Godzilla 7.3 Swap

[DFS]

I said I didn’t see the relevance. Never said “dumb” or “wrong”. Rotary engines are problematic and have been since their inception; that is not the case here.

Weak in what way? It’s not really an opinion, either there’s aftermarket upgrades available or there aren’t, and the EcoBoost engine lineup in general has received massive support in the aftermarket since its inception over a decade ago. Gen 2 3.5 EcoBoost is no different.

The “flow” numbers you found were from a computer simulation with generic fields. Comparing a cylinder head designed for N/A engine to an F/I one isn’t apples to apples either.

“I say it dosnt look good right now for 3.5eb not based on this thread but a lot of conturing factors?”

And what are those “contributing factors”?

I have no dog in the fight, but as someone who uses computation fluid dynamics done both by myself and in Solidworks simulations, I can say the "flow" numbers are accepted as not reliable in almost all industries I work within for anything other than "guestimates" or guidelines. Real world testing is the only way to get reliable results. As I'm sure FTO knows, but adding some context from another party.

 

[Gumby]

Just because someone hacked a 7.3/10R140 into a Gen 2 doesn’t make it a good swap, in fact it’s the opposite in terms of weight, performance, and complexity.

I agree totally. But agian not up to me or you.

Goosetuned is putting down 700+WHP on the stock engine with bolt ons

not what I ask for

Ok..does your truck have 1000HP? No…so how is that your bottom? Horsepower is rarely the limiting factor on an off road vehicle, 1000 is not even usable on a street vehicle.

No you are correct. My whfe.s daly doesn't have 1000 hp It is the Bottom of what I consider a fast car. not just off road unless the 3.5eb is only put in off road trucks. I presume you are going to tell me something about this statement. fast to me. if you take it to the track they will not let you run because you don't have a shoot. that is where fast starts for me. if you think 1000 isn't useable on the street I guess you have never been to good guys car show and seen any of the auto cross.

Goodguys AutoCross

goodguysax.com

Adding 400lbs over the front axle of a Baja truck is detrimental to its entire purpose of going fast off road; adding horsepower does not make up for that.

I agree totally. But again not up to me or you.

It’s a one-off. No rational person would waste thousands of dollars hacking up their truck to swap in a heavier engine with less power. You can make more power than even the “megazilla” on a stock Gen 2 engine with bolt-ons and a tune.

Been my point the entire Time. Time will tell. Be careful Sasquatch. You don't know what people will waist their money on.

 

[downforce137]

Yeah because owning a raptor is such a rational decision to begin with.. cars and trucks have been modified since the second car was ever made to go faster.. just because fto has the opinion that it's a bad idea or irrational really means nothing. He doesn't have to go do it to his truck and he can roll his eyes all he wants when others do it...

 

[Gumby]

I have no dog in the fight, but as someone who uses computation fluid dynamics done both by myself and in Solidworks simulations, I can say the "flow" numbers are accepted as not reliable in almost all industries I work within for anything other than "guestimates" or guidelines. Real world testing is the only way to get reliable results. As I'm sure FTO knows, but adding some context from another party.

I am not sure what all of this means. And I mean that as that.
Background on this discussion Accrost 2 different threads between FTO and myself.
FTO said 6.2 boat anchor blah blah blah cylinder heads are all choked up blah blah blah.
This made me wonder???? Well what do they flow? and thought what dose the 3.5 flow?
HE (FTO) was not happy that the only flow numbers I could find for the 3.5 were software flow # and I will give him that not really that accurate. Tons of calls later..... I get someone who has had the 3.5 head on a bench.
Here are the real numbers all in one place. all the # are @ .450 Stock Heads.
3.5 gen1 254/188
3.5 gen2 296/204
6.2 278/177
6.2 @ .550 305/191
In true FTO fashion he wants to say well you blah blah blah blah boosted blah blah blah blah.
These are the numbers. The 3.5 breath better YES a ton better NOPE Is the 6.2 choked up that depends on what you compare it too. Ls and Hemi. YES way choked up but in that comparison so is the 3.5 but that is entirely different conversation. Not to be had here!!
With all that said A port job on the gen2 3.5 will yield you a very small gain. 15/20 CFM. A port job on a 6.2 wlll give you a pretty good gain.35/45 CFM
Those numbers look like this.
3.5 311/224
6.2 313/222

 

[xlr8]

Currently doing my due diligence on this swap. Watching all the videos and contacting vendors. Hopefully you guys settle down and get back on topic. Here's an older video but a good one.

