V8 owner, otherwise you'd know how crucial AT LEAST 2.5" is in these engine bays

And you wouldn't have this inferiority complex, either

What the F?

V8 owner for over 32 years and 2.5” is nothing. Nothing for a swap. In fact there is less ancillary crap around this motor to deal with so it’s nothing.


Just out of curiosity - bud - how many V8s in your life and how many years?

I won’t even get into the trucks...


Anyway nice try derailing this thread - it didn’t work.

Sponsored