| PM | Quote | Reply | Full Topic |
Owns A Torsen
Joined: Mon Sep 18th, 2017
Posts: 6436
Status:
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: $user_rep
After building this mustang I've been working on. I've become a fan of the 4.6L modular engine. Simple set up easy to make power dependable. All around good engine
Good for a mustang, not too much for a ranger. They are incredibly wide especially later iterations.
They also have those multiple cams and multiple chains. Chains stretch per linear measure. A chain that ties a cam in with a crank on a pushrod motor is so much shorter.. just for simple math let's say 10 inches. If that chain stretches .01 per inch, it only is .10 longer than it was, will probably still run well. You take a chain that is 6 times longer that is almost 5/8 of an inch, which is why they need tensioners, which is why the tensioners wear, and regardless of the tensioning the mechanical cam timing is still changing happening later in the cycle. It works for indy cars which get rebuilt every 750 miles or so but I think it was a horrible design for daily drivers.
Think of the difference in the 2000 4.0 in a ranger and the 2001. How much horsepower did they gain per what they lost in reliability, longevity and about a dozen or so more ty's?
I owned 2 crown vics both with 4.6. They both were extremely powerful for the cubes but they had some issues.
Kind of like a logic problem, X being a personal preference for comfort zone.
IF (Ranger) AND (income - expenses) > X AND (no need for AC)
THEN 4.6
ELSE find another solution
END IF
Since there is a 5.0 in my project already, it is probably going to be less expensive to get it working than to do anything else.
____________________
00 XLT 4WD RCSB 3.GO! Jalapeño
01 XLT 2WD RC Steppie 3.0 auto Silver
The future belongs to those who show up.