What gives a 2005 and up V6 model more HP

February 13th, 2008, 11:31 PM	#21
tsp_2177 Hardcore Enthusiast 2005 Civic GAY! Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alabama Posts: 1,874	does anyone know how strong the blocks are in our cars? are they as well designed as the 3.8l? __________________ slow car member twinky times two the stangs gone pypes mid muffler catback with their X-pipe In the top 20 cool peoples list on MM potsticker in training

February 14th, 2008, 12:08 AM

#22

AtlanticBlue99

The Nice Guy

1999 Ford Mustang V6

14.79 @ 92.15

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: UGA

Posts: 8,251

Originally Posted by Blainestang

You're right that it's not part of the current "modular" family and that's it's a "Cologne" engine, but the current 4.0 is not a pushrod engine... it's SOHC. However, the Cologne family of engines have generally been pushrods.

no i am right on all terms. the 3.8 essex family is a SOHC pushrod and so is the 4.0. the 4.0 in the 05+ v6 is a SOHC pushrod.

__________________
ModdedAutos
1999 Mustang V6
I used to list my mods here but stopped when I exceeded 255 characters.

http://www.moddedmustangs.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic8_7.gif

February 14th, 2008, 12:16 AM

#23

Blainestang

Regular

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: Tampa, FL

Posts: 412

Originally Posted by AtlanticBlue99

no i am right on all terms. the 3.8 essex family is a SOHC pushrod and so is the 4.0. the 4.0 in the 05+ v6 is a SOHC pushrod.

3.8L = OHV (Pushrod) = 1 Cam in block
4.0L = SOHC = 1 Cam per head (2 total)

__________________
1993 2.3L Coupe [Motortopia] : Open-Track Project... 214k miles
2000 V6 (Black,5-speed) [Motortopia] : Heads/Cam (EXHAUST CLIP)
2001 Harley Davidson F-150

Acts 16:31

February 14th, 2008, 12:22 AM	#24
itschristorres8 SP00LIN V6 2000 Mustang V6 unknown @390 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: south florida Posts: 14,619	AB i hate to disagree here but Im pretty sure that 4.0L SOHC doesnt use push rods the cam spins in the head and rides on something that pushes the valve down as the cam lob does. i forget the name for it though __________________ 437rwhp and 402rwtq through a V6 on a stock bottom end

February 14th, 2008, 12:27 AM

#25

Onemanzu

MM Phantom

Join Date: Oct 2006

Location: looking for free hand jobs in poland springs nebraska... silly gooses

Posts: 11,169

... the ford mustang 4.0 colonge motor is a over head cam design though the block originated as a push rod engine... the engine was first altered in 97 when it was placed in the ford explorer as a 4.0 over head cam... though before this it was often used in smaller cars as a weak little V6 push rod engine

__________________
Back for brotherly love. My thoughts are with you Bubba!! [9-23-08]

Originally Posted by omz

How to search
Nebraska!
CRT Performance

February 14th, 2008, 12:30 AM	#26
itschristorres8 SP00LIN V6 2000 Mustang V6 unknown @390 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: south florida Posts: 14,619	anyone have specs on this im finding this hard to believe an over head cam or cam in head motor does not use push rods as far as i know. __________________ 437rwhp and 402rwtq through a V6 on a stock bottom end

February 14th, 2008, 12:43 AM

#27

Blainestang

Regular

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: Tampa, FL

Posts: 412

Originally Posted by itschristorres8

AB i hate to disagree here but Im pretty sure that 4.0L SOHC doesnt use push rods
the cam spins in the head and rides on something that pushes the valve down as the cam lob does.
i forget the name for it though

Followers/Rockers

Originally Posted by Onemanzu

... the ford mustang 4.0 colonge motor is a over head cam design though the block originated as a push rod engine... the engine was first altered in 97 when it was placed in the ford explorer as a 4.0 over head cam... though before this it was often used in smaller cars as a weak little V6 push rod engine

I mentioned this in one of my earlier posts above...

Originally Posted by itschristorres8

anyone have specs on this
im finding this hard to believe
an over head cam or cam in head motor does not use push rods as far as i know.

It WAS a pushrod motor, but it was modified to now be OHC.

