Voodoo Theory

[Pablo GT350]

Going back to the topic of FPC, last night I was watching Chris Harris' take on Porshe's new 918 Hybrid supercar. Impressive to say the least.

It's 4.6 with the FPC is pumping out 608hp and it revs to 9000rpm! That's a staggering 132hp/litre. The F12 is "down" at 118hp/litre. Bare in mind these are exotics with not much expense spared so I'd be very surprised if Ford got over 105hp/litre. .

Is that not a V8? Lets see what the dyno curve says at 8000 rpm.

Sponsored

 

[Pablo GT350]

https://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=23300

oh here is one. omg its made by Ford even. 500hp+.
Now your going to tell me they couldn't make that emissions compliant if they had to.

And the good news is the 2015 will have quite a few of these features such as the cams if I'm not mistaken. So when I take delivery all I have to do is add the headers and CJ IM.

 

[on d bit]

He didn't say rw.. It's all besides the point; we're talking about production motors not modded... apples and oranges.

Voodoo is the codename for the GT350's motor.

Second, many owners have built their Coyotes to produce well in excess of 100hp/liter even when measured at the wheels.

I believe the point they were trying to make was that if engine builders could make a reliable motor hit 100hp/l Ford would be able too.

Of course the regulations and durability tests that Ford runs and needs to pass are far more strict than that of a contract engine builder.

 

[PsyopGoat]

Ferrari 458 Italia — 562 hp at 9,000 rpm: 4.5-liter, whats that work out to out 8000 rpm?

Hyundai Genesis type R, direct-injected 5.0-liter V8, 429 horsepower at 6,400. Extrapolate the output at 8000 rpms. Wouldn't be to shabby.

That depends entirely on how much torque they make at 8000 RPM.

 

[PsyopGoat]

BS. 100hp/L is easily doable. its been done by honda, bmw, ect... Look at the oem headers on an E92 M3.

As for Honda doing it, it's a much smaller task with smaller engines because it's easier to get them to higher RPM. 100 HP/L generally means a high reving engine or forced air induction.

 

[Falc'man]

Hyundai Genesis type R, direct-injected 5.0-liter V8, 429 horsepower at 6,400. Extrapolate the output at 8000 rpms. Wouldn't be to shabby.

If you're asking such a question you're indicating to me that you and I are not on the same wavelength. Let me try to explain it a little better.

Look at the capacity per cylinder.

For a 5 litre V8 it's 0.625 litres per cylinder. For a 4.6 it's 0.575 litres per cylinder.

That difference per cylinder has an effect on the size of the rotating assembly.

The lesser the number indicates the lighter rotating mass, which does two things,
1) it spins faster due to less mass,
2) can utilise the use of a flat plane crank, which further aids revs.

This second point is like a free ticket or bonus that a larger capacity per cylinder motor doesn't enjoy, because FPC in a V configuration is said to become unstable. Who knows, maybe Ford have made it work at 5.2 litres but I highly doubt it.

I won't claim to know where the sweet spot is but Porsche may have just found the limit at 4.6 litres for maximum capacity before FPC is rendered unstable in a V8. In other words if Porsche were to add cubes in the way of stroking or boring they would negate the balance and increase the mass of the rotating assembly, therefore no good.

Hope that explains my point of view a little better, and I'll be happy to be corrected.

Also, I'm not interested in aftermarket figures, be it from Ford Motorsport or otherwise. When we talk about the limits in production motors we shouldn't stray outside that.

 

[Shark77]

Ferrari 458 Italia — 562 hp at 9,000 rpm: 4.5-liter, whats that work out to out 8000 rpm?

Hyundai Genesis type R, direct-injected 5.0-liter V8, 429 horsepower at 6,400. Extrapolate the output at 8000 rpms. Wouldn't be to shabby.

Just for the sake of discussion... Assuming torque remained the same at 8000rpm as the respective peak power RPMs listed above, you'd have the following:

Ferrari example at 8000rpm: 500hp
Hyundai example at 8000rpm: 536hp

 

[nametoshowothers]

If you're asking such a question you're indicating to me that you and I are not on the same wavelength. Let me try to explain it a little better.

Look at the capacity per cylinder.

For a 5 litre V8 it's 0.625 litres per cylinder. For a 4.6 it's 0.575 litres per cylinder.

That difference per cylinder has an effect on the size of the rotating assembly.

The lesser the number indicates the lighter rotating mass, which does two things,
1) it spins faster due to less mass,
2) can utilise the use of a flat plane crank, which further aids revs.

This second point is like a free ticket or bonus that a larger capacity per cylinder motor doesn't enjoy, because FPC in a V configuration is said to become unstable. Who knows, maybe Ford have made it work at 5.2 litres but I highly doubt it.

I won't claim to know where the sweet spot is but Porsche may have just found the limit at 4.6 litres for maximum capacity before FPC is rendered unstable in a V8. In other words if Porsche were to add cubes in the way of stroking or boring they would negate the balance and increase the mass of the rotating assembly, therefore no good.

