Crown Vic 4.6 3V

[mtl1977]

I was talking to a cop in St Joe, MI that had a new Charger PI and he was complaining about how bad it was in the snow...apparently the CVPI was quite a bit better. Being a cop isn't just about going WOT in chases. They have to drive like a normal person 90% of the time.

 

 

"I had a 94 wagon 5-sp I used for my customer appointments. 250k with no issues(one timing belt). Tough little sucker."

 

I had a 1993 wagon hand-me down from my mother in law...I kept it because it had a manual! Broken timing belt at 135k. No other real problems. Got $300 down on my '05 F-150 lease for trading it (163k miles). Should have kept it. (Eibach Pro springs, Tokico ZX2 S/R struts, fart can muffler...)

 

I still have a 1995 Escort GT. 37k miles. Bought it new in high school and kept it in perfect shape.

Edited March 7, 2007 by mtl1977

[waymondospiff]

I don't understand how Ford designed the SOHC 3V 4.6 to be taller than the old DOHC 4V 4.6? If the DOHC 4V 4.6 fit shouldn't the SOHC 3V 4.6?

 

Given the lack luster output of the current SOHC 2V 4.6, I'd be interested to see a mule running the new 3.5L Duratec. The added top end power might make it a better pursuit vehicle than the 4.6. And I think most fleet buyers would be happier with paying fuel bills on the six cylinder (Of course given the Edge's rather "eh" EPA rating, that measure might not go up much if at all.)

 

Scott

 

Editted to add: And I'm not sure of the origin of this 91-96 Escort love, but we can thank Mazda for the chassis & 1.8L "Twin Cam" - the Tracer LTZ & Escort GT were peppy little runabouts.

Edited March 8, 2007 by waymondospiff

[PolarBear]

I don't understand how Ford designed the SOHC 3V 4.6 to be taller than the old DOHC 4V 4.6? If the DOHC 4V 4.6 fit shouldn't the SOHC 3V 4.6?

 

Given the lack luster output of the current SOHC 2V 4.6, I'd be interested to see a mule running the new 3.5L Duratec. The added top end power might make it a better pursuit vehicle than the 4.6. And I think most fleet buyers would be happier with paying fuel bills on the six cylinder (Of course given the Edge's rather "eh" EPA rating, that measure might not go up much if at all.)

 

Scott

 

Editted to add: And I'm not sure of the origin of this 91-96 Escort love, but we can thank Mazda for the chassis & 1.8L "Twin Cam" - the Tracer LTZ & Escort GT were peppy little runabouts.

 

The counterpoint, of course, is that the fleet buyer interested in six-cylinder fuel economy isn't interested in a Panther-based car in the first place. The big draw to the Panther's has been their near-legendary durability and reliability, and a lot of that stems from the existing powertrain. My advice- don't fix what ain't broke.

[atomaro]

True, But you better baby that tranny! If its an auto that is..

 

 

Nope mine was a 5-speed. Only trans issue was that if you banged 2nd too hard and pulled down and not straight back, the rubber linkage "guide" (for lack of a better term...) would drop and screw up the linkage a little. I just learned to carry a long pry bar to pop it back into place.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

supposedly with the 3V, the engine itself isn't taller so much as the intake arrangement is. All I have to go on is hear-say.

 

I wonder if the HP upgrade that the 4.6L 2V saw this year translated into any gain for the 4.6L 2V in the panthers? I know the CVPI engine was already the power leader of the non-mustang setups, but, if the truck and the Panthers are using the same setups (wouldn't surprise me) then that change may have happened there too.

[Bob Rosadini]

I wonder if the HP upgrade that the 4.6L 2V saw this year translated into any gain for the 4.6L 2V in the panthers? I know the CVPI engine was already the power leader of the non-mustang setups, but, if the truck and the Panthers are using the same setups (wouldn't surprise me) then that change may have happened there too.

I have an 07 CV Sport that went on the road like Oct 6. I hit 17,000 last night on my way back from Jersey. Could the car use more power? I suppose. Could it use another gear? No doubt. but I'll tell you, while not a screamer, it will get out of its own way. I put a set of Flowmaster 40's on it, other then that, just the way Topgun painted it at STAP.! This thing will run circles around my old 2000 (41G pkg) that had 3.55's. Great car for the money

[Bluecon]

supposedly with the 3V, the engine itself isn't taller so much as the intake arrangement is. All I have to go on is hear-say.

