Who will swap for the new 7.3 V8!

[bootlegger]

Depends on weather you include heads on an FBO. If you exclude heads, I agree....not able to touch them. If you include heads in an FBO, then port work and valves should be allowed...as a new set of heads would have those anyways.

With that said, swapping heads on these is a simple en devour.

Most people exclude heads in FBO. Full bolt on is generally intake, tune, headers, and exhaust.

Sponsored

 

[bootlegger]

Gearing can certainly make up for it...and so can RPM. With that said, you need both to take full advantage....which also means a 10 speed auto is almost a necessity as you need to shift fast and often to stay in the powerband.

I have a manual with 3.73 stock PP rear. With just tune, E85, cheap open element intake, and cat back (worth zero), I can melt the tires from a roll in 1st or 2nd just by punching the throttle. I don't mean at 7k RPMs either. Without heating the tires up with burnout, the torque in a mildly modded gen 3 Coyote is unusable in first gear on the street. I don't understand how anyone who has driven an E85 fueled gen 3 could say there is no torque. It's a lie.
In stock form, it was a bit lacking, but a lot of that was also a throttle issue.

 

[millhouse]

Most people exclude heads in FBO. Full bolt on is generally intake, tune, headers, and exhaust.

Fair enough. If that's the case...you're looking at no more than high 4XX HP as that truck cam is terrible.

 

[millhouse]

I have a manual with 3.73 stock PP rear. With just tune, E85, cheap open element intake, and cat back (worth zero), I can melt the tires from a roll in 1st or 2nd just by punching the throttle. I don't mean at 7k RPMs either. Without heating the tires up with burnout, the torque in a mildly modded gen 3 Coyote is unusable in first gear on the street. I don't understand how anyone who has driven an E85 fueled gen 3 could say there is no torque. It's a lie.
In stock form, it was a bit lacking, but a lot of that was also a throttle issue.

It's unusable because of gearing. Do you ever wonder why everyone complains how short first gear is? Or have you ever heard of folks that choose the C6 camaro because it just feels faster in day to day driving?

Again, I have no issue with the coyote engine as-is....especially in the S550.

Again, all my talking points are from a hot rodding perspective. I would love to shoe-horn this 7.3L into a salvage S550.

 

[Big Boss]

Most people exclude heads in FBO. Full bolt on is generally intake, tune, headers, and exhaust.

Got to love the full bolt on debate and what some people consider bolt ons or not.

I agree with you. That is probably what I would consider full bolt ons as well. Only one I might disagree with would be headers.

 

[millhouse]

Got to love the full bolt on debate and what some people consider bolt ons or not.

I agree with you. That is probably what I would consider full bolt ons as well. Only one I might disagree with would be headers.

Torque converter cough cough lol!

Highly debated for sure.

 

[BmacIL]

Got to love the full bolt on debate and what some people consider bolt ons or not.

I agree with you. That is probably what I would consider full bolt ons as well. Only one I might disagree with would be headers.

Not removing or disassembling anything in the heads and w/o FI is a fairly good "bolt-ons" criteria.

 

[Strokerswild]

I just watched that last video with the teardown.

Those heads - holy high-ports Batman! Nice straight shot at the intake valve. Big ass ports too, they remind me of 429CJ stuff. It won't take much to get some big flow numbers out of them, although they're pretty stout as cast by the narrative.

Some pretty nutty potential here by my eye....but I still don't want it in my S550.

 

[Big Boss]

Torque converter cough cough lol!

Highly debated for sure.

Haha

Not removing or disassembling anything in the heads and w/o FI is a fairly good "bolt-ons" criteria.

I would tend to agree.

 

[GT Pony]

Well hell if thats the case people might as well go buy a C6Z they have a 7.0 pushrod engine and they are pretty cheap now LOL!!

Speaking of that, I wonder if the OP (Fatguy) went and bought a Corvette (which he mentioned maybe doing) since he hasn't been here since June 2019.

 

[Hi-PO Stang]

How can anyone not want a 7.3 liter V8 in their Mustang ? I will travel across the country to hear first hand how the Godzilla sounds going down the quarter mile. I am aware the new Bronco will not have a V8 engine , what a shame. Someone at Ford may realize the Bronco would be perfect with a 7.3 liter V8 in it.

 

[Erik427]

Heads flow 325 cfm as delivered. 375 - 400 cfm fully ported.
Like I said.......there are a ton of aftermarket support gearing up for this motor.

 

[BmacIL]

How can anyone not want a 7.3 liter V8 in their Mustang ? I will travel across the country to hear first hand how the Godzilla sounds going down the quarter mile. I am aware the new Bronco will not have a V8 engine , what a shame. Someone at Ford may realize the Bronco would be perfect with a 7.3 liter V8 in it.

Because some of us aren't single minded and want to go around corners too. I don't want a huge iron lump hanging further out in front of an already heavy and front-heavy car.

7.3 absolutely wouldn't fit in the Bronco, has been confirmed. It's too long.

 

[NotagainV2]

How can anyone not want a 7.3 liter V8 in their Mustang ? I will travel across the country to hear first hand how the Godzilla sounds going down the quarter mile. I am aware the new Bronco will not have a V8 engine , what a shame. Someone at Ford may realize the Bronco would be perfect with a 7.3 liter V8 in it.

How can anyone want a heavy boat anchor that makes less hp and tq than a 3.5 ecoboost? LOL in stock form this engine isnt impressive at all.

 

[3star2nr]

Why.... That would be a stupid swap. Huge waste of money to put in a ridiculously heavy motor. And for what just to say you can?

There is no performance reason to do that swap

Also it should be noted that Carol shelby HATED large displacement engines. He never wanted to put the 427 in the cobra. He had to because at the time Ford didnt have the technology to produce enough power to compete with GM. And ford refused to develop a better motor than the 289 which they maxed out. It was out of necessity why he had to go to the 427.

Watch interviews with him he hated large displacement because they were heavy and fucked up the chassis dynamics. He also hated the fact that the higher torque meant all the drivetrains pieces had to be oversized, which compounded the problem. Shelby was all about lightweight.

Its 2020, we have technology. The 302 has virtually no limitations. Even the cyclone and 2.3 can be tuned to deliver insane power... Its not 1963 anymore... Why would you ever want to go back to cast iron and pushrods.., what's next converting to dual holleys and distributors...

Sponsored