Ford Performance selling HPP turbo

[w3rkn]

FB5Z-6010-B is the newly revised part number. Ford made some minor changes to the deck. But yes, you won't have any worries with this engine block and it will take plenty of power and abuse.

Also, it's around $550 + shipping for the -B (newest) revision, so my last order was something like $630 shipped. A small price for peace of mind.

How do these differ from the RS block's casting, other than material..?

Sponsored

 

[w3rkn]

I was talking about the latest version of the 2.5 I4. The engine that was used in the Fusion and a million other applications. That engine is a closed deck, single piece main girdle engine.
The later 2.0 was/is a semi closed deck.
The Mustang 2.3 is an open deck engine with a very thin block material at the bottom of the water jacket.

The combination that I'm going to end up going is:
2.5 Duratec block
2.3 Ecoboost crank
2.0 Ecoboost rods
Custom 89mm piston (to accept the EB wrist pin)

This combination has already been proven to 800 hp.

I just need to figure out if I want to use a cast manifold for longetivety or an equal length stainless for better flow. Probably a cast one as I would rather have it one and done.

I'm searching now what to do about a transmission...

I am not sure what you are missing. What are you trying to accomplish/do..?
Is this going into your mustang?


If so, nearly everybody here has answered your question. If you want high horsepower out of the 2.3 liter ecoboost platform, just start out, using the Focus ST 2.0 block... and you are good for major horsepower. It's been done hundreds of times and very easy to do... why are you trying to complicate things..?


ed:
Try contacting Tune+

 

[D K]

Sorry

didn't mean to derail the thread.

This is a track build going into a different car.

I am not sure what you are missing. What are you trying to accomplish/do..?
Is this going into your mustang?


If so, nearly everybody here has answered your question. If you want high horsepower out of the 2.3 liter ecoboost platform, just start out, using the Focus ST 2.0 block... and you are good for major horsepower. It's been done hundreds of times and very easy to do... why are you trying to complicate things..?


ed:
Try contacting Tune+

 

[Gogoggansgo]

According to Ford the HPP engine has improvements over the RS application:

High-tensile cylinder liners, improved piston rings, and a bespoke cylinder head. A new head gasket handles the increased pressures created by an enlarged turbocharger cramming 22 psi into the intake and reduced 9.37:1 compression ratio.

they did most of those changes because they know a lot of people won’t run premium fuel or it’ll be daily driven. Most focus RS owners for the most part are into the click and tend to be on top of what gas they run, tune it, ya know what i i mean. Point being they want this new Ecoboost variant to survive

 

[USMCtoARMY]

they did most of those changes because they know a lot of people won’t run premium fuel or it’ll be daily driven. Most focus RS owners for the most part are into the click and tend to be on top of what gas they run, tune it, ya know what i i mean. Point being they want this new Ecoboost variant to survive

I follow, but all I was doing is posting what Ford was publishing. I don't believe these "new" technical changes means you can tune this engine variant up to higher HP/TQ numbers and it be safe. I still believe it will inherently be weak as it stands. I wish Ford would have never dropped the 3.7L V6...of course I'm biased. Brilliant engine that handles mods to include boost like a champ and is nearly bullet proof. Imagine what would have happned had they released a 3.5 EcoBoost variant.

 

[Gogoggansgo]

I follow, but all I was doing is posting what Ford was publishing. I don't believe these "new" technical changes means you can tune this engine variant up to higher HP/TQ numbers and it be safe. I still believe it will inherently be weak as it stands. I wish Ford would have never dropped the 3.7L V6...of course I'm biased. Brilliant engine that handles mods to include boost like a champ and is nearly bullet proof. Imagine what would have happned had they released a 3.5 EcoBoost variant.

the 3.7 is a good engine buts not amazing IMO, that’s mainly due to the fact Ford never did anything with it. Chevy did one thing right with there line up and used the v6 at the middle engine. But once again 335hp ain’t shit today folks. So you either want to save a few bucks or you really really like V6s. For me ford could of done it better, either drop the v6 in 2015 and do what they’re doing now , or take the v6 to 350hp which wouldn’t be that hard and use it as the cool alternative. Right now ford is in an odd spot with the engine range for the mustang. In my opinion they need more range, but they won’t get too crazy because the coyote is the baseline at the end of the day. So until we see 500plus hp Mustang GT, i doubt we will see a 2.7 or 3.5 Ecoboost mustang. And that’s a damn shame

right now it would be nice to have a 400-415hp twin turbo something,

 

