The Unofficial "Ask a Stupid Question" Thread

My opinion is if a 4.6 has a truly bad cylinder (out of round, gouge) just scrap it. It's one of the most long life V8 engines you can get you hands on, dont start with one like that which is beyond a clear indication of abuse. Been there done that. At this point in time they're still cheap, don't settle. Aluminum block is better as I mentioned but iron is fine too. If my DOHC died today and I needed replacement an iron block PI I'd easily swap in without too much regret
 
XR7-4.6 said:
My opinion is if a 4.6 has a truly bad cylinder (out of round, gouge) just scrap it. It's one of the most long life V8 engines you can get you hands on, dont start with one like that which is beyond a clear indication of abuse. Been there done that. At this point in time they're still cheap, don't settle. Aluminum block is better as I mentioned but iron is fine too. If my DOHC died today and I needed replacement an iron block PI I'd easily swap in without too much regret
Click to expand...

I agree, but it is ok to bore a block out, yes? I mean if someone just wants more cubes? For some engines the tendency is to bore the block out no matter what (and sometimes stroke it, too) just to get more displacement. I'm just wondering if these blocks get weak if they're bored out or something, or if bigger pistons are really expensive.
 
So wait, I am lost now. Which SOHC engine is the best to swap in?
 
The added displacement from boring it out is minimal, especially on the 4.6 since I think max safe overbore is .020”. Stroking a 4.6 2v motor is not a great idea since since it has such a small bore to begin with that it winds up starving for breath at higher rpms. If you really want more displacement, you need to go with a big-bore kit, which is usually done with an aluminum block, and they sleeve it with new larger liners to be able to get 5.0L displacement with a stock bore, or 5.3 with a longer stroke crank, but that is significant expense, and not worth it unless going for an all out build. So to me, for a mild build, just stick with the stock bottom end, and maybe get new bearings, rings, and maybe some ARP bolts for the rods.
 
I’d go one further and say if you want displacement move away from Modulars. A big bore sleeve kit+ machining to get .4 liters isn’t going to do that much, it might make it easier to crest the 300rwhp plateau built NA 4.6 2Vs struggle with but is 20 horsepower worth it?
 
Derphound01 said:
So wait, I am lost now. Which SOHC engine is the best to swap in?
Click to expand...

Explorer for the weight loss. Beyond that any Romeo PI is going to be the same, what the vehicle was subjected to that the engine came from is the only deciding factor and you just kind of have to use good judgement
 
The Teksid Blocks from the Mark 8 cars have the strongest block, and have been ran over 1500HP. I have a pic of one that failed at 21 lbs boost, on high compresson, with a 200 shot of Nitrous. Broke either the crank or block, but that's as good as it gets. They are steel sleeves in an aluminum block. To my knowlege, they an be bored to 0.020 over. The mark redline is 6500R's, where the 2v cars are 5500. A 4V c-head with a mach or cobra intake is as good as it gets factory. Until like Matt, you add a manual trans. :D
 
Grog6 said:
The Teksid Blocks from the Mark 8 cars have the strongest block, and have been ran over 1500HP. I have a pic of one that failed at 21 lbs boost, on high compresson, with a 200 shot of Nitrous. Broke either the crank or block, but that's as good as it gets. They are steel sleeves in an aluminum block. To my knowlege, they an be bored to 0.020 over. The mark redline is 6500R's, where the 2v cars are 5500. A 4V c-head with a mach or cobra intake is as good as it gets factory. Until like Matt, you add a manual trans. :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for that info. I'm not saying I would bore out the block or do anything radical, I like the idea of a 281 c.i. engine. I was just wondering if there was something inherently bad about boring the blocks out (or the block's strength) because it seemed like nobody ever suggested that. But now it's obvious why. If you want a bigger engine, I guess the 5.4 is the obvious path there.
 
rampagingsloth said:
Thanks for that info. I'm not saying I would bore out the block or do anything radical, I like the idea of a 281 c.i. engine. I was just wondering if there was something inherently bad about boring the blocks out (or the block's strength) because it seemed like nobody ever suggested that. But now it's obvious why. If you want a bigger engine, I guess the 5.4 is the obvious path there.
Click to expand...
Coyote would be a much better path. HP per headache will be much better. The 5.4 barely fits and makes no power.
 
rampagingsloth said:
Thanks for that info. I'm not saying I would bore out the block or do anything radical, I like the idea of a 281 c.i. engine. I was just wondering if there was something inherently bad about boring the blocks out (or the block's strength) because it seemed like nobody ever suggested that. But now it's obvious why. If you want a bigger engine, I guess the 5.4 is the obvious path there.
Click to expand...

The 5.4 SOHC is a dog. Like I said I think you either need to find a different engine family (eg Windsor) I’d you want usable cubic inch growth potential, or just drop the “no replacement for displacement” prejudices and work with the strong points of the engine.

4.6s (and coyote 5.0s) have square bore/stroke which is excellent for torque for their displacements and durability but they are maxed out in their physical dimensions since the bore spacing is the same as a small four cylinder, unlike classic V8s. The 5.4 is a compromised design, it replaced the truck 5.8 and all thought in its development was torque which the longer stroke provided but it is terrible for horsepower production since the narrow cylinders are so hard to fill. The SOHC being particularly bad. Oh and no intake manifolds fit
 
It isn’t that the block gets too weak, it is that the cylinder walls get too thin, hence people sleeve them if they want more displacement, but it really isn’t worth the cost in my opinion. If you really want that much power, a built 4.6 4v with boost will get you there cheaper and easier than more displacement.
 
