Why work with a motor that is really hard to get any power? I hear all the time about how the 5.0L was better or pull the 4.6L and drop in a 5.4L. Why do you like the motor? Why don't you spend time on something better for your mustang?
Why do you like the 4.6L?
- Thread starter Lilkicker
- Start date
duff daddy
Legend
First of all, for the weight to hp ratio stock to stock 5.4 and pi 4.6 ill take the 4.6 all day. secondly if you have read any of the posts about a 4.6 you can get decent power out of them with "bolt ons" set of cams yoru at 300 wheel with a pi swap.....
sneaky98gt
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Messages
- 269
- Reaction score
- 0
I like it because it's smooth, efficient, and reliable.
I don't know exactly what to pinpoint, but the 4.6 is just a smoother running motor than the 5.0s I've ever ridden in. Much smoother to run up the rpm, and just generally more tame and easy to drive. Just a factor of technology; I've driven S197 4.6s, and they are tons smoother than my car is. It's a fact of car technology: they get better over time (especially in the driveability department), and people who don't believe that need to get over themselves.
The 4.6 is a very efficient motor. I know of LOTS of people that have recorded 25+ mpg on heavily modified 4.6s. I've got a blower on mine making 325 rwhp, and I got 25 mpg in non-optimal conditions a few weekends ago. I know people with S197s (which are quite a bit heavier) that have gotten 28-29 mpg. My granddad's 01 auto vert GT (almost stock) regularly gets 27 mpg; his 04 auto Mach 1 has gotten 24 on several non-optimal occasions. His 94 mild H/C/I full bolt on 5 speed GT, which makes less power than either the Mach 1 or my GT, however, has never gotten more than 20. I know other people with mostly stock 5.0s that have only gotten 21-23ish. Once again, it's another fact of cars that they get more efficient over time, and the 4.6 proves that.
And finally, the 4.6s are VERY reliable. There are lots of folks with modified and very "driven" Mustangs with 150,000+ miles and still running strong. Think of all the cop cars out there that have been abused and how many miles they have, and all the taxi cabs that have 3, 4, 500,000+ miles on them and still rolling. I can't exactly speak for other motors here, but the 4.6 is about as reliable as it gets.
Hard to get any power? I beg to differ. My NPI auto GT, which boasts the absolute lowest stock HP rating for any 4.6, is making 325 rwhp with less than $2500 in it, and it still drives like it is stock, cranks as soon as I turn the key, doesn't choke off at a stop light randomly, and gets 25+ mpg. Ask someone in a N/A 5.0 making that amount of power if their car does all that...I can tell you right now what the answer will be. Some of these old school types of folks think that if aftermarket heads and cams don't add 100+ hp like they did in the old days (or still do with some pushrod motors, LSx motors for example), then they "can't make power." That is simply not true; they just require a different method of making power. Primarily boost. Boost a 4.6 and you WILL make power, end of story. PI 4.6s will make 375 on the wheels bone stock at 9psi; S197s will make 450 on the wheels stock at less boost than that. All of that with stock driveability and nice fuel mileage.
Alright. /rant. As you can probably tell by now, I'm pretty strongly opinionated about the 4.6s. And don't think I'm knocking the 5.0s; there is nothing wrong with them, and if I were to build a drag car, it would probably have a 5.0 or 5.8 in it simply because they are easier to work on. But I really do hate all the 5.0 folks out there who just really really hate 4.6s and feel that they "can't make any power".
I don't know exactly what to pinpoint, but the 4.6 is just a smoother running motor than the 5.0s I've ever ridden in. Much smoother to run up the rpm, and just generally more tame and easy to drive. Just a factor of technology; I've driven S197 4.6s, and they are tons smoother than my car is. It's a fact of car technology: they get better over time (especially in the driveability department), and people who don't believe that need to get over themselves.
The 4.6 is a very efficient motor. I know of LOTS of people that have recorded 25+ mpg on heavily modified 4.6s. I've got a blower on mine making 325 rwhp, and I got 25 mpg in non-optimal conditions a few weekends ago. I know people with S197s (which are quite a bit heavier) that have gotten 28-29 mpg. My granddad's 01 auto vert GT (almost stock) regularly gets 27 mpg; his 04 auto Mach 1 has gotten 24 on several non-optimal occasions. His 94 mild H/C/I full bolt on 5 speed GT, which makes less power than either the Mach 1 or my GT, however, has never gotten more than 20. I know other people with mostly stock 5.0s that have only gotten 21-23ish. Once again, it's another fact of cars that they get more efficient over time, and the 4.6 proves that.
And finally, the 4.6s are VERY reliable. There are lots of folks with modified and very "driven" Mustangs with 150,000+ miles and still running strong. Think of all the cop cars out there that have been abused and how many miles they have, and all the taxi cabs that have 3, 4, 500,000+ miles on them and still rolling. I can't exactly speak for other motors here, but the 4.6 is about as reliable as it gets.