Originally Posted by Wiki

The original Ford Cologne V6, also known as the Ford Taunus V6, 640L, was a 60° cast iron block V6 engine built by the Ford Motor Company in Cologne, Germany, hence the name. It was closely related to the Ford Taunus V4 engine, adding two cylinders and no longer requiring a balance shaft. Over the years, the Cologne style V6 evolved from the engine displacements of 1.8, 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 litres engines. All except the Cosworth 24v derivative and later 4.0 litre sohc engines were pushrod overhead valve engines, with a single camshaft between the banks. The Cologne V6 is still in production, is still a viable engine and does not closely resemble the original engines it evolved from. There is talk that it is scheduled to be replaced however Ford has made no formal announcement and recent news suggests it will remain in use in the Mustang as a base model engine into 2010. The new version of the Ford 4.0 L engine is listed as having 210 HP with 240 ft/lbs torque. Dyno tests by owners, and manufacturers of after markets products, have shown this engine to be underrated in reported HP.
Originally, the Cologne V6 was installed in cars intended for Germany and continental Europe, while the British "Essex" V6 was used in cars for the British market. Later, the Cologne V6 largely replaced the Essex V6 even for British-market vehicles. These engines were also used in the United States, especially in compact trucks.
The older fuel injected Cologne engine is lighter and more powerful than the equivalent Essex V6 even though its maximum engine displacement is smaller, but it produces less torque (Cologne V6 162 lb·ft (220 N·m) versus Essex V6 174 ft·lbf).
The Cologne V6 was made to be very compatible in installation with the Taunus V4, having the same transmission bolt pattern, the same engine mounts, and in many versions, a cylinder head featuring "siamesed" exhaust passages, which reduced the three exhaust outlets down to two on each side. The latter feature was great for compatibility, but poor for performance. The 2.4, 2.9 and 4.0 had three exhaust ports as in the photos, making them preferable.
The engine was available in both carburetted and fuel injected form.

Last edited by Blainestang : February 14th, 2008 at 12:46 AM.

February 14th, 2008, 12:59 AM	#28
itschristorres8 SP00LIN V6 2000 Mustang V6 unknown @390 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: south florida Posts: 14,619	im not talking about what it was im talking about the current 4.0L mustang having no push rods in it. just the followers or rockers (thank you for reminding me) __________________ 437rwhp and 402rwtq through a V6 on a stock bottom end

February 14th, 2008, 01:36 AM

#29

SSStang

I Post Entirely Way Too Much

2k2 Mustang V6

Join Date: Feb 2007

Location: TEXAS

Posts: 6,030

Originally Posted by AtlanticBlue99

no i am right on all terms. the 3.8 essex family is a SOHC pushrod and so is the 4.0. the 4.0 in the 05+ v6 is a SOHC pushrod.

Your actually wrong.

The 3.8L essex v6 is an OHV pushrod motor...

The 4.0L colonge v6 is an SOHC motor

__________________

Selling for friend: Vortech Supercharge kit < 100miles.

February 14th, 2008, 08:26 AM

#30

AtlanticBlue99

The Nice Guy

1999 Ford Mustang V6

14.79 @ 92.15

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: UGA

Posts: 8,251

Originally Posted by SSStang

Your actually wrong.

The 3.8L essex v6 is an OHV pushrod motor...

The 4.0L colonge v6 is an SOHC motor

i stand corrected. the pushrod 4.0 was used in rangers until 2000... i thought that was the motor in the new mustangs, not the explorer one.

