Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 The std F-150 engine will be a 3.7 NA. The 3.5 Twin Force will make 350 ft lbs @ 2000 rpm. 3.7sounds more feasible...any new on that engine..ie SOHC? DOHC? HP and torque? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 I don't do that sort of thing. The Twin Force GTDI 3.5 will be in the CY 2009/MY 2010 Taurus restyle. Ugh. It better be more than the 07 > 08 type of "restyle" or Ford is about useless. Shouldn't it be due for a bottom-up redesign by then, if they are indeed sticking to the 5-6 year product cycle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 still seems like a VERY expensive solution with inherrent maintenence expenses as well.....4.6 will be cheaper proposition....just spend some bux on refinement etc If they are making 250K units of this engine a year...cost wont be an issue. Plus the 4.6L won't get 20+ MPG like the TwinForce is supposed to get in a F-150! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Ugh. It better be more than the 07 > 08 type of "restyle" or Ford is about useless. Shouldn't it be due for a bottom-up redesign by then, if they are indeed sticking to the 5-6 year product cycle? I'd assume that it would be an all new design...or at least totally new front and rear ends on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 3.7sounds more feasible...any new on that engine..ie SOHC? DOHC? HP and torque? Same thing as the 3.5L...bigger...and close to 300 HP out of it on regular Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Same thing as the 3.5L...bigger...and close to 300 HP out of it on regular if so it outdates the 4.6...is there also a replacement for that engine as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 if so it outdates the 4.6...is there also a replacement for that engine as well? If the TwinForce makes 350 lb-ft @ 2000 RPM, there's your 4.6 replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Very interesting news indeed. This lends a great deal of credibility to the theory that SVT is not dead... it's just waiting for the right engines. Why try to work with Ford's current crap, when Ford has an all-new family of engines coming out very soon with MUCH more potential (Boss/Cyclone). With 425hp on tap, this should make VERY short work of the 300C SRT-8, especially with AWD and a much more balanced chassis. I could definately get into a black on black monochromatic Sable Marauder with 20" rims. I remember the days when we were lamenting about the MKS having just a 265hp V6 and 315hp V8. We really underestimated Ford on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 If the TwinForce makes 350 lb-ft @ 2000 RPM, there's your 4.6 replacement. Still don't like the stigma of a smaller displacement engine working harder in a Truck when a larger displacement engine could be loping and producing similar results...in a car a TT ia a different beast...the less inertia of lower curb weights go's hand in hand with turbo's etc.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Still don't like the stigma of a smaller displacement engine working harder in a Truck when a larger displacement engine could be loping and producing similar results...in a car a TT ia a different beast...the less inertia of lower curb weights go's hand in hand with turbo's etc.... All a matter of perception really. If the 2000 RPM number is accurate, it would seem the turbos are designed to spool relatively quickly, and that torque number already puts the 4.6 to shame. It's probably a lighter and more refined setup to boot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 All a matter of perception really. If the 2000 RPM number is accurate, it would seem the turbos are designed to spool relatively quickly, and that torque number already puts the 4.6 to shame. It's probably a lighter and more refined setup to boot. Probably right, but high revving engines are not condusive to pickup trucks...witness the Tundras horsepower bragging at over 5000 rpms....5000 rpms in a pickup is utterly useless... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Probably right, but high revving engines are not condusive to pickup trucks...witness the Tundras horsepower bragging at over 5000 rpms....5000 rpms in a pickup is utterly useless... If it makes 350 lb-ft @ 2000 RPM, it appears it wouldn't need to be high-revving at all. Simply because it has fewer cylinders doesn't automatically mean it is going to or need to rev higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Still don't like the stigma of a smaller displacement engine working harder in a Truck when a larger displacement engine could be loping and producing similar results...in a car a TT ia a different beast...the less inertia of lower curb weights go's hand in hand with turbo's etc.... I believe there has been at least one F150 (maybe more) running around Dearborn with a TT 3.5L engine for quite some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 If it makes 350 lb-ft @ 2000 RPM, it appears it wouldn't need to be high-revving at all. Simply because it has fewer cylinders doesn't automatically mean it is going to or need to rev higher. I sincerely hope you are right...just not a big Turbo guy...especially inpick me ups... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 This also means heavy-duty AWD bits and pieces at the Ford dealers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 There is nothing to report with Alan at this time. He's too busy spending his multi-million dollar bonus to get any work done. Hes in cancun wearing a Gucci ball bag frolicking with Carfreak.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 I wonder if he has Mark bringing them drinks with little umbrellas. only before bouts of oiled up volleyball...ahem....sorry what was the thread about again? LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one2gamble Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 So Im curious, as an Audi S4 owner.... What kind of turbos are they using for the "Twin Force" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.