 

I wonder if the HP upgrade that the 4.6L 2V saw this year translated into any gain for the 4.6L 2V in the panthers? I know the CVPI engine was already the power leader of the non-mustang setups, but, if the truck and the Panthers are using the same setups (wouldn't surprise me) then that change may have happened there too.

The F-150 intake is to tall. They use a cast aluminum intake on the Australian Falcon 5.4l 3v that is much lower.

[Traveler]

I have an 07 CV Sport that went on the road like Oct 6. I hit 17,000 last night on my way back from Jersey. Could the car use more power? I suppose. Could it use another gear? No doubt. but I'll tell you, while not a screamer, it will get out of its own way. I put a set of Flowmaster 40's on it, other then that, just the way Topgun painted it at STAP.! This thing will run circles around my old 2000 (41G pkg) that had 3.55's. Great car for the money

 

 

I concur. Mine feels stronger than the official horsepower ratings would suggest. I don't know what it is...better torque convertor...better factory tuning...throttle by wire...??? Its rather like my 99 Mustang GT I had prior to my 01 Cobra. Its a heavier for sure, but Ford has definitely got the 2-valve in these late-model HPP Panthers tuned pretty good. It has surprised me, quite frankly a few times at how well the engine pulls evens at speed. Plus, I think it gets better mileage than the 99 Mustang GT.

 

One thing I believe is a real set-back is the intake on these cars. To keep them quiet, I guess... they are terribly restrictive. I popped open the air filter box to drop in a new filter, looked up the intake tube and was shocked to see some sort of material in there that looked very restrictive. I haven't done it yet, but as soon as the warranty is gone...I think I'm going to do the Marauder airbox, tune and a CVPI zip tube.

[StevenJ]

Traveler, don't forget to switch to 3.55 gears, Ford Traklock, and a aluminum driveshaft while you are at it! You'll enjoy it more!

[Traveler]

Traveler, don't forget to switch to 3.55 gears, Ford Traklock, and a aluminum driveshaft while you are at it! You'll enjoy it more!

 

 

I've even wondered about a 3.73. I'm just not sure the bump from 3.27 to 3.55 is going to give me that much improvement vs. the costs of a gear swap. Of course, the only thing about the 3.73 in the CV's four speed auto is slightly higher engine speed on the interstate. Getting a locking rear with the gears probably would become a necessity for sure and I can only imagine the savings in mass weight going to the aluminum driveshaft...especially on a long car like the CV. That intake has got to go, though. I think it probably flows about as well now as having a couple of pairs of rolled up tube socks in there!

 

I'm not really sure modifying the Vic is going to really pay off much more than with just bolt-ons, though. I'm still left with a fairly heavy car and the image that goes along with the LX isn't one of outward sportiness like that of the Sport or the Marauder. I mainly want to target areas of obvious compromise.

[StevenJ]

Only the CVPIs and TCs have aluminum. I am pretty sure the stock CV's is steel. Traveler, if you do the gear swap to 3.55 or 3.73s with LSD, the marauder aibox, and a tune, you'll turn your car from a high 15s to mid 16s to a low 15s car easily. You might even hit 14.9 if you are luck! Heck, if you really want to put your money to use, get a set of Kooks longtube headers! Tony the Brit just has the Kooks kit and the MM airbox on his LXS and it ran 14.8! This is with an 87 tune too! This is with stock 3.27s!

Edited March 10, 2007 by StevenJ

[Traveler]

Only the CVPIs and TCs have aluminum. I am pretty sure the stock CV's is steel. Traveler, if you do the gear swap to 3.55 or 3.73s with LSD, the marauder aibox, and a tune, you'll turn your car from a high 15s to mid 16s to a low 15s car easily. You might even hit 14.9 if you are luck! Heck, if you really want to put your money to use, get a set of Kooks longtube headers! Tony the Brit just has the Kooks kit and the MM airbox on his LXS and it ran 14.8! This is with an 87 tune too! This is with stock 3.27s!

