Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Justin 2:01PM (8/07/2007)
"Why would ford spend millions of dollars developing some nice OHC V8s, better OHC v8s then any of the other domestics have, only to go back to a in block came design 10 years later?"
To make more power/torque and the same mpg out of a smaller package. I never really understood ford's mod motors compared to gm's lt and ls v8's of corresponding years. You trade displacement for added complexity but there are no gains in the form of size, weight, peak power, low end power, or mpg.
Case in point: 1996 Mustang GT with 4.6 DOHC -> 305 hp, 300 lb-ft torque, epa 18/26 mpg (http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/new/reviews/heilfmcr.html) And this is with a raised hood since the 4.6 DOHC was apparantly not so small.
vs. 1996 Camaro SS with LT-1 5.7 OHV -> 310 hp, 335 lb-ft torque, epa 16/27 mpg(http://www.camarosource.ca/php/camaro_info_db/index.php?year=1996&act=summary_profile&mid=276)
Reply