Hope that explains my point of view a little better, and I'll be happy to be corrected.

Also, I'm not interested in aftermarket figures, be it from Ford Motorsport or otherwise. When we talk about the limits in production motors we shouldn't stray outside that.

Minor comments, it is not unstable, rather the vibration is the issue. Vibration is related to speed and the unbalance present plus harmonics. Most high performance engines solve with a balance shaft when using FPC. Mechanically you can make a flat plane crank for virtually any size but can you make it smooth that someone will buy it. There is no stability issue, stability indicates it would oscillate in speed randomly or instantly parts would fly off.

The rotating mass is also affected by the material densities chosen ( really money or how exotic you want to get). The cylinder capacity is really not directly related to rpm limits. You really need to do the math to fully understand - the rules of thumb almost always fall apart in designs that are at the edge of the performance envelope. Piston speed, peak acceleration are affected by the rpm and the stroke, forces are affected buy the acceleration and the mass of the components. Since there are many variations on these parameters between the engines it is hard to make direct comparisons.

Suffice it to say ford has the engineering prowess to make this work as well as the third party suppliers they work with. The real question is can they get it to work (flat plane crank) at the power output they want for the Cost they want as well who knows if it is really flat plane crank.

Suffice it to say there are enough engines on the market that make this power output or more per what ever rule of thumb applied to say that it Is more than technically possible, but who knows what will really happen.

 

[Grimace427]

You've basically proven my point - NONE of those motors have the same cubes per cylinder (as the Coyote) which dictates the amount of revs that can be achieved whilst adhering to regulations.

Again, are you able to find ANY production engine that has an equal capacity/cylinder as the Coyote that can achieve 100hp per litre?

Lamborghini 5.2l V10 makes 560hp. Their 6.5l V12 makes 691hp.

What is a voodoo engine?

Many, as in more than 10 have built their 5.0 motor to more than 500rwhp n/a? I have not heard of one....maybe Im just out of the loop?

Yes, more than 10. I can't post the links here because I'm at work but you can easily search 500rwhp Coyote. JPC was the first hitting 507rwhp with their Coyote, then later 550rwhp and running 9 second 1/4 miles. A forum member did 522rwhp on pump gas out in California with heads/cams and Boss intake manifold.

 

[Grimace427]

https://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=23300

oh here is one. omg its made by Ford even. 500hp+.
Now your going to tell me they couldn't make that emissions compliant if they had to.

And the good news is the 2015 will have quite a few of these features such as the cams if I'm not mistaken. So when I take delivery all I have to do is add the headers and CJ IM.

Bingo. And it even has the stock 11:1 compression ratio.

This second point is like a free ticket or bonus that a larger capacity per cylinder motor doesn't enjoy, because FPC in a V configuration is said to become unstable. Who knows, maybe Ford have made it work at 5.2 litres but I highly doubt it.

I won't claim to know where the sweet spot is but Porsche may have just found the limit at 4.6 litres for maximum capacity before FPC is rendered unstable in a V8. In other words if Porsche were to add cubes in the way of stroking or boring they would negate the balance and increase the mass of the rotating assembly, therefore no good.

Minor comments, it is not unstable, rather the vibration is the issue. Vibration is related to speed and the unbalance present plus harmonics. Most high performance engines solve with a balance shaft when using FPC. Mechanically you can make a flat plane crank for virtually any size but can you make it smooth that someone will buy it. There is no stability issue, stability indicates it would oscillate in speed randomly or instantly parts would fly off.

Nelson Racing build a Chevy small block FPC with 358ci and made over 600hp at 9,000rpm. If such an ancient setup can handle an FPC with those cubes, Ford can manage with the Coyote architecture.

Not saying they have or they should. I would prefer a conventional CPC for the sound, torque, and overall driveability.



I think it's pointless arguing Ford can't produce a 500hp N/A 5.0 V8 engine. They can and can do so rather easily. Whether they will or not is the better argument.

 

[Pablo GT350]

I think it's pointless arguing Ford can't produce a 500hp N/A 5.0 V8 engine. They can and can do so rather easily. Whether they will or not is the better argument.

Yes. I cant believe we are arguing this point. They can, they did. Using basically non exotic parts. Staying under 8k rpms. To say they couldnt put their heads together and get that in a production car is rediculous.

 

[Pablo GT350]

Just for the sake of discussion... Assuming torque remained the same at 8000rpm as the respective peak power RPMs listed above, you'd have the following:

Ferrari example at 8000rpm: 500hp
Hyundai example at 8000rpm: 536hp

Thanks for doing the math. That was my point.

If you're asking such a question you're indicating to me that you and I are not on the same wavelength. .

I’m not asking a question. I do agree we are not on the same wavelength.

