Plant details behind Ford's $9 billion spending spree

[RichardJensen]

conform to Jac Nasser's instance that Ford only produce one family of 'obsolete' V-8 engines, and said V-8 must fit in a front wheel drive car platform. Such idiocy resulted in a compromised engine that could not grow much beyond 5.4L, clearly inadequate for all but the lightest 3//4 ton trucks. Adding 2 cylinders was the best answer to comply with the edict and still have a worthwhile gasoline engine for larger trucks.

 

The chronology of that account is off.

 

The first mod engine appeared in 1990, when Jac Nasser was running Autolatina, and several years before he had oversight over any operations in North America.

 

The first V10 appeared in 1996, not even two full years after Nasser became group vice president, product development (the press release announcing Nasser's appointment was dated April 21, 1994, but the appointment wasn't effective until Jan. 1, 1995). Even if Nasser demanded a V10 on his first day on the job, it would have been practically impossible for Ford to put one in production by summer of 1996.

 

--

 

Regarding the oft-repeated assertion that the mod had to fit in FWD vehicles: That's typically used to account for the narrow bore spacing. I don't know if it's true or not, but it seems plausible enough.

Edited November 18, 2015 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

Also:

 

Given that all engine designs are compromises, it would, in my opinion, be rather foolish to characterize the mod motor as compromised to some detrimental extent, given that the basic architecture (not just the bore spacing) has been used successfully for over 25 years, and in applications that are more varied than any Ford V8 family since the similarly "compromised" Fairlane block.*

 

Contrast that with the succession of LS engines that GM has trotted out alongside their failed Northstar block.

 

* let's not kid ourselves: as compared to the displacements possible with the small block Chevy, the Fairlane was indeed compromised, just like the mod is "compromised" in terms of displacement as compared to the LS family

[fordmantpw]

Didn't the V10 first show up in the 99 Super Dury in early '98?

[RichardJensen]

Nope. '97 E-Series in '96

[mackinaw]

* let's not kid ourselves: as compared to the displacements possible with the small block Chevy, the Fairlane was indeed compromised, just like the mod is "compromised" in terms of displacement as compared to the LS family

 

I’m not sure what you mean by “compromised,” but if you’re talking about the Fairlane engine relatively small size, it was purposely designed that way. George Stirrat, the Chief Engineer on the 221-260-289-302 project, was never in favor or making that engine family any bigger than 302 C.I.

As an aside, I knew George Stirrat. He was a friend of my dad’s (who also was an engineer at Ford). They used to talk about designing engines when I was a kid. Mr. Stirrat passed away in January, 2014.

[7Mary3]

The Mod. was designed for FWD or RWD applications, and my understanding was that was why Nasser decreed it would be the only V-8 platform Ford would manufacture, trucks be damned. While the Mod. is a very wide engine, it was designed to be as short, water pump to flywheel, as possible (yes, bore spacing). I was told the V-10 was a last minute solution at the time when the Lima and Windsor was dropped, anyone know for sure?

 

The Windsor was not as compromised. The crankcase was just wide enough to accommodate a crank with @ 3.5" throws, which made the tall deck 5.8L (351) possible. 221 to 351 inches is still a great spread, not many engine families have been that flexible. As for the Mod., 5.4L is about it for 8 holes. Much more stroke and there are clearance and rod angularity issues, not to mention you would have a VERY undersquare bore/stroke.

 

The Northstar was something of a quick and dirty DOHC adaption of the OHV alloy 4.1/4.5/4.9 V-8's. Kind of silimar to those nasty 3.4L 'Twin Dual Cam' 60 degree V-6's GM tried for a few years.

[RichardJensen]

EXACTLY! Saying that an engine that successful was "compromised" vs. small block Chevy is ridiculous. Just like saying the Mod Motor is "compromised" as compared to the Northstar engine, the Gen I LS, Gen 2 LS and Gen III LS motors is ridiculous.

