Ford goes pushrod?

[hoffman900]

A 4 valve architecture is superior to a 2 valve in any rpm range. As it was pointed out, the EMC made this glaringly clear (and many already knew this). If it can be low rpm if pushrods can actuate 4 valves and translate the correct motion, then it doesn’t matter how they’re opened.

I think Spintrons have made it glaringly clear where pushrods are lacking in performance applications. It’s incredible what they have gotten out of them tbh.

2 valve pushrod engines only exist in racing where they get rule breaks (different restrictor sizes, displacement advantages, etc) or the rules flat out ban OHC multivalve arrangements.

But, a mass produced truck engine isn’t that.

[pamotorman]

the GM LS truck engine has to cost less to manufacture than fords eco boost. the car companies are in business to make a profit and if you look at GM vs ford stock you can see who is making a bigger profit.

[Steve.k]

Im wondering if ford is just proving a point with new pushrod engine. They can build effecient engines either way.No doubt the LS ranting makes head office!

[hoffman900]

Im wondering if ford is just proving a point with new pushrod engine. They can build effecient engines either way.No doubt the LS ranting makes head office!

Publicly traded companies aren’t in the business of proving points unfortunately. I’m sure they have their reasons and if you read the business reports, material costs are eating in Ford’s bottom line, especially with the way things have been going lately.

[Steve.k]

Not sure i buy that. 24 hours of lemans comes to mind. I've read numerous books on Ford over the years and while the bean counters dictate alot of what happens there is definitely alot of mfg rivalry. If the engineers can build a high hp engine that meets all the cost parameters ters and kicks the competition down a notch or two get it done!!

[pamotorman]

A 4 valve architecture is superior to a 2 valve in any rpm range. As it was pointed out, the EMC made this glaringly clear (and many already knew this). If it can be low rpm if pushrods can actuate 4 valves and translate the correct motion, then it doesn’t matter how they’re opened.

I think Spintrons have made it glaringly clear where pushrods are lacking in performance applications. It’s incredible what they have gotten out of them tbh.

2 valve pushrod engines only exist in racing where they get rule breaks (different restrictor sizes, displacement advantages, etc) or the rules flat out ban OHC multivalve arrangements.

But, a mass produced truck engine isn’t that.

in amateur racing the LS is winning the fight because it is so much cheaper to build. one cam costs a lot less than 4 to start with.

[hoffman900]

A 4 valve architecture is superior to a 2 valve in any rpm range. As it was pointed out, the EMC made this glaringly clear (and many already knew this). If it can be low rpm if pushrods can actuate 4 valves and translate the correct motion, then it doesn’t matter how they’re opened.

I think Spintrons have made it glaringly clear where pushrods are lacking in performance applications. It’s incredible what they have gotten out of them tbh.

2 valve pushrod engines only exist in racing where they get rule breaks (different restrictor sizes, displacement advantages, etc) or the rules flat out ban OHC multivalve arrangements.

But, a mass produced truck engine isn’t that.

in amateur racing the LS is winning the fight because it is so much cheaper to build. one cam costs a lot less than 4 to start with.

Okay, professional racing where costs aren't as much of a factor.

That said, build out a pushrod valvetrain with pushrods, lifters, and rocker assemblies, index the rocker bores, and it adds up. If I'm building a pushrod system that can go to 9000rpm, what's that going to cost me? I also don't mean like a CarCraft "it made one pull on the dyno, so you too can build this recipe for like $5000", I mean like hold together for 200+ racing miles.

Pretty sure Kaase put different cams and valve springs in the EMC engine, as compared to all the fancy pieces used in the LSX engines that he competed against. Stock rocker arms and everything...

On a Coyote engine, you're in $1500 for cams and just need to add valve springs on top of that. $1200 will buy you a good shaft rocker assembly alone, not including lifters, cam, and pushrods.

[pamotorman]

how many chevys do you see out there with a ford engine vs how many fords do you see with a chevy engine. I rest my case.

[hoffman900]

how many chevys do you see out there with a ford engine vs how many fords do you see with a chevy engine. I rest my case.

Economy of scale is what's happening there.

If I can buy a block, heads, etc. for 2/3 the price to make the same power, and nothing to do with the architecture, why wouldn't I? Everybody and their brother is making Chevy parts...

[stokerboats]

Reason..... Packaging is why.

[Steve.k]

how many chevys do you see out there with a ford engine vs how many fords do you see with a chevy engine. I rest my case.

Chevy doesn't have chassis worth putting Ford in!LS swap into fox body is a chassis that just plain works. Very little mods.

[pamotorman]

Economy of scale is what's happening there.

If I can buy a block, heads, etc. for 2/3 the price to make the same power, and nothing to do with the architecture, why wouldn't I? Everybody and their brother is making Chevy parts...
[/quote]
that is because chevy only had 2 different architecture for 50+ years the SBC and the BBC and ford even changed the bell housing bolt pattern on different engines.

[Newold1]

As that wonderful old mechanical engineering professor told us young future engineers to be "Never design, engineer or make anything more complicated or expensive than it needs to be to function & work well!"
Hopefully Ford will subscribe to the KISS theory on this engine like GM did with the LS engine platform.

[pamotorman]

As that wonderful old mechanical engineering professor told us young future engineers to be "Never design, engineer or make anything more complicated or expensive than it needs to be to function & work well!"
Hopefully Ford will subscribe to the KISS theory on this engine like GM did with the LS engine platform.

more complicated you have more chances of things going wrong and more warranty claims.

[PackardV8]

A 4 valve architecture is superior to a 2 valve in any rpm range.

For true, at WOT, but even light and medium trucks spend a small percentage of their operating hours at WOT.

The bean counters spend all their operating hours questioning ever cent of material, labor and warranty costs.