Sources: Ford SVT Raptor R to be Powered by EcoBoost V-6

[The Tank]

LSX?

The mod motor is just at the end of its useful like... it has been out since 1991... that is a long time for a modern motor (the GM LS motors by comparison were introduced in 1997)...

The GM LSX motors are only found in performance cars I see the new 5.0 being the same way. The F-150 may get a version like the GM LQ truck motor is to the LSX. Ours will be iron block instead of aluminum block and other things like that.

 

[Frivol]

This is great tech. i'm excitied to see how it's going to do, and i'll probably get one or more down the line but dont think i'll be amoung the first. I'm going to try and follow this one closely

 

[bstoner59]

here's a link to some info on the 5.0 F150...not sure how accurate this is today since the article was from Sept '09

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/09/spied-coyote-5-0-liter-v8-ford-f150.html

it does say the engine will make around 400HP...

 

[frogslinger]

The GM LSX motors are only found in performance cars I see the new 5.0 being the same way. The F-150 may get a version like the GM LQ truck motor is to the LSX. Ours will be iron block instead of aluminum block and other things like that.

I thought that is what you meant, however LSX is now a designator for a specific GM crate motor...

LSx is also used as a designator of all current and one older generation GM small blocks. The LQ motors are LS motors (and by the way are no longer made- they were last generation). If you are refering to high power cars engines starting with LS that is not correct either... the G8 GT has an L76, the foriegn market caprice has the L98, the upcoming domestic version probably will have the L99 and the Camaro SS has the option of the L99. Block material in the GM is not dependent on output either.... though it is true that all the cars have Aluminium blocks, most of the trucks do too... for example my 2009 Tahoe XFE has a 326 CI 5.3 Aluminium block LH6.

In other words I understand your premise... but the lack of an LS at the begining of a GM RPO code does not mean it is not a low performance or truck motor... all else being equal a factory L99 will stomp on a factory LS1 or early LS6. An L76 with the same mods as an LS2 or LS6 will kill either of them. Also of note... the LQ9 is rated about 40 hp and 50 TQ higher than a 4th gen camaro LS1, and even the LQ4 puts down roughly the same numbers as the camaro.

 

[The Tank]

I thought that is what you meant, however LSX is now a designator for a specific GM crate motor...

LSx is also used as a designator of all current and one older generation GM small blocks. The LQ motors are LS motors (and by the way are no longer made- they were last generation). If you are refering to high power cars engines starting with LS that is not correct either... the G8 GT has an L76, the foriegn market caprice has the L98, the upcoming domestic version probably will have the L99 and the Camaro SS has the option of the L99. Block material in the GM is not dependent on output either.... though it is true that all the cars have Aluminium blocks, most of the trucks do too... for example my 2009 Tahoe XFE has a 326 CI 5.3 Aluminium block LH6.

In other words I understand your premise... but the lack of an LS at the begining of a GM RPO code does not mean it is not a low performance or truck motor... all else being equal a factory L99 will stomp on a factory LS1 or early LS6. An L76 with the same mods as an LS2 or LS6 will kill either of them. Also of note... the LQ9 is rated about 40 hp and 50 TQ higher than a 4th gen camaro LS1, and even the LQ4 puts down roughly the same numbers as the camaro.

Sorry I should have been more clear but LSX is used a general term for the GM LS family. These L series motors are fuel efficient versions of LSX motor but they roughly the same motor only they have active fuel management, flat tappet cam, a slightly different tune and other things. So to compare a moded LS2 to a moded L76 is pretty much the same thing. When you say the LQ4 and LQ6 make the same or more HP then the LS1 well they should they are 6.0 motors. Also using the 4th Gen F-body as a point of comparison is bad. It is known fact that GM had been lying about the numbers from 00-02. It was not uncommon for a bone stock 00-02 F-body to put around 300hp to the wheels out of a motor "rated" at 325 to the crank. The real LS1 number didn't come out until the SAE certified numbers of the GTO at 345hp. But I meant is when I posted the comparison first was the LS series motors get all the bell and whistles and while the LQ motors are just as comparable as there LS brothers but they don't get all the bells whistles

 

[frogslinger]

Again I agree with your point... just not your supporting data...

I could not find a GM RPO code LQ6
The LQ4 and LQ9 did not have AFM...
A modded LS2 will get smoked by a modded L76 because the L76 has WAY better heads. The LS2 and L76 have identical blocks... they even have the same part number. Depending on what version of the L76 you get it is available with Variable Valve Timing, a feature not available on the LS2...
The camaros with the faulty ratings were from 1998-2002; the 1998 Z28 was rated at 305.
The Truck version of the Camaro L99 (which is in a high performance car, the camaro, but has AFM), with the RPO code L92 Has VVT and puts out higher numbers than the Camaro...

Essentially what I am saying is that an LS prefix in no way guarantees a higher performance, lighter or more technologically advanced motor, even given the same displacement. Now I agree that the LS7 and LS9 are King of the GM hill. After that it is a crapshoot...
The 2004 GTO was rated at 350... it was the 1997 corvette that was rated at 345.

 

[MagicMtnDan]

Hey! Is this the Bowtie forum or the Blue Oval forum? Just sayin

 

[The Tank]

Again I agree with your point... just not your supporting data...

I could not find a GM RPO code LQ6
The LQ4 and LQ9 did not have AFM...
A modded LS2 will get smoked by a modded L76 because the L76 has WAY better heads. The LS2 and L76 have identical blocks... they even have the same part number. Depending on what version of the L76 you get it is available with Variable Valve Timing, a feature not available on the LS2...
The camaros with the faulty ratings were from 1998-2002; the 1998 Z28 was rated at 305.
The Truck version of the Camaro L99 (which is in a high performance car, the camaro, but has AFM), with the RPO code L92 Has VVT and puts out higher numbers than the Camaro...

Essentially what I am saying is that an LS prefix in no way guarantees a higher performance, lighter or more technologically advanced motor, even given the same displacement. Now I agree that the LS7 and LS9 are King of the GM hill. After that it is a crapshoot...
The 2004 GTO was rated at 350... it was the 1997 corvette that was rated at 345.

Here I'll make it simiple our 5.4L makes 310 on 87 and the 4.6L Mustang makes 315. You put a mustang manifold on our trucks and give it a real tune on the BS one Ford did and our truck will make a lot more power.

 

[MagicMtnDan]

Here I'll make it simiple our 5.4L makes 310 on 87 and the 4.6L Mustang makes 315. You put a mustang manifold on our trucks and give it a real tune on the BS one Ford did and our truck will make a lot more power.

I'd like to see proof of that! Sounds too good to be true!

Brian? Jason? Are you ready to be our...



???

 

[The Tank]

I'd like to see proof of that! Sounds too good to be true!

Brian? Jason? Are you ready to be our...



???

When I get back to states I'm going to start working on plates to make the FRPP 3v manifold work on our trucks.