MUSTANG BOSS 330

[MustangFanatic]

A BOSS 302 and a BOSS 390 be awesome, 5.0 small block or a 6.2 big block, It makes sense the Z28 will have the 6.0 and the challenger will have the 6.1 is it. Ford would really be in a nice position if they did this and it wouldent suprise me to have another mustang option, so far you can buy a roush,saleen,shelby,steeda,CS/GT,GT, do I have to go on, lol. Stroke the 4.6 to 5.0 with GT500 heads and tranny 35-37k, Have the BIG BLOCK 6.2 390 with everything beefed up for 40k+ Idk how would they price this, prob be after the GT500 production or the 09 yr, who knows its all good.

 

 

 

Definitely agree, we need a Boss 302 and a Boss 390!! :happy feet: :happy feet:

[68fastback]

In reguards to the above debate, a bunch of folks got into the same one on Brads site.TMS/How Ford could have made 500hp naturally aspirated on the GT500. They handled it pretty well so far and it does make for a good read.To frame the discussion;" Some folks here are saying it can't be done, a naturally aspirated V8 making

 

close to 500 hp at a price point very close to the 2007 Shelby GT500.

 

Neither side can offer proof, yet, either way. I'm surprised at how rude

 

some posters can be because some person dares offer a different opinion

 

then theirs.

 

(I'm curious what happens on the job when their boss disagrees with them).

 

Yet, they can't provide proof (just opinions) that it can't be done.

 

Maybe it can't, this is just bench racing ....we're not talking life or death

 

stuff here or insulting your family members so learn to be tolerant...you'll live

 

longer and be way happier.

 

I'm interested in hearing from engineers, builders and designers that have

 

actually worked on clean emissions engines that have gotten high hp per

 

cubic inch and get their expert opinions.

 

Someone wise said "The fun is in the journey"."

 

 

JETSOLVER, yeah, that's an interesting thread to read... you sure do find the fun stuff

 

Present NHRA pro-stock NatAsp, carburated, 500CID, big blocks routinely make 1,200-1,400 HP, so for a race engine that's no problem.

 

The mid 60s Ford 427 dual-quad 4-bolt-main side-oilers were rated at 425HP but, like the 426Hemis of the same vintage, made 515-530HP dead stock on the dyno on pump gas.

 

Now, if you toss in the constraint of 'clean' it surely would change the story. First, how clean? LEV? ULEV? ULEV-II? PZEV? Most of Ford's engines shipping in cars today are ULEV/ULEV-II/PZEV (I believe). I don't know what the GT500 qualified under -- I'd guess ULEV but that's just a guess.

 

A DOHC engine would have a distinct advantage IMHO because the fundamental breathing, at a given point of refinement, is better than pushrod/two-valves. High lift will breath more and all the traditional techniques: porting, polishing, matching ports, intake runner lengths, exhaust primary size/length, collector size/length,and configuration (all-one, skewed, tri-Y, etc) etc. I think the big problem areas will be cam duration and overlap and coordinated dynamic valve timing. Duration because if you over scavange, raw fuel will go out the exhaust (dirty dirty!) and Overlap: ditto but not due to scavanging, just due to direct raw fuel passing through since both intake and exhaust being open at the same time. Dynamic valve timing since the effecive flow characteristics will change with rpm for agiven baked-in cam design, so you need some way to optimize across the operating range. Of course the engine management system is key too, but the baked-in design has to be optimized first, which is lett critical with a blower since you can very the breathing with a'hammer' rather than nat-asp finesse.

 

My opinion is that a modern 427CID, for argument sake, with DOHC, with the right cams (there are also awesome aftermarket cams that will meet the minimum emissions requirements, but not the GT500's, I think) and direct injection could easily develop over 500 HP and still meet ULEV without too much difficulty. I think s/c's are favored though, because you don't have to do nearly as much experimentation and hard-part tuning, ie. you don't need to 'bake' the tune into the parts to the same degree you would with Nat asp., as opposed to manageing forced breathing with the computer management system (and a blower or turbo). A lot easier that way which probably means cheaper. But a 500HP 427CID ULEV direct injection motor should not be a technological challenge to my mind. Heck, that's only, what, ...1.2HP/CID.