Trunk Monkey showed the way for a nice path to 500+hp, and a blower that fits under the hood. :)
 
Adding a blower to Matt's C-head engine, is a 2005 cobra, except for the teksid block. edit:Matt apparently doesn't agree. :)
 
Last edited:
That was my plan for the 4v teksid I have in the garage. Life has a way of rearranging your priorities . I couldn't get a basket for the 4v. Well, $900, but fuck that. didn't pay that for the blower, that I hope to see on Chingon's car someday. A 2v kit is easily available for ~$$2k. A set of chrome wheels is better for me at this point. :)
 
XR7-4.6 said:
The 5.4 SOHC is a dog. Like I said I think you either need to find a different engine family (eg Windsor) I’d you want usable cubic inch growth potential, or just drop the “no replacement for displacement” prejudices and work with the strong points of the engine.

4.6s (and coyote 5.0s) have square bore/stroke which is excellent for torque for their displacements and durability but they are maxed out in their physical dimensions since the bore spacing is the same as a small four cylinder, unlike classic V8s. The 5.4 is a compromised design, it replaced the truck 5.8 and all thought in its development was torque which the longer stroke provided but it is terrible for horsepower production since the narrow cylinders are so hard to fill. The SOHC being particularly bad. Oh and no intake manifolds fit
Click to expand...

Hahahaha, what a weird situation for that engine family. Ya, I don't care about "going big" or trying to be the fastest anything, I just want a better 4.6 engine. But without boost or nitrous, I'm not racing this car. My only question was about why weren't these engines treated the same as other small blocks from the past, now I know. I find it very interesting that Ford didn't consider the inevitability of people wanting to bore out/stroke their engines for more power, or didn't care? They seem large enough (engine bays always look cramped) yet they're not. Whatever, less excuses for me to spend more money.
 
There's supposedly a solution, with a 5.0 new engineintake manifold. but t takes adapter plates. And there's NO room for exhaust.
 
So if I wanted to go stupid HP, what would be the engine option?
 
rampagingsloth said:
Hahahaha, what a weird situation for that engine family. Ya, I don't care about "going big" or trying to be the fastest anything, I just want a better 4.6 engine. But without boost or nitrous, I'm not racing this car. My only question was about why weren't these engines treated the same as other small blocks from the past, now I know. I find it very interesting that Ford didn't consider the inevitability of people wanting to bore out/stroke their engines for more power, or didn't care? They seem large enough (engine bays always look cramped) yet they're not. Whatever, less excuses for me to spend more money.
Click to expand...

The modular actually is a very compact V8 from front to back, which is due to the fact that when developed it was expected to be installed transversely in more FWD models than it actually was. That concession kept the bore spacing narrow however and is the reason you can’t get more than a still small 3.7” bore with a 5.0 sleeve kit. If you ever look at the bare block compared to a 302, other than it’s skirted mains it’s noticeably smaller

Ford didn’t treat it any differently than other V8 of the past. Almost every V8 engine family that existed until the Ford Modular, GM LS and Chrysler Gen III Hemi were all developed in the 1950s to early 1960s(SBC, BBC, SBF, LA/Magnum) the youngest V8 engine Ford had when the modular was being developed was the 385 series 460 dating back to 1969. The Modular was a product of its late 80s time, a smooth running efficient V8 producing the then gold standard 200ish horsepower.
 
Ok, here is the next stupid question: Can you physically tell if a motor mount is bad. This is on a 4.6 V8. I think my 96 mounts are original and since I have very small Oil filter clearances and I have a CAT that is rubbing the floor on the passenger side, I assumed they were bad. Today I dropped the subframe and removed them. They don't actually look bad at all...
 

Attachments

  • 20240619_134327.jpg
    20240619_134327.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 5
  • 20240619_134330.jpg
    20240619_134330.jpg
    3.3 MB · Views: 5
  • 20240619_134340.jpg
    20240619_134340.jpg
    2.9 MB · Views: 5
Last edited:
Can you grab each stud and flex the rubber by hand with ease? If so, they're bad.
 
When I replaced my motor mounts my father did a power brake while I watched the engine lurch pretty good. I decided to replace them and they did not look bad either. I did notice less engine vibration in the cabin afterwards.
 
This was just recently asked after I can't find it, so a pretty stupid question. What is the best lube for window tracks?
 
GRWeldon said:
Ok, here is the next stupid question: Can you physically tell if a motor mount is bad. This is on a 4.6 V8. I think my 96 mounts are original and since I have very small Oil filter clearances and I have a CAT that is rubbing the floor on the passenger side, I assumed they were bad. Today I dropped the subframe and removed them. They don't actually look bad at all...
Click to expand...
How close was your oil pan to the subframe? Mine are shot (go figure after 183k miles) and the oil pan is very close to the subframe. I would think cat to floor clearance would increase with bad mounts unless I misunderstand you.
 
Well, hard to tell at the moment, the subframe is out. Needed to change oil pan gasket as well as the motor mounts. My old mounts were very stiff. I also believe they are solid instead of hydraulic. I didn't know Ford did this in 96.

The oil filter clearance between the subframe and the filter can was small. I had difficulty getting the filter started on the thread. Also had so shove the filter between the sway bar and subframe to even get it in (from the bottom).

I've got new mounts on the way but I would have dealt with the small oil leak if I had known the old ones were good...
 
New question:

Am I supposed to hear the fuel pump?

I usually only hear it when turning on the ignition. Once the engine is running, the sound fades into the background. Today I moved the car next to the garage, windows down, and I heard something. Walked around the car, and the sound definitely came from the tank.

This may not be new at all; I may just not have been in the position to hear it (windows down plus sound reflecting off the garage wall).

It wasn't necessarily concerning, but I didn't love the pitch of the sound.

Let's collectively knock on wood please. I'm in no mood of dropping the tank.
 
You can hear it, outside the car. Excessive noise isn't normal. I have had one die, it didn't get noisy, just died .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Back
Top