Any predictions on Turboing the new 5.2 FPC???

[SID297]

The GT350 is not going to be terribly boost friendly out of the box.

 

[NametoShowOther]

I didnt say it wasnt possible, i just said it wasnt likely. They're also not turboing the stock motor on the 458 are they?

Ferrari california turboed from FActory - FPC. Actually Ford bought one for benchmarking according to GT350 reveal event

 

[saleencobra]

Fpc has more power potential as it's more efficient. The efficiency aids safety to an extent.

If this was a 4.5l fpc, I'd say get it on corn to mitigate the cr (or 110+) and have at it.

8500rpms isn't that hard to sustain with forged internals/internals that hold boost well.

Remember that 2jz's and rb26's, though only 2.6-3.4L when built, rev easily into 9,000rpms when making 800+whp. One could argue the smaller displacement makes the weight of the internals much less of an issue, but it's also making that displacement with similar bore/stroke sizes to a coyote because it's 6 vs 8 cylinders. Iirc 3.0" stroke by 3.3" bore on a 2jz (it's been so long I've honestly forgotten) vs iirc 3.553x3.7" bore on a coyote (again I can't remember exacts). My point is that a half inch in diameter and depth isn't making or breaking weight on a piston that's spinning 500-1000rpms slower. Basically high rpm boost is done everyday in the import world and it's not a big issue.

The fpc layout does wonders for spool and power potential throughout the rev range.

Think of it more like dohc vs ohv. Because it's so easy to get high rpm power and stability out of dohc, many engines are built with smaller displacement and higher rpm power bands vs a competitive ohv (think roadrunner vs ls3/6/lt1) but ultimately, if displacements are actually even, the ohv has 0 power or torque production advantages vs a similarly well designed dohc. A 6.0 dohc vs a 6.0 ohv is a no contest hands down dohc win. Give them the same bore and stroke, and the dohc will have better power and torque everywhere assuming all other variables are normed out from intake manifold runner length and design to exhaust etc etc.

Back to fpc vs cpc, it's the same story as ohv vs dohc. Build two identical (as close as possible) engines with the sole difference being crank plane design, and the fpc has more physically unbound potential to produce power and torque because it more so maximizes efficiency of air and exhaust flow within the combustion process.

The down side is that at 5.2L with spray bore liners, this engine may not take to boost as safely as a 458 Italia does. It's too soon to say. It will literally come down to heat managing via water jacket design, oil delivery, and traditional cooling etc

One huge advantage is the traditional f/r layout of the ford greatly improves potential airflow for low and medium speed cooling, as does it's much more substantial frontal openings for said airflow to reach the cooling system.

The midship layouts are much harder to keep cool because routing airflow and packaging cooling units is more burdensome.

Lastly, I personally would keep this mill na and shoot for 600whp. It would be an amazingly communicative engine and power train with 4.88 gears (maybe 4.56's or 4.30's if that's too spin happy) but the problem is definitely the transmission, which can easily (but expensively) be built to handle about 750tq but will require a clutch among other things, possibly components we as mustang enthusiasts don't readily consider because high rpm drivetrain requirements aren't usually in out aftermarket needs.

this right here is exactly what I was looking for.

thank you to everyone else who put input in as well. the question was never could it be done. it was should, and why or why not.

have we seen any engine specs besides 5.2l and FPC? do we know if it will have forged internals like shelbys of the past? I would assume they'd plan for the large aftermarket tuning crowd and to safe guard the motor against rough riving habits. since it is track oriented.

I agree with everyone else. if 600whp can be obtained N/A that's hard to contend with if it puts the power down. im sure a 100 shot on top wouldn't hurt either. I don't know if I wanna be a guinea pig for how much tq that trans can handle either lol

 

[97desertCobra]

this right here is exactly what I was looking for.

thank you to everyone else who put input in as well. the question was never could it be done. it was should, and why or why not.

have we seen any engine specs besides 5.2l and FPC? do we know if it will have forged internals like shelbys of the past? I would assume they'd plan for the large aftermarket tuning crowd and to safe guard the motor against rough riving habits. since it is track oriented.

I agree with everyone else. if 600whp can be obtained N/A that's hard to contend with if it puts the power down. im sure a 100 shot on top wouldn't hurt either. I don't know if I wanna be a guinea pig for how much tq that trans can handle either lol

I would bet it will have forged internals. If it didn't it would really be going against the grain pretty hard compared to its predecessors like the 2000 Cobra R and the Boss 302.

 

[Voltwings]

Just poking around today, i didn't realize the McLaren MP4-12c's engine was a flat plane crank.

Its hard to find a lot of info on this motor, but basically the break down is:

4 valve DOHC
phasers on intake and exhaust cams
Flat plane crank
Port injection
600 rpm idle - 8500 rpm redline
twin - twin scroll turbos ( points to whoever suggested that for the 5.2, dont remember if it was in this thread)


So obviously the engine was built around the turbos, but its still interesting to see.
http://ae-plus.com/features/accelerated-development-ricardo-mclaren-m838t/page:2

Note* That link takes you to page 2 of the article. Also found this little tidbit interesting:

Balancer shafts were not considered, Yates says, because they increase weight, bulk and parasitic losses: “Mitigation was done through detail design and ensuring that areas where you might have problems with vibration were rigid and stiffly-mounted to the structure"

 

[Deranged2013]

Nice find. Was expecting more than 599 hp out of a turbocharged fpc engine.