__________________
ModdedAutos
1999 Mustang V6
I used to list my mods here but stopped when I exceeded 255 characters.

February 14th, 2008, 03:03 PM	#31
tsp_2177 Hardcore Enthusiast 2005 Civic GAY! Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alabama Posts: 1,874	Originally Posted by Wiki The original Ford Cologne V6, also known as the Ford Taunus V6, 640L, was a 60° cast iron block V6 engine built by the Ford Motor Company in Cologne, Germany, hence the name. It was closely related to the Ford Taunus V4 engine, adding two cylinders and no longer requiring a balance shaft. Over the years, the Cologne style V6 evolved from the engine displacements of 1.8, 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 litres engines. All except the Cosworth 24v derivative and later 4.0 litre sohc engines were pushrod overhead valve engines, with a single camshaft between the banks. The Cologne V6 is still in production, is still a viable engine and does not closely resemble the original engines it evolved from. There is talk that it is scheduled to be replaced however Ford has made no formal announcement and recent news suggests it will remain in use in the Mustang as a base model engine into 2010. The new version of the Ford 4.0 L engine is listed as having 210 HP with 240 ft/lbs torque. Dyno tests by owners, and manufacturers of after markets products, have shown this engine to be underrated in reported HP. Originally, the Cologne V6 was installed in cars intended for Germany and continental Europe, while the British "Essex" V6 was used in cars for the British market. Later, the Cologne V6 largely replaced the Essex V6 even for British-market vehicles. These engines were also used in the United States, especially in compact trucks. The older fuel injected Cologne engine is lighter and more powerful than the equivalent Essex V6 even though its maximum engine displacement is smaller, but it produces less torque (Cologne V6 162 lb·ft (220 N·m) versus Essex V6 174 ft·lbf). The Cologne V6 was made to be very compatible in installation with the Taunus V4, having the same transmission bolt pattern, the same engine mounts, and in many versions, a cylinder head featuring "siamesed" exhaust passages, which reduced the three exhaust outlets down to two on each side. The latter feature was great for compatibility, but poor for performance. The 2.4, 2.9 and 4.0 had three exhaust ports as in the photos, making them preferable. The engine was available in both carburetted and fuel injected form. so the guy that ya'll flamed for his dyno sheets could have actually had those numbers huh? __________________ slow car member twinky times two the stangs gone pypes mid muffler catback with their X-pipe In the top 20 cool peoples list on MM potsticker in training

February 14th, 2008, 03:20 PM

#32

whitemustang02

MM's official Chevy guy

2002 Mustang V6

Join Date: Sep 2007

Location: Rochester, NY

Posts: 1,920

Originally Posted by tsp_2177

so the guy that ya'll flamed for his dyno sheets could have actually had those numbers huh?

no his numbers were still insane. they are hard enuf for a gt to get.

also he probed with other facts that he was just pulling shit out of his ass.

__________________

"Speak softly and carry a big stick" - Theodore Roosevelt
"Any idiot can make a V8 fast, it takes a real idiot to make a fast V6".

Originally Posted by Heather

Me likey mikey

February 14th, 2008, 03:27 PM	#33
shadow5403 Hardcore Enthusiast 2000 V6 Mustang Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: PA Posts: 2,041	+1 quote of the week is his stock injectors can handle up to 500HP __________________ http://www.angelfire.com/pro2/shadowx/mustang_pics

February 14th, 2008, 03:53 PM

#34

Blainestang

Regular

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: Tampa, FL

Posts: 412

Originally Posted by tsp_2177

so the guy that ya'll flamed for his dyno sheets could have actually had those numbers huh?

No.

Is the 4.0 slightly underrated? Probably... by about 10hp.

But either way, you can't UNDERRATE them once they're on the dyno, and I have SEEN dyno numbers for a 4.0 with bolt-ons and ported heads. It made a little over 200whp. This kid claimed to have 355whp with bolt-ons, the SAME ported heads, and higher compression pistons. Unless the pistons resulted in a 150whp gain (which they 100% absolutely did not), he was lying.

February 14th, 2008, 04:13 PM

#35

supercharged421

Regular

2004 Mustang

n/a

Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: East TN

Posts: 144

Originally Posted by Onemanzu

turbos are usually more efficient then superchargers... though they are a tiny bit harder to work with/tune... either way your going to notice a nice gain when shoving 8-11 psi through that engine

your exactly right!

__________________

February 14th, 2008, 05:15 PM

#36

Onemanzu

MM Phantom

Join Date: Oct 2006

Location: looking for free hand jobs in poland springs nebraska... silly gooses

Posts: 11,169

i think its great that you guys are quoting wiki... very reliable

__________________
Back for brotherly love. My thoughts are with you Bubba!! [9-23-08]

Originally Posted by omz

How to search
Nebraska!
CRT Performance

February 14th, 2008, 05:31 PM

#37

Blainestang

Regular

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: Tampa, FL

Posts: 412

Originally Posted by Onemanzu

i think its great that you guys are quoting wiki... very reliable

I wouldn't use it if my life depended on it, but it's in agreement with several other sources (including yourself) as it comes to the topic of it's previous valvetrain arrangement... so I thought it would suffice

February 14th, 2008, 06:01 PM	#38
nick/adam Banned 2005 v6 Mustang 13.5 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: hesperia Posts: 32	Listen The v6 motor witch is in the new mustang is aluminum Witch can nothandel as much as the Cast iorn like in the older six... I think the older six was cast but I might be wrong.... But You can still bolt on a super charger and still pull greater numbers than the older Bitch ass 3.8 that mister mullit has