Ford goes pushrod?

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
PackardV8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5456
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 2:03 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by PackardV8 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:08 pm

A 4 valve architecture is superior to a 2 valve in any rpm range.
For true, at WOT, but even light and medium trucks spend a small percentage of their operating hours at WOT.

The bean counters spend all their operating hours questioning ever cent of material, labor and warranty costs.
Jack Vines
Studebaker-Packard V8 Limited
Obsolete Engineering

Newold1
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:50 am

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Newold1 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:37 pm

Packard V8

Can we all spell "Cost/Benefit Analysis!"

tt 383
Pro
Pro
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:46 pm
Location: Stuart, Florida

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by tt 383 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:46 pm

Steve.k wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:34 pm
pamotorman wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:15 pm
how many chevys do you see out there with a ford engine vs how many fords do you see with a chevy engine. I rest my case. :D
Chevy doesn't have chassis worth putting Ford in!LS swap into fox body is a chassis that just plain works. Very little mods.
??? They are going into everything though... 3rd gens, S10, RX7, Jeeps, "Rods" of all sorts etc... I would venture a guess they are swapped more than Modular and Gen3 Hemi combined.
Soon as chevy makes a chassis "worth" putting a Ford in (more like fitting in) guys will put in a BBC, not worth the aggravation or expense to be cubes limited...

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 805
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Steve.k » Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:09 pm

Dont see it around here. Fox bodies thats about it.

MichaelThompson
New Member
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by MichaelThompson » Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:38 pm

pamotorman wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:43 pm
Economy of scale is what's happening there.

If I can buy a block, heads, etc. for 2/3 the price to make the same power, and nothing to do with the architecture, why wouldn't I? Everybody and their brother is making Chevy parts...
that is because chevy only had 2 different architecture for 50+ years the SBC and the BBC and ford even changed the bell housing bolt pattern on different engines.
[/quote]

I’ve heard this argument for most of my adult life and I must respectfully disagree with you on this.

General Motors categorized their huge variety of engines under the division they were intended for. So a Pontiac 350 shares no commonality with a 350 from any other division.

The 396 rat has nothing in common with a 389 Poncho or a 400” Olds. I could list comparisons like this all night.

FoMoCo on the other hand calls ALL engines in their arsenal “Ford” engines.

So now you have a 351W intended for bread and butter car and truck business while at the same time you have a 351C intended for the performance cars. Remember that’s Ford’s AND Mercury’s. (BTW same bell housing flange)

Furthermore Ford always took an engineered approach to expanding a engine line. For example with the 2.87” stroke 221, 260, 289 and 302 engines the 8.2” deck the rod length and the crankshaft journal sizes all match the architecture and intended purpose of these small lightweight V8’s.

Now moving up to the 351W and it’s intended purpose of lugging bigger cars, trucks and vans you have a taller deck with a longer and beefier connecting rod that is the correct length to maintain what Ford felt was the ideal L/R ratio.

The crankshaft journals with their greater overlap for toughness and little things like bigger main bolts and head bolts and oil pump drive shaft. At the same time many parts will interchange.

It’s all in how you look at it I guess. I think Fords are simple compared to Gm’s Smorgasbord.

Geoff2
Expert
Expert
Posts: 951
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:36 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Geoff2 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:26 am

Going backwards, to pushrods? What next, back to flatheads?

96blackgt54
New Member
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 8:19 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by 96blackgt54 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:04 am

Lucky me, im associated with a manufacturer that is developing and producing the new 7.3l intake. Their is strong similarities like the 5.0l coyote intake and LS style intakes such as the low front entry throttle body.

What ive discovered, the 7.3l intake has the same port head width and port spacing as a 6.2l engine, but thats where the similarities end.

No injector bosses, no coil pack clearancing, no fuel rail mounts.

Underside clearancing does not match up to a 6.2l engine block.

Runner port entrance bottle necks down to head port shape, unlike any other intake ford has produced.

Port shape favors a single intake valve.

My conclusion is this...Ford pumping the brakes and reversing in technology, uhm NO! Although it is possible!

One possible senario is Koenigsegg freevalve technology. Theve been running it for 5-6 years now and implimented the free valve technology with the Ford modular engines they used in their supercars. It only makes sense that Ford steps toward advancing technology rather than stepping backwards.

We might see actual camless engines!

