Voodoo Theory

[Falc'man]

I am curious, would you mind running your numbers with a slight modification?


Hypothetically, 5.2 liters making 550 horsepower. No revs higher than 8500.

And do one for me with 510hp @ 8000rpm please Red

Edit: ....with 5.15 litres, 94x92 b/s.

Sponsored

 

[Johnb-5.0]

Coyote 5.0 with JPC Stage 1 CNC Ported Heads,Stage 2 Comp Cams and a Boss Intake manifold made 566 hp at 7200 rpms.
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/mmfp_1209_ported_coyote_heads_dyno_test/

 

[Falc'man]

Coyote 5.0 with JPC Stage 1 CNC Ported Heads,Stage 2 Comp Cams and a Boss Intake manifold made 566 hp at 7200 rpms.
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/mmfp_1209_ported_coyote_heads_dyno_test/

Does it pass as government regs?

 

[Dirk McGurck]

Does it pass as government regs?

That's just the Man getting us down, man.

 

[Red]

No problem. I'll post the numbers tomorrow evening.

 

[RTD]

Given what we now know about the heads/cams on the 2015 5.0, it appears to be intake manifold limited.

So I still say throw on the Boss or CJ intake manifold, an open element CAI like they did on the GT500 starting in 2010, DI, forged pistons with a comp ratio bump by 0.5 or 0.75, plus an overbore (PATW maybe) to 5.1 or 5.2 and come in at 510-520 hp.

#1 That makes it the most powerful NA American V8, besting the LS7's 505 hp.
#2 That makes it the first NA American V8 to produce 100 hp/liter.

 

[Red]

Something quick over lunch. Decided to run Falc'man's numbers first, as his is a more specific case than TTH's. I'll run two scenarios for TTH.

Falc'man's results:

bore: 94.0 mm
stroke: 92.0 mm
rod: 151.05 mm (to keep the pin height at the stock value)
displacement: 5,107.677 cc (311.67 cid)
rod/stroke: 1.642
mean piston speed (@ 8000 rpm): 24.53 m/s
max piston speed: 40.30 m/s
peak accel: 4,298 g's
max piston speed occurs at: 74.34 degrees before and after TDC

The following assumes 510 HP @ 8000 rpm

Torque @ 8000 rpm: 335 ft-lbf

BMEP @ peak HP: 162 psi

Assuming VE of 100% @ peak HP gives a BFSC = 0.520
Assuming VE of 99% @ peak HP gives a BFSC = 0.514

Looks like a feasible design, Falc'man. Piston speed is definitely on the high side, but in reason. BMEP and BFSC are well within reason. Would expect this to be quite a nice, tractable engine.

I'm a little rushed, but have double-checked the numbers and believe them to be correct. More to come later.

 

[Grimace427]

I'm assuming you guys are making crank HP guesstimations, right? The guys making 500+ hp to the wheels at under 8,000rpm are making you calculations seem unnessecarily complicated. I doubt any of those guys made the extensive mean piston speed calculations before throwing in some balanced forged rotating assemblies, ported heads, cams, intakes, headers, and throwing out those big numbers.

A 500 rated hp Coyote would put around 430-440hp to the tires, or basically what a lot of people are doing with bolt-ons right now.

 

[TearTheHorizon]

My number was pulled from a conversation I overheard. The redline is from a previous conversation I also happened to overhear. There isnt any validity behind my guess. But it is an educated guess.

 

[Red]

TTH: I ran two sets of numbers for you. First is @ 8500 RPM:

bore: 94.1 mm
stroke: 92.7 mm
rod: 150.7 mm
displacement: 5,157.5 cc (314.7 cid)
rod/stroke: 1.628
mean piston speed (@ 8500 rpm): 26.265 m/sec
max piston speed: 43.18 m/sec
peak accel : 4,900 g's
max piston speed occurs at: 74.21 degrees BTDC & ATDC

torque @ 8500: 339.84 ft-lbf
BMEP (@ 8500 rpm): 162.8 psi
assuming 100% VE @ peak power = 0.517

The latter two values, BMEP and BFSC, are entirely reasonable. But piston speeds and acceleration are likely too high for longevity. Recall that NASCAR & F1 have mean piston speeds in the 25.0 - 26.0 meter/sec range and the current Ferrari 458 engine is 24.30 meter/sec (@ 9000 rpm).

Case two changes the rpm, and rpm only, from 8500 to 7900:

all mechanical dimensions same as above

mean piston speed (@ 7900 rpm): 24.41 m/sec
max piston speed: 40.13 m/sec
peak accel: 4,233 g's
max piston speed occurs at: same as previous case

torque @ 7900: 365.65 ft-lbf
BMEP (@ 7900 rpm) = 175.2 psi
assuming 100% VE gives BFSC = 0.480

Now the mechanical forces stresses are better (and very similar to Falc'man's case), though still at Ferrari 458 levels. BMEP is essentially that of the 500 HP Aluminator @ 7500 rpm (so, currently doable). BFSC might be a little hard to get. If Ford could get the VE up to > 102%, say, at 7900, would make things easier. Anyway, case two seems more realistic than case one, imo.

