Tired of waiting for the GT500

[BmacIL]

The 7.0L in the C5 Corvette Z06 and the Camaro 5 Z/28 are small block, not big block. Physically, they are no bigger than the LS engine. Just bigger holes.

Fair, but my point remains about the size a Coyote-based engine would have to grow to in order to get to the same bore and stroke.

Sponsored

 

[martinjlm]

A four cam 7.0L would be unbelievable, though also enormous.

The 7.0L in the C5 Corvette Z06 and the Camaro 5 Z/28 are small block, not big block. Physically, they are no bigger than the LS engine. Just bigger holes.

Fair, but my point remains about the size a Coyote-based engine would have to grow to in order to get to the same bore and stroke.

I totally agree.

 

[loubif]

Ford is in the works of producing a new OHV 7.3L engine to replace the 6.8L V10 and the 6.2L SOHC engines, albeit for commercial use...

 

[Hack]

A Chevy big block is also OHV...

A 7.0L DOHC V8 is a big boy. If equaling the Chevy dimensions, It would have to grow in length by a minimum of 2.2" ((4.25-3.7)*4) just to account for the bore, the banks & heads would have to get at least 0.55" thicker/wider, and you'd want to beef up the block some for the higher forces in the engine. It'd be a significantly bigger engine than the Coyote/Voodoo, probably on the order of 2.5" longer and 1" wider and 0.5-1.0" taller. In terms of vehicle packaging, that is big.

Sounds like new math to me.

 

[BmacIL]

Sounds like new math to me.

How?

Is 4.25-3.7 not 0.55? That number for bore increases both the length and cross sectional width of the block and heads. Each cylinder in the bank would add that much, so 2.2" in length. The cross sectional width would make the width of the engine parallel to the ground at least 0.38" greater, if nothing else is changed for robustness (this is just basic geometry, FYI). The vertical height would also be at least 0.42" higher (0.388" + (0.10/2*0.707 = 0.035")) from the width of the bank increase + the stroke increase. It's not new math, just basic geometry.

 

[machsmith]

I've never driven a Camaro, although I've sat in every gen. last few gens, I'll compare to wearing a sheep skin condom (camaro) vs a trojan extra thin latex (mustang).

 

[Hack]

How?

Is 4.25-3.7 not 0.55? That number for bore increases both the length and cross sectional width of the block and heads. Each cylinder in the bank would add that much, so 2.2" in length. The cross sectional width would make the width of the engine parallel to the ground at least 0.38" greater, if nothing else is changed for robustness (this is just basic geometry, FYI). The vertical height would also be at least 0.42" higher (0.388" + (0.10/2*0.707 = 0.035")) from the width of the bank increase + the stroke increase. It's not new math, just basic geometry.

Everything you say is correct. I was wrong in how I was visualizing it. I still think that adding an inch to the height and 2.2" to the length isn't that much, though. Ford could fit a 7 liter DOHC V8 in the existing Mustang with only some minor changes to the engine compartment. Possibly no changes at all to the car.

And that would be great.

I just don't think a 1 inch and 2.2 inch change makes something the size of a V8 small or enormous.

 

[jlwdvm]

I've never driven a Camaro, although I've sat in every gen. last few gens, I'll compare to wearing a sheep skin condom (camaro) vs a trojan extra thin latex (mustang).

Huh?

 

[BmacIL]

Everything you say is correct. I was wrong in how I was visualizing it. I still think that adding an inch to the height and 2.2" to the length isn't that much, though. Ford could fit a 7 liter DOHC V8 in the existing Mustang with only some minor changes to the engine compartment. Possibly no changes at all to the car.

And that would be great.

I just don't think a 1 inch and 2.2 inch change makes something the size of a V8 small or enormous.

When you've been in packaging reviews looking at requirements for dynamic engine roll, virtual assembly, clearance to hot components, and then evaluating the clearances to parts in the engine bay, you start to realize how much a few mm makes a difference, let alone an inch or two.

 

[Hack]

When you've been in packaging reviews looking at requirements for dynamic engine roll, virtual assembly, clearance to hot components, and then evaluating the clearances to parts in the engine bay, you start to realize how much a few mm makes a difference, let alone an inch or two.

Sure it makes a difference. But my point was that you can get a lot of additional displacement with a relatively small change in the engine's overall size. I realize I didn't say it that way. Sometimes I think things are obvious, but I need to type a few more words in.

 

[Epiphany]

The bore spacing on the modular V8's Ford lives by has limited growth since inception. Getting to 5.2L what with coating the bores was a major undertaking. What you see now is likely the largest you'll ever see from the series. Anything larger that could possibly ever make the production cut and you are looking at a new engine. With electrification and hybrid powerplants right around the corner for the Mustang, I doubt you'll see it.

 

[Hack]

The bore spacing on the modular V8's Ford lives by has limited growth since inception. Getting to 5.2L what with coating the bores was a major undertaking. What you see now is likely the largest you'll ever see from the series. Anything larger that could possibly ever make the production cut and you are looking at a new engine. With electrification and hybrid powerplants right around the corner for the Mustang, I doubt you'll see it.

It should be interesting (and possibly very crappy) to see what happens. IMO electrification and hybrid are fine for the masses who are basically buying appliances to do a job, but a really bad idea for a performance vehicle. I would be fine with a smaller displacement, boosted V8, but I really prefer NA.

 

[nastang87xx]

If I remember right, the deck is as absolutely high as this architecture will allow for balancing and anymore bore will put the block integrity in jeopardy. 5.2L, as Epiphany said, is pretty much it.

 

[Hack]

And it's impossible to make a 5.2 flat plane crank engine..

 

[Darkane]

And it's impossible to make a 5.2 flat plane crank engine..

As a traditional FPC, yes it is.

Did you know ford only removed about 5 pounds from the crank? They removed a lot more and has to put it back on to avoid total failure.

Do a quick google search and get the weight of the 458 crank.

The voodoo crank weighs 50 pounds.

Sponsored