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1783
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Truckedup » Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:29 am

Geoff2 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:26 am
Going backwards, to pushrods? What next, back to flatheads?
Or moving in a more practical direction for the expected use, emission and fuel mileage..And as mentioned more compact lighter weight engine less expensive engine as mentioned....I said before, do the current trucks with DOHC V8 engines, Ford, Toyota,Nissan, out preform the GM wedge or Dodge hemi ? No they dont , they all have about the same pulling power and fuel mileage when comparing similar power ratings...The actual power to displacement doesn't matter for a truck..
Motorcycle land speed racing... wearing animal hides and clinging to vibrating oily machines propelled by fire

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 805
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Steve.k » Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:54 am

I think with the electronics capability today and head design ford can make a big cube engine such as the modern 7.3 that generates big tq numbers slow running engine. With the new transmission engine rpm is kept in sweet spot to be easy on fuel. The pushrod design gets rid of alot of complex parts and costs. Win win all the way around. It will be much needed in the heavy pickup class. Ive run powerstroke diesels since 97. The repair costs are considerably higher than gas and with the latest gas engines and diesel price they offer very little gains. The new 6.7 with def gets considerable less milage than 5.0 f150 that we have. The only benifit of diesel right now is towing heavy trailers which we do continually there is no good option in gas at this point.

pamotorman
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2705
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by pamotorman » Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:38 am

MichaelThompson wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:38 pm
pamotorman wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:43 pm
Economy of scale is what's happening there.

If I can buy a block, heads, etc. for 2/3 the price to make the same power, and nothing to do with the architecture, why wouldn't I? Everybody and their brother is making Chevy parts...
that is because chevy only had 2 different architecture for 50+ years the SBC and the BBC and ford even changed the bell housing bolt pattern on different engines.
I’ve heard this argument for most of my adult life and I must respectfully disagree with you on this.

General Motors categorized their huge variety of engines under the division they were intended for. So a Pontiac 350 shares no commonality with a 350 from any other division.

The 396 rat has nothing in common with a 389 Poncho or a 400” Olds. I could list comparisons like this all night.

FoMoCo on the other hand calls ALL engines in their arsenal “Ford” engines.

So now you have a 351W intended for bread and butter car and truck business while at the same time you have a 351C intended for the performance cars. Remember that’s Ford’s AND Mercury’s. (BTW same bell housing flange)

Furthermore Ford always took an engineered approach to expanding a engine line. For example with the 2.87” stroke 221, 260, 289 and 302 engines the 8.2” deck the rod length and the crankshaft journal sizes all match the architecture and intended purpose of these small lightweight V8’s.

Now moving up to the 351W and it’s intended purpose of lugging bigger cars, trucks and vans you have a taller deck with a longer and beefier connecting rod that is the correct length to maintain what Ford felt was the ideal L/R ratio.

The crankshaft journals with their greater overlap for toughness and little things like bigger main bolts and head bolts and oil pump drive shaft. At the same time many parts will interchange.

It’s all in how you look at it I guess. I think Fords are simple compared to Gm’s Smorgasbord.
[/quote]

my post referred to chevy not all GM. GM figured it out many years ago it was not a good idea to have so many different engines. remember the stink when GM put chevy engines in pontiac and olds. caddy still puts chevy engines in some of their models

swampbuggy
Expert
Expert
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Location: central Florida

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by swampbuggy » Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:42 am

Great reading PAMOTORMAN------THANKS. Mark H. =D>

pamotorman
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2705
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by pamotorman » Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:55 pm

henry ford
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

hoffman900
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by hoffman900 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:13 pm

The Japanese seemed to realize early on about comparability across platforms. Just scale them up Or down but keep some of the fundamentals the same.

You see this a lot in the motorcycle world.
-Bob

Newold1
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:50 am

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Newold1 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:38 pm

It seems as though the intake description provided would lead me to think Ford maybe following GM's lead and moving to a fairly simple pushrod OHV Direct injection big block along the lines of the newer GM LT truck engine.
As for free valve solenoid Koeniseeg valve train I don't think Ford or anyone has that technology or systems in the 250,000 mile durability area that these truck makers want or need to stay in premium warranty longevity. That could appear in the future but I don't know that they want to stretch that far now with the importance of their truck market.

Rowdy Yates
New Member
New Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 2:28 am

Re: Ford goes pushrod?

Post by Rowdy Yates » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:39 pm

Main question is when would someone be able to get one....... The way it looks it maybe around 2022 before its out for production???

Post Reply