Fourcam, check out this thread about the 5.4

[Fourcam330]

I have an idea... :idea:

The cranks that go in a Ford GT do not have the flat for the oil pump machined in them, They were using normal Navi/truck cranks during development which had the flat. They were cracking at the snout even though there was no oil pump mounted there.
The oil pumps are still driven off the front of the crank but they are dry sump pumps and belt driven,The GT cranks no longer have the flat machined in the snout.

I would be willing to bet that this is where they are failing... Why now and not on Lightnings???

Maybe the damper weight...
Maybe the heavier rod and piston weights...
Maybe the combination of oil pump load, internal reciprocating weight, heavy damper, and higher blower drive loads(roots)...

If they are running Ford GT heads then they would also be running Ford GT lash adjusters.... yes???
If I remember correctly these adusters supposedly require the heavier oil that only the GT runs... 0W50???

Could that be contributing to the higher oil pump loading???
It would be right on the area know to be prone to torsional stress cracking.

Perhaps a combination of all these things :shrug:
Most unfortunate to say the least!!! :nonono:

R or GT lash adjusters do not require heavier than normal oil.

 

[03Terminator]

God I can't wait to hear all the Chevy loving import sodomists going ape shit over this.

If they do Fourcam, show them this:

ZO6 Roof Falls Off

Don't think GM engineered that into the design. :-D

 

[Jimmysidecarr]

R or GT lash adjusters do not require heavier than normal oil.

Why is the GT running that heavier synth then??? I heard it was because of the lash adjusters... Not true then???
They sure don't have a 5w20 oil cap on them....LOL :rollseyes

Are the GT and the Y2K-R lash adjusters in fact the same??? I know the oil pumps are very different.

 

[Fourcam330]

Why is the GT running that heavier synth then??? I heard it was because of the lash adjusters... Not true then???
They sure don't have a 5w20 oil cap on them....LOL :rollseyes

Are the GT and the Y2K-R lash adjusters in fact the same??? I know the oil pumps are very different.

No idea on why they run that oil. Al's got dozens of R/GT head 5.4s out there and I'm not aware of any that run that weight.
The GT valvetrain is different (very very similar but not absolutely identical) to that used in the R. The adjuster is .020" shorter in the GT vs. R and the rest of the components are similarly different.

 

[Jimmysidecarr]

No idea on why they run that oil. Al's got dozens of R/GT head 5.4s out there and I'm not aware of any that run that weight.
The GT valvetrain is different (very very similar but not absolutely identical) to that used in the R. The adjuster is .020" shorter in the GT vs. R and the rest of the components are similarly different.

If you get a chance to talk to Al aout this... PM me what you find out.
I'm very curious...

Here is a quote I found fasinating... and revealing at the same time...

"The oil thing is funny. To be specific, I use different types of oil depending on what I am doing. Basically 5W30 though. Royal Purple mostly. The lash adjusters dictate the use of the 5W30 oil. Then the clearance of the rest of the motor revolves around that.

It is true that the Ford GT uses 5W50 oil, HOWEVER, the lash adjusters are specifially calibrated in that engine for that oil. AND I can tell you for a fact that 5W30 does not work in the Ford GT because I already did that on the dyno and it lost 15 hp on the dyno back to back. As it turns out the reason it lost hp was the thinner oil is more easily compressed in the lash adjuster and the engine effectively thinks the cam is smaller because it is now easier to depress the lash adjuster than to open the valve. Basically the cam profile is the problem in that specific application. The thicker oil is the band aid.

I am working on a cure for that problem. That will be a different story. I would prefer not to elaborate too much more until I have EXACT answers, not close or almost.

That's 1000 hp at the flywheel. Stay tuned."


John Mihovetz

 

[Fourcam330]

If you get a chance to talk to Al aout this... PM me what you find out.
I'm very curious...

Here is a quote I found fasinating... and revealing at the same time...

"The oil thing is funny. To be specific, I use different types of oil depending on what I am doing. Basically 5W30 though. Royal Purple mostly. The lash adjusters dictate the use of the 5W30 oil. Then the clearance of the rest of the motor revolves around that.

It is true that the Ford GT uses 5W50 oil, HOWEVER, the lash adjusters are specifially calibrated in that engine for that oil. AND I can tell you for a fact that 5W30 does not work in the Ford GT because I already did that on the dyno and it lost 15 hp on the dyno back to back. As it turns out the reason it lost hp was the thinner oil is more easily compressed in the lash adjuster and the engine effectively thinks the cam is smaller because it is now easier to depress the lash adjuster than to open the valve. Basically the cam profile is the problem in that specific application. The thicker oil is the band aid.

I am working on a cure for that problem. That will be a different story. I would prefer not to elaborate too much more until I have EXACT answers, not close or almost.

That's 1000 hp at the flywheel. Stay tuned."


John Mihovetz

Is that a quote from John's/Holdener's new book? .

I just went over John's quote again. Am I reading correctly in that John's saying that the stock GT cam profiles are the reason they need to run the heavier oil? If so there's the answer, all of Al's GT head builds use non stock cams.

 

[Fourcam330]

I realize that the components aren't the same, but out of curiosity, Bruce what weight are you supposed to run in an '00R?

 

[Purvis]

Fourcam, thanks for all of the information. As usual, you blow us all away with your knowledge.

Anyway, Im definately glad to not have ordered one of the initial batched cars. Im just going to wait this out, and see how this all goes. It seems way too risky to order one from the initial batch. :read:

 

[E. Green Cobra]

I realize that the components aren't the same, but out of curiosity, Bruce what weight are you supposed to run in an '00R?

I believe the R's ran the same Andy...

 

[Fourcam330]

I believe the R's ran the same Andy...

After poking around a bit I believe you're right Ron, 15w-50. This may make for an interesting dyno day.

 

[Jimmysidecarr]

Is that a quote from John's/Holdener's new book? .

I just went over John's quote again. Am I reading correctly in that John's saying that the stock GT cam profiles are the reason they need to run the heavier oil? If so there's the answer, all of Al's GT head builds use non stock cams.

That is a quote from a Mod Fords thread... I still don't have Holdeners book YET!! ... I need to get it though... I really enjoy his articles!!!

I think it's too soon to say what's up w/ the 50 weight thing... I don't know what the cam profile is on the GT...

But....

I suspect the shorter adjuster is playing a fairly major role in all this as well.. :shrug: Who knows???
The orrifice sizing has to play a role... and I suspect the volume of oil in the lash adjuster may contribute to sensitivity to being compressed...