 

 

I’m not sure what you mean by “compromised,” but if you’re talking about the Fairlane engine relatively small size, it was purposely designed that way.

[RichardJensen]

The Mod. was designed for FWD or RWD applications, and my understanding was that was why Nasser decreed it would be the only V-8 platform Ford would manufactur

 

the Mod., 5.4L is about it for 8 holes.

 

Re-read my post. Nasser's involvement in the Mods was practically non-existent.

 

The OHV engines were not going to pass tightening emissions regs and there was absolutely no need to engineer TWO V8 engine families, once the V10 was in production.

 

To repeat for emphasis: The V10 was in the pipeline before Nasser had any authority over NA ops, and once it was in production, there was no conceivable need to engineer an entirely different V8 family *just* for heavy duty truck applications.

 

--

 

And let's stop making excuses for the three GM V8s that the Mod has outlasted. The tests of time, performance, and application have overwhelmingly established the validity of the Mod motor.

 

Stop letting abhorrence of OHC engines or hatred of the Mod's extremely robust deck:stroke ratio & deep skirt design color your opinion of the thing.

[RichardJensen]

Both the 460 and 5.0 were in production when the V10 was launched, BTW. The 460 remained in production until 1998MY and the 5.0 until 2000MY.

 

And let's not shed too many tears over the death of the 460:

 

Compared to the 7.5-liter big-block V-8 it supplants, the 54-pound-lighter, 3.0-inch-shorter 6.8-liter V-10 makes 20 more horsepower. Its 410-pound-feet torque peak is 10 pound-feet greater, and fuel economy is increased by more than 15 percent, to 11/17 city/highway mpg.

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/1997-ford-econoline-e350/

 

The 6.8 was lighter, more powerful and more efficient than the 460.

 

It was cleaner too.

Edited November 18, 2015 by RichardJensen

[fordmantpw]

Nope. '97 E-Series in '96

 

Well I'll be. I always thought the Super Duty was the first to get it. Learn something new every day.

[RichardJensen]

 

Well I'll be. I always thought the Super Duty was the first to get it. Learn something new every day.

 

I hope most days it's something more useful than that.

Edited November 18, 2015 by RichardJensen

[fordmantpw]

 

I hope most days it's something more useful than that.

 

Well, it's been a slow day...

[jpd80]

When you consider the power levels achieved by today's engines like the.5.0 Coyote,

the last S/C GT500 and of course the FPC 5.2, using the narrow bore span of those early mods,

they're not so bad.....

Edited November 18, 2015 by jpd80

[7Mary3]

 

Re-read my post. Nasser's involvement in the Mods was practically non-existent.

 

The OHV engines were not going to pass tightening emissions regs and there was absolutely no need to engineer TWO V8 engine families, once the V10 was in production.

 

To repeat for emphasis: The V10 was in the pipeline before Nasser had any authority over NA ops, and once it was in production, there was no conceivable need to engineer an entirely different V8 family *just* for heavy duty truck applications.

 

--

 

And let's stop making excuses for the three GM V8s that the Mod has outlasted. The tests of time, performance, and application have overwhelmingly established the validity of the Mod motor.

 

Stop letting abhorrence of OHC engines or hatred of the Mod's extremely robust deck:stroke ratio & deep skirt design color your opinion of the thing.

 

I don't think Nasser had any direct involvement with the Mod's development, it was more like he decided that it would be the only V-8 engine platform Ford would manufacture after he came to power. It was 6 years after the Mod. was introduced in the '91 Town Car that it was used in any truck. If the Mod was really intended for light truck use why wasn't it used sooner? Looks like it would fit in a 1993 F-150. It's not like Ford has a problem sticking a new engine in an older vehicle platform!

 

As for OHV engines, the original 2 valve Mod cylinder head design had no advantages over what could have been done with an OHV design. It was a simple high swirl wedge with all the valves on the same angle, same as many OHV V-8's. It was kind of a head-scratcher when it came out, why did Ford bother with an OHC design without using it to any real advantage? Of course the later 4 valve versions were a different story. Must have been for future development, I guess.

