2007 Shelby GT500 Crankshaft Failure Article

[robertlane]

CLICK HERE FOR THE ARTICLE

 

We asked Ford to comment on this article since 19 April, however, the did not respond.

[DVS2XS]

THANK YOU very much for the info, it is fantastic. The photos of the internals are great - especially the Manley H-beam rods . The crank journals don't have much filet/radius do they?

 

The Dampener weighs HOW MUCH? Holy $#!@ Batman!

 

After all of the design work on the Ford GT cranks (especially the snouts) I wonder who dropped the ball here?

[sbornitz]

Not cool by Ford! I see more delays on the way now .

[kepfordj]

Well, sometimes things just go wrong. Better they catch it now than 6 months after the release.

[DVS2XS]

Well, sometimes things just go wrong. Better they catch it now than 6 months after the release.

 

 

VERY good point!

 

Just think of it this way...now we get an even stronger crank.

[rpretzel]

That completely sucks! Let's all cross our fingers for a prompt solution to the problem. The lack of comment from Ford concerns me.

[Three Cobras]

Robert -

Thanks for the follow-up. Thanks for providing news, even though it appears to be bad news. I, for one, appreciate being informed even if the information is not always positive. I get a grim chuckle from this deal because it looks like their attempt to outfox the aftermarket folks outfoxed them. I gather this was the result of trying to make it very painful to do a pulley swap.

Also, thanks for the plug for us long-suffering Powerlease folks. I am aware of some other expressions of discontent that are not showing up on any site - there are some more ipssed than even me.

[svtbird91]

I'm looking at this as good news. I would hate to think of what would happen if this type of problem would show up after production.

This way Ford can correct the issue without affecting the owners ,and at a much lower cost to Ford as well.

 

It's a win- win for both . (the discovery of the problem )

 

In the end this will only make the engine even stronger also.

 

Just trying to put a positive spin on a bad situation.

[SVTpower]

I'm looking at this as good news. I would hate to think of what would happen if this type of problem would show up after production.

This way Ford can correct the issue without affecting the owners ,and at a much lower cost to Ford as well.

 

It's a win- win for both . (the discovery of the problem )

 

In the end this will only make the engine even stronger also.

 

Just trying to put a positive spin on a bad situation.

 

 

 

:burnout: You are right, better now than later. Hopefully now they will overkill it with the fix.

[ford4v429]

something Ive always wondered about regarding belt driven superchargers- banging second has GOT to be hard as hell on the belt- I would have to imagine inertia of roots type blower to be way more than damper, and the instantaneous belt pull as the high speed blower(and damper) are in effect adding 'flywheel hp' TO the drivetrain until speed catches up (tenths of a second unless belt slips)...anyways, what I was wondering was if anyone ever put a sprag clutch in their blower pulley? that would allow blower to spool down a bit more slowly- but could result in 'overboosting', so would need a wastegate type device...Ive thought about this especially regarding the 'high overdrive' ratios of centrifugal blowers, as it would seem the shock load on those gears at rapid deceleration encountered on a hard shift would cause far more wear and tear than anything else...Any thoughts???

 

Another suggestion - perhaps simply increasing BOTH pulley diameters would decrease belt pull...on our lathe spindles I usually try to size pulleys at max diameter allowed without exceeding belt speed limits at required spindle rpm, to decrease bearing loads (and increase hp rating at same width belt)

[jkittrell]

something Ive always wondered about regarding belt driven superchargers- banging second has GOT to be hard as hell on the belt- I would have to imagine inertia of roots type blower to be way more than damper, and the instantaneous belt pull as the high speed blower(and damper) are in effect adding 'flywheel hp' TO the drivetrain until speed catches up (tenths of a second unless belt slips)...anyways, what I was wondering was if anyone ever put a sprag clutch in their blower pulley? that would allow blower to spool down a bit more slowly- but could result in 'overboosting', so would need a wastegate type device...Ive thought about this especially regarding the 'high overdrive' ratios of centrifugal blowers, as it would seem the shock load on those gears at rapid deceleration encountered on a hard shift would cause far more wear and tear than anything else...Any thoughts???

