Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
2020 -vs 2014 GT500
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tt335ci03cobra" data-source="post: 16270838" data-attributes="member: 68944"><p>Edit* Unless you think I’m talking about a Chevy 5.3 (I have a modular 4v 5.3 based off a 4.6)</p><p></p><p>I’m not. You’re an idiot. You think an engine with 4.165” of stroke is a revver because you’ve bought hype and parts. I’ve built them, ran them, blown them, rebuilt them, ran them and blown them. 65-70mph piston speed is not healthy. 45-55mph is plenty. Taking a truck stroke and trying to rev it to sports car range is a recipe for disaster.</p><p></p><p>If you are right, why did ford abandon the 4.165” stroke entirely? Ford not smart enough to figure it out? They figured out a 5.2L flat plane engine. They figured out a 7500rpm supercharged 760hp 5.2 as well. You think they just got lazy and said darn, we are too busy to just take the trinity and run it to 760hp? How many trinity engines fail in the 800-1000whp range relative to 5.4’s similarly modded and built well? Compare that to little old 4.6’s also built well and done properly. Factory 4.6 terminator mills are still today sitting healthy in properly built 800-1000whp combos and living fine, 17 years later. The shorter stroke is ideal for a 6500rpm engine.</p><p></p><p>Taking a 4.165” stroke to 7000rpm or even 6500 is asking for wrist pin failure. It’s north of 60mph piston speed.</p><p></p><p>Coyote vs modular architecture is entirely a game of improving what the modular needed help with.</p><p></p><p>•bore</p><p>•unshroud the valves for flow</p><p>•assess the need for stroke at the expense of rpm by fortifying and stabilizing the entire valvetrain and head design so valve Seats, phasers, guides and retainers don’t break as often</p><p>•increase compression and mitigate preignition with variable valve timing, and deliver fuel more precisely with dual wideband</p><p></p><p>Lastly, regardless of what you do with your 5.8, I can guarantee mod for mod from turbo to sc to head work to na, I can get the same or nearly the same peak power out of a 5.3 based off a 3.7” stroke with revs and compression that you can’t touch in a 5.8.</p><p></p><p>Rev a built 5.8 to 8500rpm in race applications for 10 passes and do a tear down. Rev a 5.3 to 9500rpm same races, 10 passes and tear it down.</p><p></p><p>5.8 will show dramatically more wear at the wrist pins, piston skirt bottom, and likely the ring lands.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tt335ci03cobra, post: 16270838, member: 68944"] Edit* Unless you think I’m talking about a Chevy 5.3 (I have a modular 4v 5.3 based off a 4.6) I’m not. You’re an idiot. You think an engine with 4.165” of stroke is a revver because you’ve bought hype and parts. I’ve built them, ran them, blown them, rebuilt them, ran them and blown them. 65-70mph piston speed is not healthy. 45-55mph is plenty. Taking a truck stroke and trying to rev it to sports car range is a recipe for disaster. If you are right, why did ford abandon the 4.165” stroke entirely? Ford not smart enough to figure it out? They figured out a 5.2L flat plane engine. They figured out a 7500rpm supercharged 760hp 5.2 as well. You think they just got lazy and said darn, we are too busy to just take the trinity and run it to 760hp? How many trinity engines fail in the 800-1000whp range relative to 5.4’s similarly modded and built well? Compare that to little old 4.6’s also built well and done properly. Factory 4.6 terminator mills are still today sitting healthy in properly built 800-1000whp combos and living fine, 17 years later. The shorter stroke is ideal for a 6500rpm engine. Taking a 4.165” stroke to 7000rpm or even 6500 is asking for wrist pin failure. It’s north of 60mph piston speed. Coyote vs modular architecture is entirely a game of improving what the modular needed help with. •bore •unshroud the valves for flow •assess the need for stroke at the expense of rpm by fortifying and stabilizing the entire valvetrain and head design so valve Seats, phasers, guides and retainers don’t break as often •increase compression and mitigate preignition with variable valve timing, and deliver fuel more precisely with dual wideband Lastly, regardless of what you do with your 5.8, I can guarantee mod for mod from turbo to sc to head work to na, I can get the same or nearly the same peak power out of a 5.3 based off a 3.7” stroke with revs and compression that you can’t touch in a 5.8. Rev a built 5.8 to 8500rpm in race applications for 10 passes and do a tear down. Rev a 5.3 to 9500rpm same races, 10 passes and tear it down. 5.8 will show dramatically more wear at the wrist pins, piston skirt bottom, and likely the ring lands. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
2020 -vs 2014 GT500
Top