Hard to get any power? I beg to differ. My NPI auto GT, which boasts the absolute lowest stock HP rating for any 4.6, is making 325 rwhp with less than $2500 in it, and it still drives like it is stock, cranks as soon as I turn the key, doesn't choke off at a stop light randomly, and gets 25+ mpg. Ask someone in a N/A 5.0 making that amount of power if their car does all that...I can tell you right now what the answer will be. Some of these old school types of folks think that if aftermarket heads and cams don't add 100+ hp like they did in the old days (or still do with some pushrod motors, LSx motors for example), then they "can't make power." That is simply not true; they just require a different method of making power. Primarily boost. Boost a 4.6 and you WILL make power, end of story. PI 4.6s will make 375 on the wheels bone stock at 9psi; S197s will make 450 on the wheels stock at less boost than that. All of that with stock driveability and nice fuel mileage.
Alright. /rant. As you can probably tell by now, I'm pretty strongly opinionated about the 4.6s. And don't think I'm knocking the 5.0s; there is nothing wrong with them, and if I were to build a drag car, it would probably have a 5.0 or 5.8 in it simply because they are easier to work on. But I really do hate all the 5.0 folks out there who just really really hate 4.6s and feel that they "can't make any power".
JerZeyStangz
Well-Known Member
sneaky98gt, summed it up. The 4.6L is low compression motor that is pretty much a engine that has a lot of potential, its a matter of tapping in to that source of power the right way. You cant impress everyone, just do what you like! We know we have the lowest factory hp rating, but when you have so much restrictive stuff on the car, you can see why it makes 215crank.
Orange Stang
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,656
- Reaction score
- 2
4.6L FTW. Even if its NPI.
hahaha
hahaha
some of us like a challenge... i was one of those people... but then i got frustrated...
i enjoyed seeing 99+ GTs in my mirrors...
i enjoyed seeing 99+ GTs in my mirrors...
Well, I have a '95 5-slow, yes, I said 5-slow. Love the car, real beauty, but it is my cruiser for a reason. Unlike the foxes, this car is slow from the start (225hp if your lucky-stock). My 4.6L '03 is my race car. 245hp baseline to start. With just bolt-ons I last dynoed at 303rwhp!! Love my '95, but it is a heavy car. The '03 is my fun modded car for a reason.
What bolt on got you 303whp? must be more than the basic, maybe LT's or cams? I have every bolt on I can throw at my car(no LT's or cams) and I dont think I will lay down anywhere close to 300whp, so whats all done to yours?NASTY03GT said:
Oh yeah....I have had both motors and its the 2v for me hands down.
1996mustangGT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,538
- Reaction score
- 1
No replacement for displacement. 5.4 FTMFW. trq rocks.
sneaky98gt
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Messages
- 269
- Reaction score
- 0
1996mustangGT said:
I got 112 cubic inches of displacement sitting on top of my motor that says otherwise.
1996mustangGT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,538
- Reaction score
- 1
Put the same 2v 4.6 or 4v 4.6 with that m112 vs . 5.4 2v or 5.4 4v and see which makes more. humor me.
navy94gt
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 0
I love both my 5.0 and my 4.6 3v. The 4.6 is for daily commute and the 5.o is for weekend fun.
sneaky98gt
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Messages
- 269
- Reaction score
- 0
1996mustangGT said:
No need to. Ford did the work for us. Lightnings make 360 flywheel hp on 9psi of boost on the 5.4. Lots of stock 2v 4.6s make more than that on the wheels at similar boost with the same heads.
The 5.4s in the 150s make 260 stock flywheel horsepower, same as the 4.6s, although they have 50 more cubic inches.
Now I already know what you're going to say next: oooh, but they make so much more torque, yatta yatta yatta. So what. You don't race from 2000 rpm to 4000 rpm. The 96-98 NPIs made very similar torque numbers as the 99-04 PI cars from 1500-4000 rpm, but were they as fast? Not even close. Torque is good, but what ultimately matters is powerband, and that is something that the 5.4 does not have. The 5.4 is exactly what it was built to be: a truck motor made for pulling. A racing motor it is not.
I understand the general idea that more displacement equals more power, and it often times does. But to say "no replacement for displacement," or, "motor x is better and will make more power just because it is bigger," or, "x car makes more torque than y car, so it must be faster" is a bit close minded, and sounds like it came right out of 1969. And that's fine. Keep racing in 1969, and I'll keep winning at the track.
1996mustangGT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,538
- Reaction score
- 1
Woooooow someone got a little offended with the little engine comment. Congrats you win the internet bench racing! Take a joke man. and btw a more realistic comparison is a stock gt500 engine vs a stock 03 cobra engine.
1996mustangGT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,538
- Reaction score
- 1
And for the truck statement...thats with a shitty truck manifold. a n/a 5.4 with a comparible intake (hps hardball`r) would run all over a stock 2v pi engine. Is the fact that more cubic inches makes more power that hard to understand lol? not trying to be nor sound like a smart butt but its just simple physics man. if you want me to pull formula`s i can
is anybody really arguing that a 4.6 2v will make as much or more power than a 5.4 2v?? all else the same the larger motor will ALWAYS make more power. the 5.4 manifold design and tune are what determine its powerband, put equal intakes and spot on tunes and the 5.4 will ALWAYS make more power, no if ands or butts about it.......
Similar threads