I won't claim to know where the sweet spot is but Porsche may have just found the limit at 4.6 litres for maximum capacity before FPC is rendered unstable in a V8. In other words if Porsche were to add cubes in the way of stroking or boring they would negate the balance and increase the mass of the rotating assembly, therefore no good.

Fine. I was never arguing that point.

Also, I'm not interested in aftermarket figures, be it from Ford Motorsport or otherwise. When we talk about the limits in production motors we shouldn't stray outside that.

This I don’t understand. You are free to avoid buying Ford Racing parts, but I don’t see why you throw out the results out of hand. I referenced the Aluminator XS.
https://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=23300
500+ horsepower out of 5L. IMHO if Ford wanted to certify this engine for emissions they certainly have the technology at their disposal. Maybe you don’t agree. Oh well.
Like somebody else on this forum noted about the new s550 5.0 “It's basically going to have the Cobra Jet intake cams, Boss exhaust cams, Boss heads with bigger valves (that even the CJ did not get), Boss rotating assembly, and a new intake manifold. I can't see it having less hp than the Boss engine and really it should have substantially more”.
And my thinking is based on keeping the revs below 8k. Actually I seriously doubt we’ll get a FPC but I would be pleased if we did. For me any engine that revs over 8k needs a dual clutch. That’s just me.

 

[Falc'man]

Lamborghini 5.2l V10 makes 560hp. Their 6.5l V12 makes 691hp.

The cubes per cylinder in those examples is less than 0.625 litres/cyl, so they don't count.

@nametoshowothers, the finer details of why/how I'm not fully in tune with so thanks for pointing them out - your post was beneficial to say the least. You seem to know a little more than the rest of us so I have one question for you. Why isn't there anyone here able to think of ANY PRODUCTION atmo engine, that has 0.625 litres/cyl, exotic or otherwise, that can push at least 100hp/litre? Actually, the real question is why have the manufacturers steered away from increasing volume per cyl up to 0.625L/cyl?

I can only think of one production engine that can do this and it's a flat six.

If Ford pull 105hp/litre from Voodoo I'll buy you all lunch. I'll round it down to 540hp.

 

[Falc'man]

Thanks for doing the math. That was my point.


I’m not asking a question. I do agree we are not on the same wavelength.


Fine. I was never arguing that point.



This I don’t understand. You are free to avoid buying Ford Racing parts, but I don’t see why you throw out the results out of hand. I referenced the Aluminator XS.
https://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=23300
500+ horsepower out of 5L. IMHO if Ford wanted to certify this engine for emissions they certainly have the technology at their disposal. Maybe you don’t agree. Oh well.
Like somebody else on this forum noted about the new s550 5.0 “It's basically going to have the Cobra Jet intake cams, Boss exhaust cams, Boss heads with bigger valves (that even the CJ did not get), Boss rotating assembly, and a new intake manifold. I can't see it having less hp than the Boss engine and really it should have substantially more”.
And my thinking is based on keeping the revs below 8k. Actually I seriously doubt we’ll get a FPC but I would be pleased if we did. For me any engine that revs over 8k needs a dual clutch. That’s just me.

That's a big if. Unfortunately until they do certify it it's irrelevant to the discussion. A set of rules where all manufacturers play by is what we're talking about. Otherwise one can squeeze 150hp/litre out of small block and then tell the world he can build engines better than Porsche or Ferrari.

 

[nametoshowothers]

The cubes per cylinder in those examples is less than 0.625 litres/cyl, so they don't count.

@nametoshowothers, the finer details of why/how I'm not fully in tune with so thanks for pointing them out - your post was beneficial to say the least. You seem to know a little more than the rest of us so I have one question for you. Why isn't there anyone here able to think of ANY PRODUCTION atmo engine, that has 0.625 litres/cyl, exotic or otherwise, that can push at least 100hp/litre? Actually, the real question is why have the manufacturers steered away from increasing volume per cyl up to 0.625L/cyl?

I can only think of one production engine that can do this and it's a flat six.

If Ford pull 105hp/litre from Voodoo I'll buy you all lunch. I'll round it down to 540hp.

Largely engine choices are about packaging versus performance requirements. A pushrod engine can be bigger in displacement, but smaller in physical size than an multicam overhead cam engine. So when you go to the mid/rear engine you have packaging issues. Also you have a choice in engine rpm, transmission gears and size for making your performance compromises. Also europe taxes cubic inches, so many EU manufactures have made smaller engines (discplacement not necessary weight or size) for smaller cars and historically had high RPM's to get around taxes. North America has not had the tax issue and so therefore historically made bigger displacement engines. So now we are seeing more global design principals in which North American engines are becoming smaller and revving higher. Also exotic car guys have always played with V12's instead of V8's (not hard and fast rule). So many reasons for the engine choices that are not directly related to the actual engineering of an engine of a certain size for a certain output. Also seeing more V8's in EU cars as well - actually have Mercedes making more large displacement V8's than Ford (at least AMG).

Sponsored