Time to go back to school.

[Unit 5302]

I just picked up a 2002 GT last week. I had been in this forum before asking technical questions about the 4.6L and trying to get an idea of whether it could compete with the 5.0 on a light mod basis.

I got a bunch of inaccurate information on the 5.0L and how cheap it was to modify vs the 4.6L, even after I posted multiple times that it would cost the same.

I come back here and read some posts today, and quite frankly, a good deal of you need to go back to school when it comes to how engines work, why they work, and how to make them work better. The BS in this forum is so thick I feel like I'm on a ricer site. Not about other cars either. The information that I see flying back and forth about the 5.0 being a dog, and this and that about the 4.6L, vague answers to technical questions without any knowledge to back it up? Good lord. Do I have to put a hat on sideways when I click on Modular Madness?

I think I'm going to do a little break down here.

5.0L (Technically 4.9L) 1968-2001. 302ci
Bore x Stroke 4.00"x3.00"
Overhead valve, pushrod 90* V-8
Cast Iron Heads/Block

The 5.0 has a proven record of being reliable over 150,000mi. Power loss doesn't begin until about 120,000mi on the average 5.0HO roller cam block. The 5.0 has been used in different varients from about 120hp up to 240hp as rated from the factory. True output on the Cobra models is much closer to 260hp, and at least one member has dynoed 260rwhp with only exhaust done to his 93 Cobra. The "old technology" engine can handle in excess of 400hp on the stock rotating assembly, and it can make in excess of 350hp easily in a very streetable N/A configuration with max power coming in at under 6000rpm. People routinely hit 600hp with a good rotating assembly and a non intercooled S/C 5.0 that has had a basic N/A job done to it. Due to the oversquare engine design, the 5.0 can rev much higher if needed. With a good block and rotating assembly N/A 5.0's have revved beyond 10,000rpms in closed circuit racing. Complete crate longblocks are currently available rated at 320hp for about $1800. Fuel economy is superior when compared to the 4.6L as the 5.0L is more adept at making low end power, eliminating the need to rev higher in normal driving. The 5.0L engine was discontinued not because of performance, reliability, economy or expense. It was discontinued due to concerns about it's ability to meet stricter pollution standards. Engineers said it would need a redesign of the head to meet air quality standards, and in a few years, even that wouldn't cut it. So in an effort to cut costs, Ford pushed the SOHC 4.6L into phase. Low and behold the 5.0L was resurrected with better heads in the 1996-2001 Explorers.

Any well driven 5spd non vert 5.0 from 1987-1988 is capable of running very low 14's stock. Any 1989-1993 can run mid 14's stock. Any SN95 within those parameters can run mid/high 14's stock. The 93 Cobra in the right hands is a 13 sec car. With a few hundred in mods, it's nearly a 12 second car. I have run my 87GT vs my former 2001GT and the 87GT was notably quicker, nearly bone stock, with 160k on it. There are many very lightly modded 5.0's running mid 13's out there. I'm talking like $500 or less here. There are stock engined save for some 1.7:1 rockers 1987-1988 SD Mustangs running 12.8's.

Overall, the 5.0L may use older technology, but it's design is superior for performance street applications. The SOHC 4.6L makes a great grand touring engine. It's smooth, quiet, and is now relatively quick. Had the 5.0L been an option on my 2002 GT, I would certainly have taken it.

Please research the engines/cars that you want to talk smack about before posting it. Most of you have no clue about what you are talking about, and you give a black eye to the credibility of Mustang owners all over when you post grossly inaccurate information.