[StealthStang]

Yeah i agree, anything more than the 2.3L Ecoboost and the GT would look bad. Ford quotes high HP numbers for the GT but since its N/A the reality is it doesnt push a huge amount of torque, its inline with what boosted euro cars are doing with 5 or 6 cylinders.

In fact, the euro spec 2018+ Mustang GTs don't perform all that great since they have much more restrictive exhaust regulations to abide by as well as C02 emissions so the tune is less aggressive too. The Euro GT is already getting beaten by 2.5L or greater boosted engines.

A 5 or 6 cylinder Ecoboost would almost certainly outperform a GT with just stage 1 upgrades, and Ford just can't risk that because the unfortunate reality is that they will piss off a whole bunch of their old fart customer base who think N/A V8s are the only engines that should be in the mustang. Yet Fords 3.5L Ecoboost platform is capable of 700HP from the factory but its unlikely we will see that kind of engine in any Mustang for a while.

 

[w3rkn]

FYI... built 2.3 EB are getting 500~600hp, while tuned 2.3's are getting 400hp to the wheels, with more torque than the v8s. The Mustang doesn't need a turbo v6, just a tuned RS longblock, to push it's weight on the streets.

HPP will have better all-around performance than an equally equipped GT. It's that some People just don't like the harmonics of an inline-4 turbo engine...!

 

[USMCtoARMY]

FYI... built 2.3 EB are getting 500~600hp, while tuned 2.3's are getting 400hp to the wheels, with more torque than the v8s. The Mustang doesn't need a turbo v6, just a tuned RS longblock, to push it's weight on the streets.

HPP will have better all-around performance than an equally equipped GT. It's that some People just don't like the harmonics of an inline-4 turbo engine...!

I don't think there is anything wrong with turbo 4 cylinders. I quite like them. I like the 4 cyclinder EcoBoost too. I just wish they would have made the factory block stronger, but obviously it was a business decision with the GT. I went with the six, because it's a better block and required little for me to do with the internals to get my HP/TQ goals. I don't think the Mustang catalog needs a turbo v6 I just think it would have been great if they had released one. Personally, I'm good, I have a TT 3.7 waiting on me. I love a good turbo car regardless of the liters that's printed on the block.

 

[Gogoggansgo]

Yeah i agree, anything more than the 2.3L Ecoboost and the GT would look bad. Ford quotes high HP numbers for the GT but since its N/A the reality is it doesnt push a huge amount of torque, its inline with what boosted euro cars are doing with 5 or 6 cylinders.

In fact, the euro spec 2018+ Mustang GTs don't perform all that great since they have much more restrictive exhaust regulations to abide by as well as C02 emissions so the tune is less aggressive too. The Euro GT is already getting beaten by 2.5L or greater boosted engines.

A 5 or 6 cylinder Ecoboost would almost certainly outperform a GT with just stage 1 upgrades, and Ford just can't risk that because the unfortunate reality is that they will piss off a whole bunch of their old fart customer base who think N/A V8s are the only engines that should be in the mustang. Yet Fords 3.5L Ecoboost platform is capable of 700HP from the factory but its unlikely we will see that kind of engine in any Mustang for a while.

no the right hand coyote has a really shitty header on the passenger side that restricts flow lol

 

[StealthStang]

no the right hand coyote has a really shitty header on the passenger side that restricts flow lol

Its probably all of the above then, different tune, more restrictive exhaust ( with something called a OPF required for 2019 onwards ) and the poor header design you mention. Then the fact that all RHD models are premium spec that adds extra weight too. So it really makes no sense to get the GT past 2018 in RHD spec, unless, you plan to mod it or just want a cheap V8 for the sake of it. Before people say you can just mod the exhausts, they are getting really hard about the rules in Europe so your car will fail roadworthy tests if you do.

