Who will swap for the new 7.3 V8!

[engineermike]

I don't have a horse in this race, pun intended, but the dyno you linked to isn't really a good comparison shot of older big block torque numbers. The LS6 Chevelle was a solid cammed big block, with deep gearing, designed to make more mid range / top end HP than typical big block engines of the time period. While many consider it the "king" of the Muscle cars - it isn't really representative of the low end grunt of "old school" big blocks. .

The point of that post is that the old 454 only made 320 ftlb peak at a lofty 3900 rpm. The current 5.0 makes 320 ftlb at only 2400 rpm and by 3900 rpm is making 375 ftlb. This flies in the face of the OP's constant and disproven assertions. If you have some dyno graphs of lower performance Big Blocks of the era, please post them up, but I still think the current 5.0 will make more low-end torque.

....That car FELT faster. Even though my brain KNEW it was slower - it was hard to deny the difference in how it FELT. In fact it was a good 2 seconds slower in the 1/4 mile......

I dunno man....I'll be the first to admit that butt dyno's are the worst. I've been fooled half a second before due to noise alone, but I'm pretty sure I can tell 2 seconds difference regardless.

Look at the Cadillac 500 engine. I've personally wrenched on a couple of these and the off idle speed torque on these engines was simply ridiculous - but makes sense - when you figure it was designed to pull around a 4,000lb + boat of a car. I've personally seen a MILDLY modified (by that I mean replacement valve springs that don't float at 3000 RPM, a dual plane aluminum intake - the weight reduction was ridiculous versus the OEM cast iron monster of an intake, and a tuned Q-jet and headers) 500 make over 550 ft/lbs of torque on a flywheel dyno and that's with pump gas friendly compression ratio. That same engine made over 450 ft/lbs of torque at 2500 RPM.

The Cadillac 500 is a good example of a huge engine with great low-end torque that rarely found itself the subject of awesome engine swaps. It is everything the OP wants, but not very many got swapped into smaller lighter cars.

....And if we're being honest - and trying to make a fair comparison - it would be hard pressed to not address the elephant in the room - electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition, computer controls versus points and a Holley carb on the LS6 - not to mention the advancement in technology on pretty much every other front - roller drivetrains with less power loss through friction for example.

I completely agree, but again, the OP incessantly referenced the Big Blocks of yesteryear as the epitome of all desirable in an engine. That is also why I posted graphs of a modern truck engine (the 6.2 Ford), for a modern reference point of what a truck motor is.

We're spoiled right now. Spoiled by cars that anyone with the financial means can walk onto a dealer's lot and buy with zero hassle. Cars that run 12, 11 or even 10 second 1/4 mile times with no or minimal modifications all while having AC, power windows, cruise control, stereos, navigation, power steering, ABS - and the same cars actually drive nice and handle well. And personally I'm okay with being spoiled like that and I'll continue to enjoy it while it lasts.

Agree! This IS the golden age of performance! Look at the snowmobiles, PWC's, outboards, cars, motorcycles, UTV's....we're seeing performance levels never seen before in every category!

Sponsored

 

[Fatguy]

The point of that post is that the old 454 only made 320 ftlb peak at a lofty 3900 rpm. The current 5.0 makes 320 ftlb at only 2400 rpm and by 3900 rpm is making 375 ftlb. This flies in the face of the OP's constant and disproven assertions. If you have some dyno graphs of lower performance Big Blocks of the era, please post them up, but I still think the current 5.0 will make more low-end torque.



I dunno man....I'll be the first to admit that butt dyno's are the worst. I've been fooled half a second before due to noise alone, but I'm pretty sure I can tell 2 seconds difference regardless.



The Cadillac 500 is a good example of a huge engine with great low-end torque that rarely found itself the subject of awesome engine swaps. It is everything the OP wants, but not very many got swapped into smaller lighter cars.



I completely agree, but again, the OP incessantly referenced the Big Blocks of yesteryear as the epitome of all desirable in an engine. That is also why I posted graphs of a modern truck engine (the 6.2 Ford), for a modern reference point of what a truck motor is.



Agree! This IS the golden age of performance! Look at the snowmobiles, PWC's, outboards, cars, motorcycles, UTV's....we're seeing performance levels never seen before in every category!

Really?


So why do I want the new 7.3?

And how come I didn’t want to buy an old big block?


Really....


The new 7.3 will more than likely put out over 500 pound/feet of torque. And enough of the questionable graphs...

 

[GT Pony]

As long as we're talking about the ridiculous...

Why doesn't somebody put pushrods in a OHC engine? Like a flathead with cams on the outside.

Because the cams are already in the heads on a OHC engine. Guess you could have 1/2 inch pushrods with some exotic design, but it would be inefficient. Going OHC made pushrods obsolete.

 

[engineermike]

As long as we're talking about the ridiculous...

Why doesn't somebody put pushrods in a OHC engine? Like a flathead with cams on the outside.

I've seen something like this before....I want to say it was an airplane engine.

I might also point out that the progression of car performance engines has followed motorcycles, though trailing behind a decade or two. Flathead -> OHV w/pushrods -> DOHC -> DOHC raised runner, etc...and the performance improved with each step. It's funny that you don't hear any sport bike guys clamoring for pushrods or flatheads. The only ones who want pushrods don't give a hoot about performance in any way.

 

[engineermike]

So why do I want the new 7.3?...

Emotional reasons. You've said it yourself. And all of your pseudo-technical reasons have been debunked.

And how come I didn’t want to buy an old big block?...

You couldn't afford it in your youth and you don't really want an old car now. You've stated this.

The new 7.3 will more than likely put out over 500 pound/feet of torque. ...

At the crank, probably so. We'll probably realistically see it make about 420 at the wheels.