 

[Falc'man]

Thanks Red

 

[Red]

I'm assuming you guys are making crank HP guesstimations, right? The guys making 500+ hp to the wheels at under 8,000rpm are making you calculations seem unnessecarily complicated. I doubt any of those guys made the extensive mean piston speed calculations before throwing in some balanced forged rotating assemblies, ported heads, cams, intakes, headers, and throwing out those big numbers.

A 500 rated hp Coyote would put around 430-440hp to the tires, or basically what a lot of people are doing with bolt-ons right now.

Thanks for your concern about my effort, but this takes little time. Mean piston speed is a trivial calculation: twice the stroke multiplied by the rpm. BMEP and VE vs BFSC are almost as easy (there is a division involved in each of those). Max piston speed, peak acceleration, and the location of max piston speed are more involved, true, but certainly not 'extensive', imo. I wrote a little code to do everything to make things easier/faster w/ less chance of error. Code runs instantly. Takes far more time to type the results here than anything else.

In case I haven't been clear, still: we are not designing engines, though I have been sloppy w/ the phrase. These handful of little equations are meant to check the feasibility of gross engine characteristics. All we need are bore, stroke, rpm, (rod length for max speed and accel and location of max speed), torque and/or hp and we can quickly perform sanity checks.

Yes, nobody who buys stuff to mod their engines/cars/whatever is concerned with this -- they are, however, relying on those who produce the parts to be concerned with this stuff. They (the vendors) will be the ones running extensive computations as in FEA (Finite Element Analysis) and/or CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) to name two major analysis fields.

Finally, Ford faces emissions and durability requirements (assuming this engine is intended for a street legal vehicle) that the guys who bolt on whatever do not. Much, much different scenario. I've done the hot rod/drag race thing, and spent a ton of money on it. Had a fine 302W back in the late 80's, and looking to have a nice 315W (that's not a typo ) in the near future w/ vintage Boss 302 crank, old SVO block, Crower rods, Wiseco pistons, Comp Cams cam, old J302 heads (ported), blah, blah, blah. And most importantly, machined, assembled and dynoed by people who know what they're doing. But... Would anyone buy that off the showroom floor to drive on the street, would it pass emissions, and would it carry a warranty? In my opinion, hell no...

 

[thePill]

Pill, my math might be a little off. But 358ci, is that under 5.0 liters?

Heres a flat plane chevy LS.

There are a handful of aftermarket companies and individuals that try it. Keywords: Handful, Aftermarket, Individuals.

No FPC V8 over 5 liters, I promise...

A Flat Plane Crank may be a no go altogether...

If I were really interested in a Ford V8 with a Flat plane crank, I would be asking for a 289/4.7 (or 4.6 if they could get that to work for a double tribute).

 

[Red]

Given what we now know about the heads/cams on the 2015 5.0, it appears to be intake manifold limited.

So I still say throw on the Boss or CJ intake manifold, an open element CAI like they did on the GT500 starting in 2010, DI, forged pistons with a comp ratio bump by 0.5 or 0.75, plus an overbore (PATW maybe) to 5.1 or 5.2 and come in at 510-520 hp.

#1 That makes it the most powerful NA American V8, besting the LS7's 505 hp.
#2 That makes it the first NA American V8 to produce 100 hp/liter.

You and I are on the same page -- my condolences, lol! However, I think the engine might be exhaust bound. Not faulting the folks who designed the current headers, as the headers obviously do a fine job given the design constraints: fitting in the engine bay and keeping the cats close to the exhaust ports. But still, I have to think a bunch of power is sitting right there. If Ford needs that much heat for the cats, I've been wondering if a header wrap, or some sort of insulation around the tubes, would allow the headers to be designed for more power.

Finally, I found this today. Thought some might find it interesting -- I sure did:

http://www.atiracing.com/links/articles/Coyote-Article-sm.pdf

Note the rpm limit they test to. Note the headers used on the dyno mule. Note how thin it is between 94 mm bores on 100 mm bore centers -- and with just four head studs/bolts per bore too. I'm amazed they don't have head gasket troubles there. And the fact that an electric water pump actually hurt power because it could not keep cylinder head temperatures under control. Anyway, lots of stuff in the article that I found interesting and perhaps applicable to where Ford might be headed w/ the Voodoo.

 

[Falc'man]

Who started this FPC rumour anyway? Wasn't it someone on here?

Sponsored