And if anybody thinks im joking about how bad the facelift RHD "euro" spec A10 GT is, here is a video of it doing a drag race using 95 RON fuel:


As you can see it really struggles against the Turbo cars, as far as i know the pre face lifts werent this slow. Sure its an auto and launch control wasnt used, but i can tell you for a fact that my Roush Ecoboost does 13s on an auto 6spd without launch control too.

At least in SA we can mod them quite a bit and its no big deal with the law here, so you could get that GT performing properly again. Though the total cost is going to be absurd so personally id stick to the ecoboost for now. I just need from the factory one or two more cylinders or a stronger 4 pot block and Id upgrade

 

[w3rkn]

If they didn't turn off traction control, then it doesn't matter.

 

[StealthStang]

If they didn't turn off traction control, then it doesn't matter.

Erm why doesnt it matter ? If they were all on the same modes thats all that matters.
You do know that some cars launch better with traction control and many cars the "off" mode isnt even off anyway ?

Also, you seem to have selective reading, I said that i can hit 13s with traction control on with my car so explain to me again why it doesnt matter ?

And lastly you completely stepped around what we were talking about which actually is that the new Euro Spec GTs have noticeably reduced performance.

 

[w3rkn]

Erm why doesnt it matter ? If they were all on the same modes thats all that matters.
You do know that some cars launch better with traction control and many cars the "off" mode isnt even off anyway ?

Also, you seem to have selective reading, I said that i can hit 13s with traction control on with my car so explain to me again why it doesnt matter ?
And lastly you completely stepped around what we were talking about which actually is that the new Euro Spec GTs have noticeably reduced performance.

Because we are talking car's potential. If they are already "nannied" then all we get is the programmer's pace, not the car's.


And just so you know, I love turbo cars, but what they do give up is low-speed throttle modulation and attenuation. In that video, did you see how slow the v8 came out of the hole..? It sounded like it was dog'd & being held back. I personally don't see standstill acceleration as an end-all, anyways. As mentioned before, a 5mph rolling start is a more accurate (5~75mph). And my favorite 70~140mph. With those two times, One can tell an awful lot about two different cars/engines/etc..



I don't make money driving a "sportscar", so how it handles & performs on the streets, is 10x more important than having another car 0.05s faster traps, etc. My life is not measures in 12 second increments, but in how well your brakes hold up, bcz negative g's tickly my nuts.

 

[StealthStang]

Because we are talking car's potential. If they are already "nannied" then all we get is the programmer's pace, not the car's.
And just so you know, I love turbo cars, but what they do give up is low-speed throttle modulation and attenuation. In that video, did you see how slow the v8 came out of the hole..? It sounded like it was dog'd & being held back. I personally don't see standstill acceleration as an end-all, anyways. As mentioned before, a 5mph rolling start is a more accurate (5~75mph). And my favorite 70~140mph. With those two times, One can tell an awful lot about two different cars/engines/etc..

I don't make money driving a "sportscar", so how it handles & performs on the streets, is 10x more important than having another car 0.05s faster traps, etc. My life is not measures in 12 second increments, but in how well your brakes hold up, bcz negative g's tickly my nuts.

Well in that case if you're on the streets the odds of you having the time to go and switch traction control off and then enable launch control ( which is just another form of traction control anyway ) is zero, so having a good stock launch with all the nannies on is important since theres not going to be much heat in the tyres or a good symmetric road surface for the rear wheels.
Personally i think launch control is a marketing gimmick anyway since most people wont use it other than those who do competitive drag racing, and also manufacturers can deny warranty if you use it too much ( which BMW used to do a lot for the SMG cars ).

The HPP is going to be formidable for street driving since its not going to be struggling fighting the rear end as much and its got a lot less mass and better symmetrical mass to rotate around corners. Ford is wasting time trying to use the N/A 5.0 with the current emissions and standards. Forced induction is clearly the future yet their are too many excuses and appologisers about the 5.0s performance but its just not good enough in light of what the rivals are bringing and they arent even bringing their best.

Sponsored