...
The original idea that Bill France had regarding running stock cars has been long lost. Heck, I've read that some guys even ran a stock rental car way back when. Doesn't get more "stock" than that.
I tried to find out just what is different and improved in the FR9 engine but it is an elusive endeavor. As near as I can make out, I think Ford copied as much as possible from the path GM used to develop the LS1 pushrod series motors. Basically a stiffer block. That, after first coming up with an overhead cam (OHC) "modular" engine with such cramped bore spacing, the stroke ended up significantly greater than the bore for a grossly under-square engine unheard of since the 1920's. No room for valve size. The only way it can breathe at all is with a blower. Oh, it's durable enough, winding out to 7K with lightweight OHC valve gear and all. But why? It's got to cost a fortune to build these motors. I heard it was supposed to initially fit tranversely in a Taurus like sedan. It still ended up longer (and much, much heavier) than their smallblock Windsor motor.
Well, that does it. Now I think is the time for Ford to revert back to the V8 flathead engine. Seriously.
First, it would honor a Ford institution and generate retro public marketing appeal. Second, it would enhance corporate cost savings because the engine is so simple with far less moving parts than a pushrod motor not to mention
any OHC. It would be too primitive you say? Heck, the OHC and roller lifters are an old, old design though not common in mild production engines ...until the Japanese put them in every econobox.
From an engineering standpoint, the simple valve-less head V8 flathead design is very durable, extremely compact, lightweight and low cost to produce. The blocks are inherently stiff and leak resistant. The restricted "side-valve" breathing can be easily overcome with an intake blower which will also allow lower real displacement for economy. The lightweight valve-train with direct lift on the valves is equal to the non-rocker direct lift on 2-cam (or 4-cam) OHC motors, also minus
at least one heavy extra camshaft. A flathead motor will wind just as high as any OHC motor because the valve-train can weigh precisely the same. Nowadays, the inherent "hidden-crevice" emissions of an elongated Ricardo combustion chamber can be rendered moot by using direct injection(DI). The future may require DI and blowers anyway to meet pollution standards. Save money on block design ...spend it on blowers and DI.
And to top it all off, it would be a piece of cake to short-route both the intake and exhaust ports to the center valley as Ford has done with the exhaust in their
new 6.7L V8 diesel. The exhaust could also directly drive a twin non-lag valley turbo as it does in the new diesel. The valley mounted compresser would have a straight shot to the intake. Then what? Well
no manifolding at all on the outer block walls. Lotsa fenderwell room left over. No excessive heat to worm its' way back to a single exhaust. One measly turbo-cooled single exhaust downpipe directly down the back of the engine and out.
Almost forgot. Why watercool the heads? With aluminum and no exhaust valve-in-head, it might not be necessary. No more leaky headgaskets. Finned aluminum replacement head ...$27 each.
Power? Power enough for NASCAR? Simple. Just crank up the manifold boost pressure. All they gotta do is convince NASCAR to allow blowers again, like the old '57 T-Bird Y-block/McCullough Holman- Moody setup.
If Ford doesn't build it, then the Chinese will. They probably already own NASCAR anyway.
Wes
...
Hybrid Mode
