Originally Posted By: redhat
Originally Posted By: maxdustington
I was doing some quick research because of this thread, and apparently the aluminum head 2v was the main offender. I am not sure which motors got the aluminum heads, but I assume that performance models got the aluminum heads, and more pedestrian models such as trucks and Crown Vics got iron?
I used to not like Ford because my Dad only bought GMs, but I like them now because they have high tech engines. It was the same back then apparently. An OHC V8 by an American manufacturer in 1991 in a normal car? That's pretty impressive looking back. The LT1 debuted in 1992 and was only around until 1997 in cars only, and it was more of a stop gap. They really should have just went full blast DOHC, why bother with the added complexity and size of an overhead cam when you have the same amount of valves as a pushrod engine? I get the modularity but the whole point of an OHC V8 is 32 valves!
All factory modular heads should be aluminum.
2v are great engines, the 3v... I don't really see why they even bothered -- probably manufacturing costs weren't much more than the 2v. Keep in mind, the 4v were not the cheapest, GM putting out OHV SBC (later on LSx) = CHEAP. Also, look at it from a longevity standpoint. 4v DOHC = longer chains. Ever see 2v chains, they're long to begin with. OHC can spin faster (OK OHV can too with strong springs), and usually run higher compression = better fuel burn, better MPG, more power out of same displacement, etc.
Also, HP output. At that time 175-210hp from an American V8 in a RWD sedan was right in line. Ford's 2v actually was probably the most HP and highest reving. I don't think at the time, Ford making a 4v DOHC, 350+ HP pushing, more expensive engine would've done them any favors. You also will have the mindset from buyers "eh... I don't need that much power, this cheaper Chevy seems more reasonable". But, to be honest, my opinion -- the 4v 4.6 and now Coyote are truly killer motors.
The LT1 was still OHV, a reverse coolant flowing, opti-spark having 2nd Gen SBC. OK engine, but seriously... the LS1 in 1997 (Corvette) and 98 (F-Body) blew Ford out of the water. It isn't so much as valves and it is flow. The LS heads flowed better than few year prior NASCAR heads in the 90s.
We finally had a reasonable, mass produced contender to the LSx in 2011 with the introduction of the Coyote 5.0L 4v. Notice I said mass produced. 2003-2004 Termi Cobras were and still are bad-[censored] and the 4v iron-blocked modulars were great too. Just too expensive and not in ever pick 'em up truck at the local U-PullIt yard for $99.99.
Coyote truck motors are sweet but too much $$$ still. Guys are making good power on Factory Coyotes.
But, a $99.99 250k+ Junkyard Gen III 4.8 or 5.3 with blow by can make 600hp+++ with an eBay turbo.
My friendly reminder: LSx > *
They really should have done what GM did and slap better heads on the Windsor. I know they did, with the GT40P heads, but they were not nearly as common as the Vortec heads on the SBC. This allowed GM to breathe new life into an engine that was aging badly in the 90s.
Ford: design an engine in the early 90s and spent the next twenty years trying to get it right
GM: update an engine in the early 90s for cars, upgrade the heads on truck SBCs and then design probably the greatest V8 of all time (certainly OHV V8) in the mid 90s.
I think technology is to blame more than anything else. Cylinder head design took a massive leap forward in the mid 90s, it must have been CAD/CAM because both companies offered modern cylinder heads for obsolete engines while offering a more modern V8 in other platforms. Ford was ahead of their time I guess, trying to beat GM to OHC V8s. I wonder if GM would have went in that direction if Ford did not.
EDIT: I have seen one Lincoln Aviator in the scrapyard and that 32v was long gone. Same with Yukons, Escalades and any other GM product that got a special version of a gen 3.