And enough of the questionable graphs...

Why? They don't agree with your ideas? Why bring facts and numbers into a visceral, irrational, emotional (all your words) conversation?

 

[Fatguy]

Emotional reasons. You've said it yourself. And all of your pseudo-technical reasons have been debunked.



You couldn't afford it in your youth and you don't really want an old car now. You've stated this.



At the crank, probably so. We'll probably realistically see it make about 420 at the wheels.



Why? They don't agree with your ideas? Why bring facts and numbers into a visceral, irrational, emotional (all your words) conversation?

Well because we seem to be skewing the numbers and results based on emotional attachments we may have to specific and specific types of engines.

If we were comparing a Toyota Corolla engine to the one in the Hyundai Elantra- bing/bam/bong - the facts would be spat out and the thread would be over in less than 10 posts. All I’m saying is that the emotionality also resides in you as well as the rest of us.


Because of this we tend to see things we think we see that may not be there or not to the degree it is there. On both sides. It makes for lively discussion but don’t pretend for one minute that one guy is this cold calculating scientist and the other is some emotional hippy yearning for Woodstock again along with fuzzy and inaccurate memories...

 

[engineermike]

Well because we seem to be skewing the numbers and results based on emotional attachments we may have to specific and specific types of engines....

One of us has posted numbers, graphs, and even sources. The other has not. I invite you to post your own numbers and sources so that we can compare, since you think mine are invalid and based on emotion.

 

[Fatguy]

One of us has posted numbers, graphs, and even sources. The other has not. I invite you to post your own numbers and sources so that we can compare, since you think mine are invalid and based on emotion.

I posted more articles and information about the 7.3 than anyone else. The rest will come shortly. The other information on the Coyote means nothing to me as I gave up with that motor with the 2017 version. I’m not interested in big blocks of yesterday. Said it at least twice. I’m certainly not interested in comparisons of the 2019 Coyote to engines made 50 years ago and then saying: See Better!

I just want the 7.3. I don’t want the 5.0! For all kinds of reasons and mostly for the ones never mentioned here...


Just saying...

 

[engineermike]

.....I’m not interested in big blocks of yesterday....

That's funny, because I thought you said....

Page 1:

..... Old fashioned big blocks are what they are and I want one! ....

Page 2:

.....The big blocks were a beast!!!! Don’t knock it till you try one. ....

Page 3:

.....I want to put it in one gear and drive all day on that like you could in the old cars. ....

Page 4:

.....I’m almost 60 and missed the heyday of the big block.....

Shall I go on?

 

[Fatguy]

That's funny, because I thought you said....

Page 1: (By their design but you want to believe it’s literal)


Page 2: (They were and still are. The one I’m in now was made in 2017. That does not mean I want to buy one from 1969)


Page 3: (Again a characteristic of the design lacking in the 4 valve cars today. And again said in reference to the new 2019 motor)


Page 4: (Missed the heyday and the original cars are now old and clapped out. But I did miss those days so what? You got a time machine? Then comes a new one with modern amenities in 2019: So?


Shall I go on?

Shall I go on?

 

[engineermike]

Ok so once again, you contradict yourself. You said you weren't interested in the old big blocks, I proved you said otherwise earlier, then you went on to prove my point again by defending the old motors that you said you weren't interested in. Nice work.

 

[Fatguy]

When you time shift by making comparisons over time - you can’t take a 2019 Coyote motor back to 1969. For what we had back then there was nothing better.


My fox body 5.0s were some of the fastest on the street. When I say that now people say they were clap trap engines that only made 225 horsepower. But they were one of the fastest cars on the street. Do I want my 18 year old Mustang back now? Hell no...


But if they made modern day versions then I’m interested. But the new ones will be faster and produce more power than the old ones. Because they are new with all the technological improvements. That’s why I want the new 7.3.


The past is left in the past...

 

[Fatguy]

Ok so once again, you contradict yourself. You said you weren't interested in the old big blocks, I proved you said otherwise earlier, then you went on to prove my point again by defending the old motors that you said you weren't interested in. Nice work.

It’s clear you are only going to see what you want to see and I can’t change that. And that’s the point. This is fun in a way. Why do you even care?


Let’s say you won all your arguments. What is the reward? Naked women dancing in cages? A 24 pack and a wrinkled old toothless whore? Are you self-actualizing?



Think about it...

 

[GT Pony]

I suddenly feel like I'm reading a court interrogation transcript - lol.

 

[Erik427]

I posted more articles and information about the 7.3 than anyone else. The rest will come shortly. The other information on the Coyote means nothing to me as I gave up with that motor with the 2017 version. I’m not interested in big blocks of yesterday. Said it at least twice. I’m certainly not interested in comparisons of the 2019 Coyote to engines made 50 years ago and then saying: See Better!

I just want the 7.3. I don’t want the 5.0! For all kinds of reasons and mostly for the ones never mentioned here...


Just saying...

I must agree with this.
Coyote is stuck in the mid '80's with the idea that everything would be FWD.
7.3 is overall smaller in size but much bigger inside.
Australian Super Cars use pushrod in the Ford Mustang.
Nascar used pushrods in the Ford Mustang.
Top Fuel Funny Car uses pushrods in the Ford Mustang.

Ford hasn't matched GM in displacement since 1973.
Most people on this forum wasn't even born.

A large cube Mustang sounds very nice.

Here's what to expect for the 4th gen Coyote.
Mono port exhaust like the 2.3 found in the Stang.
Possible Hot V Twin Turbo.
Displacement on demand.......you think the cams are complicated now?
This motor will be so complex the aftermarket will run from it.
Just look at the new Caddy 4.2 and tell me that this is what you want to call progress.

Sponsored