It weighs around 50 lbs. more and supposedly makes 450 horsepower and 500lbs. ft as it is, tuned for truck use. It could make weigh more horsepower if tuned for the Mustang.Why would you want to stick a heavy iron block 7.3 that makes less horsepower than a stock coyote in there.
Even with 3.73 gears I can't get proper traction down low.And there aren't enough of you that would actually buy one to justify the price it would need to command to get enough margin to pay for CAFE fines and the investment to make it work as a car engine.
The Coyote is a fantastic engine and outclasses pretty much anything made from the time you're referring to. You want to peel out with no revs? Get a GT and put 4.09 gears in it.
It could make weigh more horsepower if tuned for the Mustang.
Yea that would be the thing to keep in mind here.... While it does have an iron block, it is a far more simplistic engine meaning less parts = less weight. I am interested into Ford's reasoning for going back to a OHV architecture but the result is a much more compact and simplistic design.It weighs around 50 lbs. more and supposedly makes 450 horsepower and 500lbs. ft as it is, tuned for truck use. It could make weigh more horsepower if tuned for the Mustang.
From the interview I watched it sounds like that as displacement went up, the relative volumetric efficiency of the valvetrain started to go down. With that came issues with the size of the engine and yes, reliability concerns. Because the DOHC setups had such big valves and components, it was actually causing issues with cylinder filling and mixing. A single valve architecture was elected. This really will not negatively affect the motor due to engine speed. I can't imagine the redline being much higher than 5500 RPM, if that. Perfect for a big meaty single valvetrain. And you all think that OHV engines are dookie...lol.I am interested into Ford's reasoning for going back to a OHV architecture but the result is a much more compact and simplistic design.
Oh do not get me wrong, I am not knocking OHV designs at all! I would actually prefer Ford to take a more simplistic approach with their engine desings as I think the gen 3 coyotes are starting to show what over - engineering can lead to.From the interview I watched it sounds like that as displacement went up, the relative volumetric efficiency of the valvetrain started to go down. With that came issues with the size of the engine and yes, reliability concerns. Because the DOHC setups had such big valves and components, it was actually causing issues with cylinder filling and mixing. A single valve architecture was elected. This really will not negatively affect the motor due to engine speed. I can't imagine the redline being much higher than 5500 RPM, if that. Perfect for a big meaty single valvetrain. And you all think that OHV engines are dookie...lol.
Lol, that wasn't to you directly, just the xOHC community in general. Personally I believe OHV designs will always have a place in the heart of a true badass grunt.Oh do not get me wrong, I am not knocking OHV designs at all!
This is a little too oversimplified. The LS engine was also engineered with aluminum and iron in mind. Now does that mean Ford doesn't have an aluminum variant hidden away in the corner of a closet some where? Well...no. But let's go off of what we have here rather than over speculating. What defines an LS engine an LS engine is the main cap design, Y cross section design, the single main seal, and the cam core size. The castings block to block and iron to aluminum are actually different even with the same displacements. The Vortec 6000 for instance is NOT an LS2 casting.I really think the people naysaying just assume the engine exists in a vacuum.
"Too heavy because it has an iron block" - apparently unaware that the same engine can be made with both iron and aluminum blocks, like, I dunno, the LS? And that an aluminum block OHV engine is going to be lighter than an aluminum block DOHC engine?
Perhaps an even better example is 2010 GT500 vs 2011 GT500.This is a little too oversimplified. The LS engine was also engineered with aluminum and iron in mind. Now does that mean Ford doesn't have an aluminum variant hidden away in the corner of a closet some where? Well...no. But let's go off of what we have here rather than over speculating. What defines an LS engine an LS engine is the main cap design, Y cross section design, the single main seal, and the cam core size. The castings block to block and iron to aluminum are actually different even with the same displacements. The Vortec 6000 for instance is NOT an LS2 casting.
Considering Ford, I doubt they're investing money into making an aluminum derivative.
Also, if we HAVE to make a comparison, albeit a very wonky one, regarding the weight, an LS7 is something like 460lbs dressed.
Using that argument, you kinda shot yourself in the foot. The performance car use case for Ford Motor Company is hybrid and alternative powertrain, not displacement. Gen 2 EcoBoost in the GT, EcoBoost base Mustang, 2021 Mustang hybrid, Gen 2 EcoBoost Raptor, and every ST vehicle features EcoBoost. Doesn't mean that they may not necessarily throw a curve ball but look at the real data too. I honestly don't think anyone is doubting the engine's potential. But the future of Mustang is not displacement based on Ford's behavior and dropped hints as of the last several years.The performance car use case has always been a bit of a skunkworks figuring out how to turn a truck engine into a screamer.