Roush 402IR
- Thread starter llarsen
- Start date
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
Looks very nice, how would it compare with these?
http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=6188
I would guess there may be some Ford employees here who may just be able to get a company discount on them? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Looks very nice, how would it compare with these?
http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=6188
I would guess there may be some Ford employees here who may just be able to get a company discount on them? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
Simon,
I think that most guys would prefer to use a small block engine, to avoid the inherent "complications" of a big block(no A/C, WAAAY tight fit, chassis mods,weight,etc,etc,etc.)
It seems like a pretty good price for a pile of HP though! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Bill
Simon,
I think that most guys would prefer to use a small block engine, to avoid the inherent "complications" of a big block(no A/C, WAAAY tight fit, chassis mods,weight,etc,etc,etc.)
It seems like a pretty good price for a pile of HP though! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Bill
Lynn Larsen
Lynn Larsen
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
Simon,
I agree with Bills comments. Part of the etc, etc is the very real issue of what transaxle to use. Unless you have VERY deep pockets, any solution that you come up with is going to be a kludge at best. Put another way, IMHO, there is not a readily available, affordably priced transaxle suitable for use with an FE of any stature. I would even go so far as dropping the "affordably priced" qualifier out of that statement.
Regards,
Lynn
Simon,
I agree with Bills comments. Part of the etc, etc is the very real issue of what transaxle to use. Unless you have VERY deep pockets, any solution that you come up with is going to be a kludge at best. Put another way, IMHO, there is not a readily available, affordably priced transaxle suitable for use with an FE of any stature. I would even go so far as dropping the "affordably priced" qualifier out of that statement.
Regards,
Lynn
Howard Jones
Supporter
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
This engine is 351 winsor based and not a FE. I agree that there is no need to use a FE type motor when you can use a big 351W instead.
Most of the head and valve train development done on winsors comes from NASCAR and drag racing 5.0 classes. The trend towards big CI 351's has come from Ford Mustang street rodders and the need for big HP numbers. Large CI 351W based motors with low compression, because of low octain gas, that will still fit into a 5.0 mustang engine bays have been the result.
500fp of torque is a lot. "IF" and I mean IF in capitals letters, you have tires with enough grip to handle that much torque the gearbox required will surely cost more than a 500hp motor will.
If I was going to do a new drivetrain I would begin with a Porshe box with LSD,50/50 or whatever is the best one as far as power cap. is concerned. Then a big 351W at about 450hp built on a Alum. block, heads and one big 4 barrel.
Get the overall weight down to 2300 pounds and watch just about everything go backwards in the rearview mirror.
Hummmmmm sounds like Rick's car.
This engine is 351 winsor based and not a FE. I agree that there is no need to use a FE type motor when you can use a big 351W instead.
Most of the head and valve train development done on winsors comes from NASCAR and drag racing 5.0 classes. The trend towards big CI 351's has come from Ford Mustang street rodders and the need for big HP numbers. Large CI 351W based motors with low compression, because of low octain gas, that will still fit into a 5.0 mustang engine bays have been the result.
500fp of torque is a lot. "IF" and I mean IF in capitals letters, you have tires with enough grip to handle that much torque the gearbox required will surely cost more than a 500hp motor will.
If I was going to do a new drivetrain I would begin with a Porshe box with LSD,50/50 or whatever is the best one as far as power cap. is concerned. Then a big 351W at about 450hp built on a Alum. block, heads and one big 4 barrel.
Get the overall weight down to 2300 pounds and watch just about everything go backwards in the rearview mirror.
Hummmmmm sounds like Rick's car.
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
Howard,
The Roush engine is a Windsor, the Ford Racing is a big block. According to the part #s, it is either a 429 or 460 block, bored and stroked. That's (the BB) what Lynn and I were referring to with regard to installation difficulty/cost.
Simon,
It would make a hell of a Cobra engine, wouldn't it? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Bill
Howard,
The Roush engine is a Windsor, the Ford Racing is a big block. According to the part #s, it is either a 429 or 460 block, bored and stroked. That's (the BB) what Lynn and I were referring to with regard to installation difficulty/cost.
Simon,
It would make a hell of a Cobra engine, wouldn't it? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Bill
Lynn Larsen
Lynn Larsen
Re: Roush 402IR or Ford racing crate motor?
Martin,
I believe it has, but if you go by the "official" specs, it is marginal at best (and that is being generous.) The Pantera guys have put quite a few outrageous motors in front of them, but there are some techniques that should be employed to help the ZF out. That said, I think that one could get a ZF variant from RBT that one could be very comfortable with. These were the first transaxles used in the new Ford GT with 500fp. They have since been replaced, but I believe this was because of production volume concerns and not the quality of the units. I don't know if the Ricardo that replaced it is a viable alternative: I have no clue what its dimensions are. The GrandAm Daytona Prototypes are running Trax and Enco transaxles that are huge and would never fit in a GT40; otherwise this might have been a way to go.
I would lean towards Howard's recommendations myself. To my knowledge a G50/50 or beefed up G50/xx probably provides the most capability/$. I think the only things that should be considered at these power levels are a billet side cover and aux. oiling of the diff, at least, if not all of the gear sets. Beefier shift forks is another common mod that is done, but this isn't really associated with the amount of torque the unit is handling.
Regards,
Lynn
Martin,
I believe it has, but if you go by the "official" specs, it is marginal at best (and that is being generous.) The Pantera guys have put quite a few outrageous motors in front of them, but there are some techniques that should be employed to help the ZF out. That said, I think that one could get a ZF variant from RBT that one could be very comfortable with. These were the first transaxles used in the new Ford GT with 500fp. They have since been replaced, but I believe this was because of production volume concerns and not the quality of the units. I don't know if the Ricardo that replaced it is a viable alternative: I have no clue what its dimensions are. The GrandAm Daytona Prototypes are running Trax and Enco transaxles that are huge and would never fit in a GT40; otherwise this might have been a way to go.
I would lean towards Howard's recommendations myself. To my knowledge a G50/50 or beefed up G50/xx probably provides the most capability/$. I think the only things that should be considered at these power levels are a billet side cover and aux. oiling of the diff, at least, if not all of the gear sets. Beefier shift forks is another common mod that is done, but this isn't really associated with the amount of torque the unit is handling.
Regards,
Lynn