 

There's a guy in Brooklyn making betw 1000 and 1200HP on a nat asp 5.4 modular -- it's an all out race motor and I'm sure he's not meeting any emissions ;-), but still pretty amazing for 5.4L

 

Yeah, I'd love to hear from an actual engine engineer, someone from Special Vehicle Engineering, like Dan Davis, on this -- they'd probably add another whole dimention I haven't even considered.

 

What a wonderful subject to bring up!

[BadTony]

I have said this before, just bring back the Super CobraJet 429 make it an aluminum block and add a FRPP Whipple supercharger, make an easy 600HP and call it a day.

[JETSOLVER]

I wonder how much has been done with the Miller cycle and modern direct injection? I would think it would not be that difficult to incorporate some kind of mechanical VVT in the mod series and take even more advantage of the high efficiency superchargers now available. I don't believe that the old FE or Lima series heads can be made to meet ULEV or higher standards as the size of the valves makes for such a large combustion chamber leading to cool spots in the burn. But the much higher swirl that one could achieve by opening a second intake valve slightly later combined with the higher compression ratio available with a Miller cycle approach might be the ticket to staying in lean burn longer. And the smaller twin exhausts are able to open quicker with less overlap than a larger single valve. The only hang up might be the head/block cooling effiency avail to the mod series(demonstrated problems with this). Which leads me to wonder if some sort of higher effiency(say 48 volt?) electric water pump might help to keep combustion chamber temps at a more consistant leval. As usual the problem is cold starts and getting heat into the system early. So use the technology that Ford took an option on to store coolant heat in a "thermos bottle" to release back into the head on intial start up. I recall reading about this some years ago, in particular in colder climates so as to get the interior up to temp quicker. And just for pie in the sky thinking, it is now possible to cast glass into the head cooling passages in a second process and turn the whole engine into that "thermos" removing the need for an external remote storage container and its weight and complexity.The Miller cycle/Wikipedia Miller cycle/NASA Langley hybrid proposal

[68fastback]

Thanks for those links JETSOLVER.

 

One thing that came to mind while reading on the Miller Cycle is that high-revving hi-po engines with long duration cams try to take advantage of a similar 'fifth-cycle' effect. At high revs the the incomeing mix stream is moving fast enough from the down stroke that the intake closing can be further delayed (long duration) as the incoming mix is 'slapped' into a compressesion wave near the piston surface as a result of the change in direction of the piston. The intake can be left partially open until the wave rebounds up to the valve area. But I really like the notion of the Miller cycle (see lJETSOLVER's links in post#34) with a S/C to prolong intake closing and minimize the time that the piston is expending work on compression (and minimize the overall compression energy as well).

 

In an oversquare, hi-rev, hi-compression motor the duration and overlap helps to get somewyat similar results but it would seem to me that the miller/SC combo would be more efficient and would work especially well with undersquare (long-stroke) designs like the GT500. Also, since the Miller cycle works best with postive displacement blowers with a lot of low-end grunt, the rootes-type on the GT500 would seem better than a centrifugal (for sure) or even a lysohm screw-type (Ford GT) since the latter is less efficient at low-med revs where mille cycle excels. Sounds like the GT500 motor has all the right essentials to change some cams and reprogram into a Miller cycle (no trivial task, I would expect, for sure -- but a good potential fit).

 

Your comment of an extra valve made me also think that the Miller cycle might almost just be a primitive first step toward direct AIR injection as a viable solution to exploit the fundamental benefits of the Miller cycle concept further. Analygous to direct fuel injection, high-pressure direct air injection could be done later in the cycle when the piston is much higher up in the compression stroke, thereby eliminating more of the most energy-expensive portion of piston-driven mixture compression. This would seem to benefit long stroke undersquares the most since their longer strokes and more typiclly more sever rod angles give poorer leverage in the central porion of the compression stroke (in the context of the Miller cycle tradeoffs, we're talking). Direct air injection could possibly be delayed as late as 60-degrees from TDC, well past the inefficient piston-driven compression stroke and greatly extending the fundamental benefit of the Miller cycle tradeoffs between piston and s/c components of total compression.

 

I don't know of anyone doing or even talking about doing the above, but it would seem to me to be a logical extension of the concepts explained in the articles you posted links to (post #34 above). It would also require a higher-pressure plenum/intake of some sort and very good head breathing (again, S/C'd DOHC modular friendly).

 

Anyhow, just some thoughts... anyone have other ideas?

 

PS - but if it sounds fart-can 'blaaap-y' like a V10 Viper rather than the sweet V8, fugettaboutit Hey, I've got my standards...