 

Another suggestion - perhaps simply increasing BOTH pulley diameters would decrease belt pull...on our lathe spindles I usually try to size pulleys at max diameter allowed without exceeding belt speed limits at required spindle rpm, to decrease bearing loads (and increase hp rating at same width belt)

 

 

Sounds too much like physics. I hate physics. No wonder I'm not a gearhead. :D I'm kinda like some of the others. I'd rather them figure this out now than have me figure it out while flying down the interstate on a football road trip. Maybe it'll even cool the heels on some of the ADM's and those willing to pay them.

[DVS2XS]

Wandering off topic

 

something Ive always wondered about regarding belt driven superchargers- banging second has GOT to be hard as hell on the belt- I would have to imagine inertia of roots type blower to be way more than damper, and the instantaneous belt pull as the high speed blower(and damper) are in effect adding 'flywheel hp' TO the drivetrain until speed catches up (tenths of a second unless belt slips)...anyways, what I was wondering was if anyone ever put a sprag clutch in their blower pulley? that would allow blower to spool down a bit more slowly- but could result in 'overboosting', so would need a wastegate type device...Ive thought about this especially regarding the 'high overdrive' ratios of centrifugal blowers, as it would seem the shock load on those gears at rapid deceleration encountered on a hard shift would cause far more wear and tear than anything else...Any thoughts???

 

Another suggestion - perhaps simply increasing BOTH pulley diameters would decrease belt pull...on our lathe spindles I usually try to size pulleys at max diameter allowed without exceeding belt speed limits at required spindle rpm, to decrease bearing loads (and increase hp rating at same width belt)

 

 

My .02 - first - IF it works, don't fix it.

Second - these are not Gilmer or High Torque Drive (HTD) type cogged belts, they are simple multi-V type belts that are allowed to slip if they get heavily loaded.

Third - Kevlar is a great thing.

Fourth - Cogged belts and bypass valves are widely available.

 

Again, just my .02...usually worth even less.

[rpretzel]

Sounds too much like physics. I hate physics. No wonder I'm not a gearhead. :D I'm kinda like some of the others. I'd rather them figure this out now than have me figure it out while flying down the interstate on a football road trip. Maybe it'll even cool the heels on some of the ADM's and those willing to pay them.

 

 

 

+1

 

Physics makes my brain hurt. For all you gearheads out there, how do you keep all that info in your head? I can barely remember my own name most days, and I can't remember my home phone number at all. :blink:

[kepfordj]

Another bright spot is if trans were in short supply, it gives them 9 more months to stock pile them.

[07 Shelby Cobra]

Great Job Robert! I especially liked the pointed reference(s) to Ford's lack of Customer PR Skills regarding the Shelby. Ford seems to be of the attitude, "Lets give the Customer what We Want", rather than, "Lets give the Customer what They Want". Maybe it's about time Ford heard it's Customers out.

Boy I hope I won't have to Buy another plate!! 08SHELBY

[Toms71]

Hey Everyone,

Needless to say I'm V-E-R-Y disappointed in the Ford SVT powertrain engineers if this

crankshaft failure issue is true. I'm beginning to see where a weak link might be in Dearborn.

Does anybody remember a 2002 SVT Cobra, Was there one? or was that the year Ford

yanked it back due to a mis-stated horsepower rating from an improperly designed intake

manifold? I hate to say it , but It looks like I'll be putting away my 07 GT 500 cash for another

6 months..

[Evil95GT]

Hey Tom!

To put it bluntly, I feel that Ford's R&D department is marginal at best. This isn't the first time they've had issues such as this. There wasn't a 2000 Cobra (they had the 2000 Cobra R, but not a regular Cobra), and there wasn't a 2002 Cobra. I think they definitely hit the mark with the '03 and '04, but again, those cars had issues with the drivehaft being a HUGE weak point. I'm also told that the early examples of IRS (1999) suffered wheelhop syndrome so bad it was enough to knock the fillings out of your teeth.

 

I mean, come on...........the last Cobra was a 2004 model. Ford has had ample time to research, develop, design (and price!) this vehicle. It seriously makes me wonder if they have it together.

[DVS2XS]

After reading the article several times and studying the photos, I have a couple of questions.

 

1.) Looking at the second photo, in the bore that is visible (rod/piston removed), is that rust at the bottom of the bore? Is this a sign of another issue like gasket problems?

