bifs66

I don't know if this has anything to do with your issue; but our 2011 Edge transmission and instrument panel began to have problems ; which were cleared up with the purchase of a new battery. The original factory battery was around seven years old and we were concerned about its age; although it seemed to start the car OK. During this time, the transmission began to act like a "lock-up" converter was engaging/disengaging in a harsh manner. We envisioned an expensive transmission repair bill. Also, the instrument panel began to do weird things; but seemed to correct itself after a bit of driving. Anyway, the battery finally began to fail on startup; and we had it replaced. Immediately, the problems with the transmission and instruments were eliminated, and haven't resurfaced.

This topic has jarred my memory of those days as I closely followed Ford's racing program. Correct me if I'm wrong; but I recall something about replacing the "ball socket" rocker arm valve train with rocker shafts straight from the the old Y-block. Perhaps the same bore centers made this possible. Isn't that ironic? As Mackinaw stated, in 1964 the engine was converted to DOHC heads. At first, the head was configured as on a regular DOHC V-8 (Coyote); but after further development, the exhaust ports were moved to the valley area and the intake ports routed between the cams.

Back then, the only Indy requirement was that the engine had to be 255 cu.in. There was no displacement increase allowed for push-rod engines vs. OHC racing engines. In other words, non of this "balance of performance"" stuff. This engine also ran gasoline instead of racing fuel to keep it more related to Ford production offerings. To me, this was also a test of the new SBF vs. the established SBC on equal ground as there were SBC entries too. As I recall, Jimmy Clark came in second in this initial effort. There was some controversy as the winning Offy was leaking fluids; and Clark had to back off to keep from crashing. The original version of the Ford GT (later referred to as the GT-40) was initially configured with this "Indy" engine.

My 2011 Edge's front Ford emblem had the blue color peel off several years ago.

Likewise.. These Mustangs were ordered to spec. 1965 Fastback GT 1969 Mach I 1985 GT 2008 Bullitt

Does the typical 6.2 truck engine have dual spark plugs; or does Indmar use special heads? This marine version of the 6.2 must be one of the best kept secrets in the industry.

If similar type pictures of a new Lincoln sedan were published, it would be painted in a dull, pastel blue/gray color inspiring little passion.

How long will it be before the new GM LSe motor becomes the "spec" engine for this series?

"We are all disappointed with racing in general but what is Ford going to do about it? They aren't allowed to race their main engine because its OHC and everybody knows they would mop the floor with the competition. Heaven forbid legitimate competition and innovation push racing into the 21st century out of the pushrod era. John Mihovetz is doing incredible things with the Modular considering the limited aftermarket. He has shown that there's potential but very few places to showcase it." Back when the Flathead Ford was king, sanctioning bodies welcomed the new overhead engines to enter competition without any weight adjustments, nor "BOPs" to "level" the playing field. They allowed innovation to occur naturally; and let the chips fall where they may. In recent decades, they make rules to maintain the status quo to protect investment in existing technology.

Anybody know a place (web site??) where Ford fans can register negative opinions regarding the trend for Ford to support GM "spec" powered Ford labeled race cars? I understand all the stated rationale behind these changes; but after decades of supporting Ford racers and buying Ford cars, I don't like it and I'd like to tell somebody at Ford.

I passed on the recent ARCA race because of this LS engine in everything; and will pass on tonight's truck race for the same reason. Unfortunately, I can believe Ford's surrender in these matters; but I am surprised that Toyota caved. There should be a public service announcements prior to the races that state that all participants will be using GM engines! I endure the "BOP" thing in IMSA; but at least a competitor's car and associated engine come from the same manufacturer.

Apparently the ARCA series has pretty much exclusively used the LS based engine for two years now (regardless of body decals); and now it seems the Craftsman truck series is going the same way. I suppose it won't be long before Xfinity and Cup follow suit. That will be the last straw for me as a follower of that branch of motor sports. They like to refer to that engine as the "LLmor NT1" as if it isn't a GM engine. In a different vein....There is a rumor out there that Ford may move to the "prototype" class in IMSA , after the GT has run its course (2019??). Anyone heard anything about this?

That is certainly good news. Didn't Dave Blaney have some success running a Ford powered Sprint car some years ago?

I guessed that if their race car sports "Ford" decals that some form of support is coming from a Ford related source. Historically, company logos on a race car indicate support (money/parts/etc.) If this is not the case in the original post regarding a GM powered race car with prominent "Ford" decals, I take back any criticism.

Who is it in Ford racing/promotion/advertising that would agree to support a GM powered race car under the Ford banner? Are they completely clueless?? If Ford isn't prepared to invest the effort to field a Ford powered racer, they should do something else. I personally find these "Fake Fords" embarrassing; but I'm old school.

I haven't followed the ARCA racing series much lately; but after the above posts referenced the LLMOR NT1 engine, I looked it up and found that the LLMOR "spec" engine has taken over the series. I suppose the same will now happen in the truck series too. This engine is based on the GM LSX architecture which is immediately obvious by its appearance. So, there we have it. Once this engine becomes ingrained as the standard; Ford enthusiasts will have to stomach our favorite cars/drivers are GM powered. It seems to me that Roush/Yates Ford racing engines will eventually go out of business (or switch to GM). Maybe things will change in the future when Ford racers will run Ford electric motors!