 

Who said anything about GM engines other than the Northstar?

 

BTW- Both the LS and Hemi don't seem to be having any issues meeting current emissions regulations. An OHC design is not automatically 'cleaner'.

 

The Windsor was really Ford's best V-8 back in the day.

[jpd80]

Pretty sure that Ford Europe played a big part in Mod motors, didn't they share piston, valve train, heads and cam

modules across I-4, a V6 and the V8 /V10.

 

BTW- Both the LS and Hemi don't seem to be having any issues meeting current emissions regulations. An OHC design is not automatically 'cleaner'.

 

The Windsor was really Ford's best V-8 back in the day.

Think back when the Mods came out, Ford was convinced that gas prices were going to soar and down sizing was necessary.

At the time of the 2V Mods, those engines enabled Ford to eliminate the Smog pump, would developing SB/Windsor been better?

Of course it would, add a bit of Cleveland block strength into the mix but with better wedge heads, 302, 351 and a 400 - perfect.

 

It's not the first time Ford has hopped the wrong way but then they worked with the engines and made them much better,

I just want to see Ford make good with 5.8 - 6.2 - 7.0 on the Boss and make them the "Modern Lima/FEs" of the 21st century.

[jpd80]

This was posted on another Forum yesterday

 

 

Ranger tooling is doing the supplier rounds for quotes.....

 

Sounds like plans are coming together.....

Edited November 18, 2015 by jpd80

[Biker16]

Pretty sure that Ford Europe played a big part in Mod motors, didn't they share piston, valve train, heads and cam

modules across I-4, a V6 and the V8 /V10.

 

 

huh? No none of that is true.

Edited November 18, 2015 by Biker16

[theoldwizard]

When you consider the power levels achieved by today's engines like the.5.0 Coyote,

the last S/C GT500 and of course the FPC 5.2, using the narrow bore span of those early mods,

they're not so bad.....

While all of those V8 engines you referenced make excellent HP/liter and good torque, no one with experience would suggest that those designs, scaled up, would make a good Class 4-7 truck engine.

Edited November 18, 2015 by theoldwizard

[630land]

New Ranger should go after new customers and not the cheapskates expecting a 1993 MSRP and strippo equipment. Don't expect a 'Mini-Truck' like the 80s and 90s.

Edited November 18, 2015 by 630land

[J-150]

When you consider the power levels achieved by today's engines like the.5.0 Coyote,

the last S/C GT500 and of course the FPC 5.2, using the narrow bore span of those early mods,

they're not so bad.....

I remember my 87 F150 5.0 rated at somewhere around 170hp.

[RichardJensen]

 

I don't think Nasser had any direct involvement with the Mod's development, it was more like he decided that it would be the only V-8 engine platform Ford would manufacture after he came to power. It was 6 years after the Mod. was introduced in the '91 Town Car that it was used in any truck. If the Mod was really intended for light truck use why wasn't it used sooner? Looks like it would fit in a 1993 F-150. It's not like Ford has a problem sticking a new engine in an older vehicle platform!

 

As for OHV engines, the original 2 valve Mod cylinder head design had no advantages over what could have been done with an OHV design. It was a simple high swirl wedge with all the valves on the same angle, same as many OHV V-8's. It was kind of a head-scratcher when it came out, why did Ford bother with an OHC design without using it to any real advantage? Of course the later 4 valve versions were a different story. Must have been for future development, I guess.

 

Who said anything about GM engines other than the Northstar?

 

BTW- Both the LS and Hemi don't seem to be having any issues meeting current emissions regulations. An OHC design is not automatically 'cleaner'.

 

The Windsor was really Ford's best V-8 back in the day.