 

2.) The main studs have two nuts. Does this mean that the engine will have a decent windage tray and a possible crank scraper?

 

3.) If the Damper weighs 26 pounds, what does the flywheel weigh? Just how much external balancing weight is REQUIRED in this engine? With all of this weight mounted on the front end of the crank, wouldn't this problem cease to be an issue if the damper weight was reduced, and the blower drive pulley was made as a seperate issue.

 

Somewhere I have a tech paper about the 5.4L crank development of the Ford GT. In it is mentioned that the standard Navigator crank snout was weak, and the crank was redesigned to reduce bending. However, the Lightning engines didn't seem to have an issue here, even with aftermarket blowers and lower pulleys. So what gives?

[tbl01]

Actually, I read durning the devlopment of the GT, the crank was seeing a failure at the snount. They found the failure at night durning a durability test. The crank gave way sending a piece thru the ceiling, which I believe set a portion of the room on fire.

 

Also at the NY auto show they actually had a cut-away of all the ford v8 engines including the new gt 500 motor. I was trying to compare bottom end pieces. The GT engine was cut as not to show the rods. The piston ring locations were diffrent, and the gt 500 looked like it had I beam rods. Actually they looked like I beam rods. Obviously either chromed or highly polished for the show.

 

Who knows if they were even the parts they are going to use.

[DutchGT500]

I agree. Better now then we you bought the car and accelerates it at the Interstate and then bang.... It wpuld be warranty but what can happen if this occurs.

[portside]

For what it is worth: Mark at SVT (now called Ford Performance) said that this article is unsubstantiated and that the build date for the GT500 is still June 2006. He denied that this article is true, and said he had no knowledge of it, other than on the internet. He also stated that the GT500 engine has I-beam Mahle rods, and not H-beam rods as pictured. He stated the goal of production is 8000 units. It seems very late in the game to be having engine testing failures based on a June 06 build date. Mark also confirmed that SVT has been largely absorbed into mainstream Ford as of 4-1-2006. These are just my observations based on what Ford Performance is telling me. I hope Mark is correctly informed on the matter, and is shooting me straight.

[robertlane]

I hope that this does not delay production of the GT500.

 

As for the validity of the article. Those who may not know this, but we have an agreement with Ford that we will allow them the chance to comment about any article PRIOR to publication.

 

I found it odd that Ford did not and still has not commented about the story? It the article was false, why has Ford not said anything since our letter to them dated 19 April?

[DutchGT500]

I agree. Where smoke is, is fire. That's what we say here.

[rpretzel]

I just talked to someone who just asked SVT about the crank issue, and they said they new nothing about it. It seems like this is an issue Ford would really try to keep under the radar.

[Evil95GT]

I don't doubt the authenticity and accuracy of the alleged crankshaft failures. Look at this logically........

 

Can anyone tell me when was the last time a manufacturer kept so mum about VERY pertinent details of a vehicle? These aspects would include an accurate (not estimated) MSRP, a *documented* publicized date of availability, as well as details about the engine including but not limited to the compression ratio, type of connecting rods, type of crank, material of pistons, etc etc etc.

 

With the release date as close as it *supposedly* is, one would think that Ford would WANT the public to know everything there is to know about the Shelby GT500. But such is not the case. This tells me that of course there's a problem, it's just a matter of nailing what that problem is. Nobody can legitimately act so shady without a valid reason.

 

Just my $.03, because I feel wealthy this evening.

[DutchGT500]

Ford, just solve the issue by using a separate SC lower pulley. That way we can change it to a bigger one and add horsies. wheelspin at all gears. Look at him powershifting

[Fastbackman]

Right on pjcobra9t7. Doubt they'll make it that easy though.

[DutchGT500]

I don't think so either. But 23 pounds is a heavy sucker for just two pullies/damper assembly. Make it simple and loose weight.

[Sharp]

There are a lot of people getting worked up over this, and saying various bad things about Ford. You have to keep this in prospective, this is prototype engine testing. They are supposed to test things until they break. That way they can find the weak links. If it is true great, it means they found the problem before the Shelby hits the streets.

[oldimp]

Sharp,

I like your reasoning! Sounds most logical to me!