No true Ford fan would support this BS. I'd rather see a GM car win races than a GM powered Ford. For decades, it's been typical of so many racing organizations (both land and water) to create rules, weight breaks, etc. to hinder Ford when they had a technical advantage; or to flat out ban certain Ford combinations. I attribute one reason for this GM bias is that GM has consistently supported racers in both good and bad times; while Ford and Chrysler jump in and out of various forms of racing. If the majority of a group of racers use GM equipment, they won't take kindly to some Ford coming in and stealing their thunder. They will lobby the sanctioning body to protect their investment in money and equipment. And so it goes!

I don't know if this problem has any relationship to something I have experienced in my 2011 3.5 V6 Edge; but it sounds somewhat similar. At times, particularly with the A/C running, that I "step on the gas" for more than a couple seconds; a strange odor enters the cabin. At first, I dismissed as coming from the car/truck in front of me; but overtime, I know it is the Edge. Exhaust smell is different from the old days; so I can't say for sure where the strong smell comes from; but there is no denying that something is out of order. After a few minutes of easy driving , the odor goes away. After reading this thread, I'm going to take a detector with me to see if CO is entering the cabin.

"Even though the current 358 ci V8s still use pushrod technology they are pretty damn impressive. When an engine can produce about 900 hp at over 9000 RPM for up to 600 miles plus practice and qualifying laps that is nothing to be ashamed of. Not sure how many were paying attention to yesterday's race but Kevin Harvick missed a shift in his Ford during an early race restart and still managed to finish the race in 2nd place. That engine easily rev'd way past 10,000 RPM and never missed a beat. I wouldn't even want to try that in a new GT350 with its 4-cam flat plane crank engine. As a matter of fact, the electronics wouldn't let the Voodoo rev that high to begin with." I believe Harvick engaged a lower gear which mechanically over revved his engine via the drive train. No amount of engine electronics could prevent the high rpms. Thus, a Voodoo/Coyote OHC V8 would have also revved to extreme rpms under the same circumstances. It was interesting that Jr. blew up two GM engines over the weekend committing the same error; yet, Harvick's FR9 survived. Maybe there really is a difference in the designs.

As I remember, at the time Cosworth converted the Formula I DFV engine into a turbo engine for Indy; any Ford involvement was played down. As I recall, the Indy engine was mostly referred to as a Cosworth. I have to agree with mackinaw and would much prefer one the "Fairlane V8" derived Ford Indy engines. Either the earlier pushrod version or the later (and more successful) DOHC version. Sometimes people confuse the Cosworth effort with the earlier Ford program.

This has been a great discussion with lots of info provided. The benefit to keep engine enhancements compatible with existing production machining (bore-centers, etc.) is not something new. The original SBF(221,260,289,etc) had the same bore centers as the Y-block so that they could be machined along the same lines. I've often wondered if 289 heads could have been "adjusted" to fit a Y-block. Incidentally, In the last several "Engine Masters" challenges, the old Y-block engines have been producing unbelievable HP (and winning their class).

I believe the original firing order for the SBF was 15426378. With the 351W and later 302HO they changed it to 13726548. Either order will work on any SBF as long as the distributor wiring sequence matches the cam shaft arrangement. I remember reading that Ford changed the order to ease some stress points on the crank/bearings. I also believe that that the original SBF firing order was essentially the same as most vintage Chevy V8s. I think that GM set the LS engines firing order to that of Fords 351W/302HO.

Can anyone with experience with those conversion issues comment on whether the rear sump pickup arrangement of the 5.0 SBFs alleviated some of the problems with the front mounted oil pump? Also, I believe Ford offered a "short" water pump to save some length.

Having been a gear-head since childhood (1950's) , I am well aware of the history of SBFs (initially termed the Fairlane V8) installed in "sports" cars. In some cases, the lighter, smaller SBF just fit better than the SBC. My reference to the GM LS engine series (IMO, more a derivative of the SBF than the traditional SBC) was to address more recent history in which the LS engines were/are promoted as the "best" choice for performance applications. I think Koenigsegg's (Coyote based) engine project is at least one example that defies that notion. It's just a shame that the connection to the Ford engine will not be generally known. On the other hand, I recall some discussion of a Coyote-based open wheel racing series (Formula 5000 type). It would be nice to have a spec series that uses something other than GM engines.

What interested me most in creating this thread was that after seeing the Koenigsegg's 5.0 engine pictured in RoadandTrack, was its similarity to the Coyote. You read almost everywhere that the GM LS engine series should be the basis for any high performance applications. Yet, here was a supercar manufacturer that selected the Coyote architecture, no matter how much modified, as the basis for developing extreme horsepower. I can remember years back when the MOD type engines were deemed not capable of producing much power. Interesting that neither Koenigsegg; nor mags like R/T acknowledge the engines roots.