 

[EricM]

In true FTO fashion he wants to say well you blah blah blah blah boosted blah blah blah blah.

It's almost like someone that has a salary deriving from failures of Ford products might have an interest in downplaying the problematic engines while also deriding the reliable engines. The problem engines consistantly bring in big dollar, out of warranty jobs.

 

[FordTechOne]

It's almost like someone that has a salary deriving from failures of Ford products might have an interest in downplaying the problematic engines while also deriding the reliable engines. The problem engines consistantly bring in big dollar, out of warranty jobs.

It’s almost like you have no idea what you’re talking about, which is par for the course with your posts on here. Your little theory doesn’t add up considering I own a Gen 2.

You’re nothing more than a worthless Gen 1 fanboy and a troll; you contribute nothing to this forum except for stirring the pot because you’re insecure and feel threatened by the newer trucks that outperform yours in every aspect. You constantly interject snide comments and talk trash on the newer trucks to make yourself feel better about your slow old rust bucket. Get a life.

 

[FordTechOne]

I am not sure what all of this means. And I mean that as that.

What he’s saying is the bench flow results are just that, bench flow. They are not necessary indicative of how the heads will perform on the engine or how much power they will make. Just because one engine cylinder head that outflows another on the bench doesn’t necessarily mean it will make more power for it’s given application. Flow numbers are useful for before and after porting, not for comparison two completely different engines, especially when one is N/A and the other is F/I.

Background on this discussion Accrost 2 different threads between FTO and myself.
FTO said 6.2 boat anchor blah blah blah cylinder heads are all choked up blah blah blah.
This made me wonder???? Well what do they flow? and thought what dose the 3.5 flow?
HE (FTO) was not happy that the only flow numbers I could find for the 3.5 were software flow # and I will give him that not really that accurate. Tons of calls later..... I get someone who has had the 3.5 head on a bench.
Here are the real numbers all in one place. all the # are @ .450 Stock Heads.
3.5 gen1 254/188
3.5 gen2 296/204
6.2 278/177
6.2 @ .550 305/191

I give you a lot of credit for the effort in finding the numbers, especially since they were not readily/publicly available.

In true FTO fashion he wants to say well you blah blah blah blah boosted blah blah blah blah.
These are the numbers. The 3.5 breath better YES a ton better NOPE Is the 6.2 choked up that depends on what you compare it too. Ls and Hemi. YES way choked up but in that comparison so is the 3.5 but that is entirely different conversation. Not to be had here!!

True fashion? Blah blah blah? Come on Gumby. Comparing an N/A engine to an F/I one simply isn’t apples to apples. One needs to draw air in through vacuum, the other is force fed. Cylinder head bench flow means a lot less when the manifold has a positive air charge as the valve opens.

With all that said A port job on the gen2 3.5 will yield you a very small gain. 15/20 CFM. A port job on a 6.2 wlll give you a pretty good gain.35/45 CFM
Those numbers look like this.
3.5 311/224
6.2 313/222

Here’s the thread I’ve been referring to throughout the discussion. The 6.2 doesn’t respond well with heads/cams or bolt-ons. You’re limited by the design of the engine. An LS or Hemi with H/C and full bolt-ons is a monster, the Ford 6.2 actually loses power. Which is why a lot of people install superchargers instead, at the expense of engine wear and reliability.

Livernois Head/Cam Package power loss confusion

My truck is a 2016 f260 6.2 which had S&B intake, stainless works long tubes and magnaflow exhaust tuned on 93 prior to getting the heads and cam package installed. Last time on the same dyno truck made 354.53whp/388.67wtq. After that dyno i did have larger tires installed. went from 275/70/r18...

www.fordraptorforum.com

 

[FordTechOne]

Currently doing my due diligence on this swap. Watching all the videos and contacting vendors. Hopefully you guys settle down and get back on topic. Here's an older video but a good one.

What are you swapping it into?

 

[Gumby]

True fashion? Blah blah blah? Come on Gumby. Comparing an N/A engine to an F/I one simply isn’t apples to apples.

The 6.2 I own is makes boost. about 8 LBS of it. same head that is on a N/A. and before you tell me I am doomed!!! It's got a 172k on it and hasn't spontaneously made a window yet. LOL
@xlr8 Sorry. I will try to stay on topic from on. My brain just has off topic questions some times.I will do better. but I am not excited. Sorry if it read that way.