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the later Vics can run mid 15s at least. Popular Mechanics did a run of a HPP against a Crown Vic a few years ago before the PI heads, better throttle management and upgrade torque convertors and ran 15.68 seconds at 88.68 mph. Obviously, you don't see them tested anymore in the magazines nor do many owners run the quarter with them, but I wouldn't be surprised to see 15.3 or so at around 90 mph.

[waymondospiff]

Just a quick note about the CV's current performance. C&D tested a LX Sport (3.27 & 239-hp) against a Bonneville GXP & 300C in Sept '04. The CV placed 3rd out of 3, but here are the stock performance numbers:

 

0-60 ... 7.9sec

1/4mi...16.2seec @ 88mph

 

Not too bad considering the heft, the 4-speed, & the 4.6's less-than-stellar output.

 

Scott

[Traveler]

I read that C&D article. I thought that the numbers were kind of weak all things considered. First of all, the numbers don't really add up IMO. A 190-horsepower Grand Marquis recorded 16.4 seconds in Motor Trend over a decade ago. It would be really interesting to see more testing of later model Crown Vics to see if owners are correct in their beliefs that the newer cars are quicker. However, with the Crown Vics, Grand Marquises, and Town Cars, we all know that they are past their popular standings with the general public, so we want see any more tests.

 

Consider what Bob Rosadini stated above about the comparison between his 07 Sport with 3.27 vs. his 2000 LX HPP with 3.55.

[Moby Vic]

They keep getting heavier.

 

My '01 Police Interceptor with 3.27 gears ran a best of 16 flat when it was stock, and that was in humid Florida air.

Edited March 12, 2007 by Moby Vic

[Traveler]

I'd be interested in hearing an explanation of why the Panthers keep getting heavier or at least being reported as heavier? I would've thought that switching to a hydroformed frame would not only made for a stronger platform, but also a bit lighter or at least of comparable weight to the older models. Since the body is basically the same and basically the powertrain, drivetrain and rear end is the same, where does the added weight come from I wonder?

[StevenJ]

I'd be interested in hearing an explanation of why the Panthers keep getting heavier or at least being reported as heavier? I would've thought that switching to a hydroformed frame would not only made for a stronger platform, but also a bit lighter or at least of comparable weight to the older models. Since the body is basically the same and basically the powertrain, drivetrain and rear end is the same, where does the added weight come from I wonder?

 

I'm sure CVN would have the specifics but the 03+ frame is about 200-300 pounds heavier than the 92s-02s. New frame, outboard rear shocks, all new front suspension, rack and pinion steering, and it all adds up. Still, I'd much rather have an 03+. They handel a lot better with the upgrades.

[SysEng]

I don't understand how Ford designed the SOHC 3V 4.6 to be taller than the old DOHC 4V 4.6? If the DOHC 4V 4.6 fit shouldn't the SOHC 3V 4.6?

 

 

I suspect when they ramp up and install the new 6R80 into the "panthers", then a 3V would suddenly fit. I don't think its an actual dimension thing. Its more likely a lack of strength aft of the flywheel type of deal.

 

 

Meanwhile, I think Ford would be nuts to not use the 4V engine. Hows it gonna look when the EPA sees auto companies dittzing around instead of coming up with the efficiencies implied by VCT/VVT???? ... Especially in a V8

[Traveler]

The only thing is the Panthers (especially for the sake of the CV and GM) have to maintain 87 octane. I don't think traditional Vic and Marquis buyers are going to pump premium unleaded in there. Midgrade...maybe. Lincoln buyers probably would be more likely to use premium. Its got to be about like it has been in recent years...Mustang GT motor + slightly lower performance due to restrictive intake/exhaust to please the buyers. The problem with the Panthers and a change with the motor/tranny is again adding weight. If the current hefty curb weights are accurate, then they are just too dern heavy to keep tacking on additional weight.

 

The Panther to get more power from any current or planned Ford engine would require more weight with more front end bias. Pretty soon, the Vic is going to weigh as much as a Explorer with a V8. Of course, I think there is a 4.6L supercharged Crown Vic that was done awhile back and the hood hardly looked noticably modified, however, with the added horsepower and torque, comes a lot of weight with the cast iron block and heavy Eaton blower.

