Who will swap for the new 7.3 V8!

[engineermike]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Continental

Proof

Nobody is arguing that the modular v8 wasn't used in a FWD car. The fact that it was used in a FWD application DOES NOT PROVE that the entire engine family was "designed and intended for FWD applications." In fact, the very first application of the modular v8 was RWD, and the FWD version didn't show up for another 5 years.

Sponsored

 

[engineermike]

....The days of propping up an argument because it was written in a book have gone. ...

So in your mind, we can all just go around making up whatever we want, state it as fact, refuse to supply sources, and expect everyone to believe us without question?

 

[TexasRebel]

And yes it’s in its DNA as previously stated and why some call it the front wheel drive modular V8.

Who calls it that?

 

[Fatguy]

I have to agree here. I remember swapping a Caddy 500 into a G-Body when everyone looked at us funny when we mentioned it. We had to make the motor mounts. I actually cobbled the headers together by using (2) old 'build your own' header kits and a bunch of (ugly) welding. I've done TPI and modified TBI swaps into old vehicles. I've worked on LSx swaps before you could yank a 5.3 from just about any yard. The tuning part is hard - I will grant you that - but on stockish later model engine transplants, in my lowly opinion, adapting the OEM harness to the transplant vehicle was actually harder, or at least more time consuming. I remember laying out an entire LS1 harness on the living room floor, with a copy of the GM wiring diagrams and a copy of the transplant vehicle's wiring harness. That simply sucked.

Of course that was before you could google "wiring harness pinouts" and get a PDF of everything you needed.

It may be easier but it depends on Ford and whether they will offer up the crate motor. I think they will:

“Ultimately, time will tell if this engine will be a hit with the performance-minded set. We envision many aftermarket parts, but the real hope is that Ford Performance Parts recognizes our desire for horsepower and offers the 7.3L in a drop-in crate engine package. With a performance intake, cam and FPPS popular Control Pack this would make a wicked-good option for any racer or street enthusiast.”


I copied this from hotrod.com. They are not so negative about the the swap. If interested:


https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.hotrod.com/articles/inside-look-fords-new-7-3l-pushrod-v8/amp/

 

[TexasRebel]

So in your mind, we can all just go around making up whatever we want, state it as fact, refuse to supply sources, and expect everyone to believe us without question?

Yeah... the future is looking bleak.

 

[Fatguy]

Yeah... the future is looking bleak.

No!


You have all the tools on your phone to prove/disprove affirm or dismissive information on the go. Nobody goes to the library to research unless it is a most serious academic dissertation. If you are too lazy to vet statements or claims yourself, then you take your chances with what you do with the information. But unlike the past, you are in control and don’t have to rely on “sources”.

 

[5.2 liters of democracy]

Nobody goes to the library to research unless it is a most serious academic dissertation.

Want to post a source on that claim?

 

[Erik427]

A functioning engine in an FWD car DOES NOT prove what you stated, that the modular v8 was "designed and intended for FWD applications". All it proves is that it was made to work, NOT that it was the intent of the original design team. Try to follow the bouncing ball.....if I were to say that the modular V8 was designed and intended for RWD applications, that would directly oppose your statement, correct? Does the modular v8's simple existence in RWD vehicles prove my point any more than the existence of it in FWD proves yours? No! Example: The Dodge v10 was developed for the truck, then adapted for Viper use. Does the simple existence of the v10 in the Viper disprove that it was developed for the truck? No!



If the source is crap, then for sure I will. If the source is valid, then I will learn something new.

You really don't want us to dig through press releases from the early 1990's?

 

[Erik427]

It may be easier but it depends on Ford and whether they will offer up the crate motor. I think they will:

“Ultimately, time will tell if this engine will be a hit with the performance-minded set. We envision many aftermarket parts, but the real hope is that Ford Performance Parts recognizes our desire for horsepower and offers the 7.3L in a drop-in crate engine package. With a performance intake, cam and FPPS popular Control Pack this would make a wicked-good option for any racer or street enthusiast.”


I copied this from hotrod.com. They are not so negative about the the swap. If interested:


https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.hotrod.com/articles/inside-look-fords-new-7-3l-pushrod-v8/amp/

Brian Wolfe was involved for a reason.

 

[Erik427]

For the people questioning the design purpose of the mod motor.

Yes it was indeed designed for FWD and RWD applications.
To pull this off, that engine family had to be designed from the very start in order to do both.

Windsor (302 - 351) are too long for a east west configuration.

People must remember, when this motor was being laid out to be designed
So were the plans to make the Mustang fwd.

Way back then, Ford even played with the idea of making the F-150 fwd based while offering awd as a option.
These plans included the Ranger.

One of the reasons why the Ranger and Foxbody Mustangs stayed in production is because those plans changed.
Thank the Heavens that they did.

 

[5.2 liters of democracy]

Here's a source from Popular Science discussing the engine in 1990.

https://books.google.com/books?id=l...QAhWmwFQKHSSiAEkQ6AEIRDAJ#v=onepage&q&f=false

According to this, it was designed for both. It was NOT designed solely as FWD based on this.

 

[Fatguy]

Want to post a source on that claim?

Yes!

No!


Ooops I contradicted myself...

 

[Fatguy]

Here's a source from Popular Science discussing the engine in 1990.

https://books.google.com/books?id=l...QAhWmwFQKHSSiAEkQ6AEIRDAJ#v=onepage&q&f=false

According to this, it was designed for both. It was NOT designed sole as FWD based on this.

King Solomon could not have chosen a better “source”!

But... sole use as FWD is not quite accurate as designed for FWD from the get go. But whatever, anything to exit this circular argument.

 

[5.2 liters of democracy]

Yes!

No!


Ooops I contradicted myself...

I may disagree with you, but I did enjoy that reply.

 

[DekiDoo]

Now it's up to 30 pages of garbage. To recap for anyone not wanting to read through the rest of this dumpster fire


It's 2 guys making opinion statements as facts while the rest of the forum is trying to use facts with people that can not be reasoned with.

Sponsored