 

[Voltwings]

It likely is capable of far more, they were shooting for a "balanced" package more than likely. Grip, traction, balance, dynamics and all that jazz. It is still a small engine too at <4.0L, so there's that to consider as well.

 

[specizripn]

The Heffner 458 Italia makes a claimed 820(engine?)HP on 5 psi with 91 octane. That's with stock internals on a 4.5L engine. If the aftermarket can find a way to beef up the Voodoo while retaining balance, we could be seeing an absolute animal...

 

[DHG1078]

In one of the interviews, Jamaal said that some of the rotating assembly is as light as the components on a 458. Does the ferrari have ultra light weight components? How much power can they handle? I'm not sure if he said pistons or connecting rods or what off the top of my head. Is this a good sign of forged components or should we be worried that the engine will need beefed up to add much power?

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

In one of the interviews, Jamaal said that some of the rotating assembly is as light as the components on a 458. Does the ferrari have ultra light weight components? How much power can they handle? I'm not sure if he said pistons or connecting rods or what off the top of my head. Is this a good sign of forged components or should we be worried that the engine will need beefed up to add much power?

he said that the pistons were as light as the 458 pistons, which makes perfect sense actually. the bore in the 458 is 94mm while the bore in the 5.2 is 94.5mm(or within a few tenths of that). that doesn't tell us a thing about how capable they are of dealing with boost. not all forged pistons are created equal, and a forged piston designed specifically for a boosted engine will inherently be heavier of course.

 

[Voltwings]

The ferarri can likely handle a lot of power the same reason honda motors can: Short stroke. Torque is what breaks motors, not horsepower, but horsepower is a derivative of torque.

Honda 2.0 motors are making well over 500 whp on stock motors, but still struggling to make mid 200s for torque, they just rev the piss out of them to have anything to show for it, i imagine the 458 with its like 9k rpm redline is close to the same way. The longer stroke on the 5.2 L could prove challenging, and require a pretty clever boost system to keep the low end stress down.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

The ferarri can likely handle a lot of power the same reason honda motors can: Short stroke. Torque is what breaks motors, not horsepower, but horsepower is a derivative of torque.

Honda 2.0 motors are making well over 500 whp on stock motors, but still struggling to make mid 200s for torque, they just rev the piss out of them to have anything to show for it, i imagine the 458 with its like 9k rpm redline is close to the same way. The longer stroke on the 5.2 L could prove challenging, and require a pretty clever boost system to keep the low end stress down.

for the record, stroke doesn't have much effect on peak torque(contrary to redneck engine building "facts"), but it will generally shift the torque peak RPM up a little(due to the change in piston speed). torque is, basically, a function of cylinder filling, which is why there's a torque ceiling for any given displacement(in NA form of course). to sum it up, short stroke engines don't make less torque than a long stroke engine(of equal displacement), but rather they make similar torque with the short stroke engine making greater horsepower due to the better breathing ability of its larger bore. so the HP-torque disparity seen in high RPM engines isn't caused by a lack of torque, but rather due to greater horsepower.

 

[01SVTSnake]

Nice find. Was expecting more than 599 hp out of a turbocharged fpc engine.

Its essentially the same engine in the P1. The P1 engine though is more beefed up. Makes 727hp by itself.

 

[Voltwings]

for the record, stroke doesn't have much effect on peak torque(contrary to redneck engine building "facts"), but it will generally shift the torque peak RPM up a little(due to the change in piston speed). torque is, basically, a function of cylinder filling, which is why there's a torque ceiling for any given displacement(in NA form of course). to sum it up, short stroke engines don't make less torque than a long stroke engine(of equal displacement), but rather they make similar torque with the short stroke engine making greater horsepower due to the better breathing ability of its larger bore. so the HP-torque disparity seen in high RPM engines isn't caused by a lack of torque, but rather due to greater horsepower.

Learn something new everyday although i don't think i made my point with the Hondas very clear. If a short stroke engine's piston is only traveling from A-B, there's very little chance of bent rods and windowed blocks, compared to a long stroke motor traveling from A-C so to speak. Obviously there are a LOT of grey areas and subjective variables to that statement, but that's kind of where i was going with that.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

So, what you're saying is that we need the 4" bore 3" stroke like the old 302.

Bore is always better to increase than stroke to me. Like you said, it unshrowds the valves and allows better breathing while giving the benefit of increased displacement as well.

What Voltwings said is true too though. The longer the stroke, the harder it is for the rotating assembly to turn high RPM, which is what makes horsepower as long as you can maintain torque. While more stroke doesn't mean more torque, more stroke does mean less RPM capability.

Displacements being equal, I'd take a bigger bore motor over a longer stroke motor any day.

 

[Kyle55]

i would say a turbo would defeat the purpose of the gt350. But maybe a centri would work

 

[Dizzyscure1]

First off whats your budget? I'm gonna tell you don't approach this being cheap, you will need some monies to build it right. The 5.2 will love him some TT action period.

$40-50,000+ Is the budget in which i would use for such a build.

Everything for the first few years will be custom & experimental on this GT350, the Turbo system, the motor build, the whole car really and when you start off with a setup that no one fully understands then you have the beginnings of expensive build in order.

"pistons that are lighter than those in the FPC engine that powers Ferrari’s 458"