Bathurst 1000

[clutch-monkey]

exactly, might make ford actually look for a decent engine, maybe use the 4.6L even.

[Daz27]

Is the 4.6 a better motor than the 5.4? if so, what makes it better?

[clutch-monkey]

as far as i understand it, the excellent head design was taken off it and then slapped on the 5.4L block because of our market's tendency to favour V8's of 5.0L displacement and upwards
there'snothing from stopping us using the lighter, more rev happy 4.6L except market tastes, and imo it would have been a much better engine

[charged]

Originally Posted by Daz27

Is the 4.6 a better motor than the 5.4? if so, what makes it better?

The stroke on the 5.4 of 105.5 mm or over 4 in not good for high revs due to high piston speed. The 4.6 has a stroke of 90mm, they share the same bore size. The 5.4 was originally designed as a truck motor for the f series, it worked well with 3 valve head for good torque down low. When Ford Aust bolted the 4 valve head on it, they created a torque hole due to the head flowing so well, when the revs increase and the head starts flowing better at high revs the piston speed is too high and kills the party. The 5.0 litre "cammer" engine would be the go slightly larger bore, 90mm bore



Ford Racing Performance Parts [M-6007-R50*]

[fpv_gtho]

The 4.6 4V wouldve had the same feeling of lack of torque as the 5.4, perhaps moreso. The only difference wouldve been it'd need to work harder but it'd have the ability to rev happier. The 5.4 3V with the VCT heads is the one they shouldve developed, but i suppose the 4V worked better for marketing.