 

I still think the best engine choice would have been the naturally aspirated 5.4L aluminum block in the Panthers, but that doesn't look like a plausible solution.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

the 4.6L 3V is all aluminum. ITs lighter than the iron block 2V that's in there now. The 5AT from the explorer hardly weighs more than teh 4R70-75 does. The 6R should be in the same weight class. I'm telling you, the switch to the 3V 4.6L tuned to the same specs as either the explorer or, more preferably, to the mustang GT, coupled with a 5 or 6 speed auto, would be a very respectable power upgrade. While not blow the doors off impressive, it would none the less be very noticeable.

 

I wonder if the 5.8L will be compact enough to fit in there? The 4.6L 3v is different enough from the 2V that doing a whole different engine might not be that far fetched.

[Traveler]

I think the 4.6 3V and 5 speed auto sounds like the best course of action...unless Ford has other plans about pushing forward with the Mustang-based sedans. If so, I guess it wouldn't be worth the investment. I've stated all along that the current cars feel pretty good in terms of performance, but (a) more is needed to compete and (B) its unlikely that the Panther will ever win over any large numbers with even a new found kick in the pants courtesy of 50+ horsepower or so. The public has stereotyped these cars and they don't realize the substantial improvements made, most notably since '03, and are not willing to even give them consideration.

 

It only makes sense for Ford to phase out the 2-valve engine and Ford is at the point where they must commit to a longer stay with the Panthers or move on to the Mustang-platform sedans. I'm beginning to think that the Panther platform's time is nearly over in production. Ford's delay in responding to phase in the 3V/5 speed auto, along with the appearance of the Ford/Lincoln concept sedans tells me that the Panther has another 2-3 years and then the axe. By then, the platform will have ridden another 7 years total from its last major platform modification. Consolidating their efforts to build the Mustang and sedans at the same plant, would look to make more business sense and I'll bet that we'll hear confirmation of these intentions in the next few months.

 

With cars like the Pontiac G8, a RWD Impala, the continuation of the 300/Charger and Magnum...all this points to the domestic markets intention to keep the RWD platforms going. Ford's RWD sedan is perceived to be old (and truly is) even if its a darn good platform. I think the Interceptor and the flashy Lincoln version is ready for their big announcement. Of course, one thing comes to mind. No Mercury model? Since the median age private buyer is already dwindling for Grand Marquis, perhaps Ford is not going to do a RWD Mercury. Maybe no Mercury at all.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Traveler

[armadamaster]

I have noticed in regards to door closure noise on the CVs, that even a 2007 CV sounds EXACTLY like my old neighbor's 1972 Gran Torino door closing, enough said.

 

The Panther platform itself is just fine, what needs updating is the body and interior. I chuckled the other day watching a Nissan 100K car sale commercial because looking at high side stance of some of the new Nissan cars I almost think the Vic/GM styling has come full circle. If you put some current bodystyle 500/Mustang door handles on the Vic/GM, quieted down the doors, throw in a revised front/rear fascias for the Vic, while not groundbreaking it would really bring the car current with everything else in Ford's lineup excluding the interior of course.

 

I can live with the current 2v 4.6 staying in it, what is really long overdue is a "step up" engine like a 5.4 or whatever new engine they are working on now with appropriate HP/TQ numbers comparable to that of the Charger and whatever the alleged RWD Impala will have in 2010. Add to that a 5/6 speed tranny for the stepped up motor option not to mention fuel economy and include leaving the reliable old 4 speed in the 2v 4.6 and you'd have a much more appealing set up for fleet buyers who likes things to stay the same and opening it up for those who want a little more power or something different.

 

Looks like its all a wash anyway according to all the discussion regarding the CV going fleet only.

[Hellcat_F6F]

I'm reading this thread with a tear in my eye..and not just from the wine I'm drinking. I've caught hell from other Ford employees here for driving a GM pickup....they should know that the vehicle I wanted, was a toreador red '05 Crown Vic with the HPP package. I wanted that car, test drove it, loved it...but the damned dealer just wouldn't give me a deal I could live with. The car was right around $30k, and even w/ my A plan, I just thought that was obscene. I'd still like to get one..thought about trading in our Explorer on one...but the price is still a problem.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

well, if you go check the used car lots, you're likely to find one for about $20K less than that that's almost what you want, and with the money saved, you could complete the package.