 

- Why wasn't the mod used sooner? Because it didn't have to be. No point putting the more expensive mod motors in the trucks until emissions rules tightened. Ford didn't cancel the 460 because Nasser didn't want to improve it. They canceled it because the 6.8 was a better motor, cost notwithstanding. The 6.8 was clearly, *clearly* benchmarked against the 460 from the get-go.

 

- The 4v mod hit the market two years after the 2v mod (Mk VIII, 1993 model year vs. 1991 Town Car), so it's not like the 4v head was some 'later development'--if it wasn't part of the program from the get-go, it was a very early add.

 

- Who said anything about GM's V8s? I did. Why? Because they poke a huge hole in any argument that the Mod is 'compromised' to some detrimental extent. Which of the six* V8 blocks that GM has squared off against the Mod has proven to be better than the Mod?

 

- And, no, an OHC design is not automatically 'cleaner'--but it's a lot easier to balance emissions, NVH and power--and you don't need to look farther than the 4.6L/5.3L & 5.4L/6.1L comparisons that were common during the previous generation of Ford & GM pickups. The 'fair' comparison always involved a GM motor with 10% or more in additional displacement.

 

*Gen 2 LS: '92-'97

Gen 3 LS: '97-'07

Gen 4 LS: '07-'14

Gen 5 LS: '13-

Northstar: '92-'10

Vortec 8100: '01-'09

Edited November 19, 2015 by RichardJensen

[7Mary3]

Well.....

 

First off, Gen. 2 was not an LS, it was the last development of the traditional SBC with reverse flow cooling and that oddball OptiSpark ignition. Gen. 2 was never used in trucks.

 

Gen. 3 was the first LS which debuted in '96.

Gen. 4 was a slightly revised Gen. 3 which featured provisions in the block casting to accommodate AFM (cylinder cut-off) and not much else. Many Gen. 4's do not have the AFM feature, and almost all parts interchange with Gen. 3's. 6.0L iron block Gen. 4's are still very much in production for truck, marine, and commercial use.

Gen. 5 is the first major revision to the LS family featuring redesigned cylinder heads and direct injection. Gen. 5's all feature aluminum blocks, other LS's use either iron or aluminum depending on application. There is also a V-6 LS for the first time in the Gen. 5 family.

 

So, the traditional Gen. 3/4 LS has been in continuous production since 1996 and will continue into the foreseeable future. It will likely have a longer run than the Mod.. The Gen. 5 LS is probably more closely related to the previous LS engines than the Coyote is to the Mod., but I still consider the Coyote to be part of the Mod. family.

 

The 'Boss' 6.2L is kind of a scaled up Mod. with greater bore spacing and a very nice cylinder head. I see no parts interchangeability with the Mod. family other than the oil filter and maybe the oil pan drain plug!

 

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.......

[theoldwizard]

The 'Boss' 6.2L is kind of a scaled up Mod. with greater bore spacing and a very nice cylinder head.

I don't know at that last statement ! I always thought it was kind of foolish to make the valves so large that there was no place to put the spark plug except far off to the side, leading to 2 spark plugs per cylinder

[CurtisH]

I don't know at that last statement ! I always thought it was kind of foolish to make the valves so large that there was no place to put the spark plug except far off to the side, leading to 2 spark plugs per cylinder

That's why I like the idea of a 3 valve head. You can place the spark plug in the center.

[RichardJensen]

It will likely have a longer run than the Mod.. The Gen. 5 LS is probably more closely related to the previous LS engines than the Coyote is to the Mod., but I still consider the Coyote to be part of the Mod. family.

 

So by your interpretation, GM has only thrown three or four different V8s up against the Mod instead of six.

 

And the only ones still in production need more displacement to provide equivalent power.

 

That doesn't exactly argue that the mod is a "compromised" design.

 

We are living at a time where an engine with every single mod defect from oversized block and heads to undersized bore spacing has a higher specific output than a Ferrari, and there are STILL people who insist that the Mod is a poor design.

Edited November 19, 2015 by RichardJensen