Why is the Ford-Edsel 390 so weak?

[TehMac]

Ok my lovelies, someone posted a link to the magazine car craft in AMCRambler's thread about his really hot rambler.

So I have been addicted to all the weird and crazy engineering (or lack thereof) shit going on in that magazine, but in it I was reading about the Ford Edsel 390 engine, the one used in the bulitt mustangs and other pony cars in the 60's.

One thing that kinda made me wonder was the fact that this engine is 6.4L in displacement, and yet the official ratings from Ford said it was around 325 horsepower...wtf??

Dyno tests have confirmed maybe even 300 or 290 horsepower or so, and this carcraft article says their bored and stroked 390 that is now 401 Cubic inches was dynoed at 309 horsepower. And it looks like they're doing a gross measurement--SAE Net measurements tend to be around 10-15% less. So even with the bore and stroke, why so weak?

link to CarCraft's 390 Project

 

[Demon-Xanth]

They don't have to be, the later FE engines ended up going into the GT-40 and NASCAR cars. (and giving birth to the rather rare 427 cammer). In 1962 you could get one with a 4BBL carb and 10.6:1 compression ratio that got 375HP which was comparable to the Chevy 409's 380HP.

 

[TehMac]

Right, but I guess my point is that Ford's 406 FE produced 401 hp in 1963 and yet a Ford Edsel 390 which is stroked to 401 cubic inches is only producing 309 hp. Granted, the torque is pretty immense relative to horsepower, but I'm still not getting it.

Maybe the engine needs an extra 4 barrel carb? Is there even an intake manifold for such an option for the FEs?

 

[Pacfanweb]

Cylinder head design has come a long way since then.

Ford FE engines are inferior to any later model big-blocks. They were always sucking hind tit to the Big Block Chevy's and the Hemi.

That's why Ford copied the Big Block Chevy when they made the 351 Cleveland and the 429/460 big blocks.

That said, they made some decent FE engines for the time...428 Cobra Jet was pretty cool....they just don't hold up to today's standards.

edit: If you look at the specs for the engine they built, that's about all the power it SHOULD make.
It's 9.5-1 compression, with a not-very-radical cam, and heads with 2.02/1.55 valves. Not the parts you'd want for high horsepower.

BTW, that engine is NOT stroked....article says it's the stock stroke. Only bored.

 

[TehMac]

edit: If you look at the specs for the engine they built, that's about all the power it SHOULD make.
It's 9.5-1 compression, with a not-very-radical cam, and heads with 2.02/1.55 valves. Not the parts you'd want for high horsepower.

BTW, that engine is NOT stroked....article says it's the stock stroke. Only bored.

Interesting, good point. So if they put in modern cylinders into that honey, it'd be a screamer?

 

[Howard]

Interesting, good point. So if they put in modern cylinders into that honey, it'd be a screamer?

Let bygones be bygones.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Interesting, good point. So if they put in modern cylinders into that honey, it'd be a screamer?

Heads, not cylinders. Or cylinder heads, if you want to use that term.

Yes, you could make a lot more power with those old engines if modern cylinder head technology was applied....to a point. You still wouldn't be totally up to today's standards, because of the other limitations of the FE engines....like a crappy oiling system. People have tried, but once you get to a certain power level...I think it's approaching 600hp, they just don't last, no matter what you do.

If you liked Fords, you'd be way ahead of the game to just build a 429/460 series "Lima" engine....they copied a lot from Big Block Chevrolets on those...and while they're not "quite" as good, they're still a long way in front of the old FE's.

 

[TehMac]

Let bygones be bygones.

Well hey, what if you like keeping stuff original in say a Cyclone or Mustang, I think it's a fair point to modify the engine a little bit.

If you liked Fords, you'd be way ahead of the game to just build a 429/460 series "Lima" engine....they copied a lot from Big Block Chevrolets on those...and while they're not "quite" as good, they're still a long way in front of the old FE's.

yea, but aren't these engines heavier and bulkier than the 390? I like the idea of keeping a big block on the smaller side--it sounds ridiculous I know, but still...

 

[Pacfanweb]

^Yeah, they're a bit heavier, but the gain in longevity and power is worth it.

And the Boss 429 only weighed about 10lbs more than an FE engine, so I'd say you could put aluminum heads on most any of those engines and not weigh much more.

 

[rancherlee]

Hell compare the old Hemi 426 or Chevy LS6 454 to the new Mustang GT 5.0L. The new 5.0L is putting down more RWHP that either of those old engines. The FE engines were torque monsters and felt pretty dang strong even with there lower HP ratings. Long list of engines too with the 352,360,390,410(Maurader), 427, and 428 engines all built the platform.

 

[Howard]

Well hey, what if you like keeping stuff original in say a Cyclone or Mustang, I think it's a fair point to modify the engine a little bit.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose? When has nostalgia ever done you good, anyway?

 

[TehMac]

Doesn't that defeat the purpose? When has nostalgia ever done you good, anyway?

Fair enough, I guess some people like the look, but as you say, a 429 might be just as good, although I'd try to lighten it up as much as possible.

 

[Kadarin]

One of the worst examples I can think of was the 400M engine that my parents' old '73 (or '74, I can't remember) Ford Gran Torino station wagon came with. 400 cubic inches, 168bhp. This thing had a 2bbl carburetor and a single exhaust.

 

[TehMac]

One of the worst examples I can think of was the 400M engine that my parents' old '73 (or '74, I can't remember) Ford Gran Torino station wagon came with. 400 cubic inches, 168bhp. This thing had a 2bbl carburetor and a single exhaust.

yea the M codes were designed to be deliberately shitty

 

[Zenmervolt]

One of the worst examples I can think of was the 400M engine that my parents' old '73 (or '74, I can't remember) Ford Gran Torino station wagon came with. 400 cubic inches, 168bhp. This thing had a 2bbl carburetor and a single exhaust.

yea the M codes were designed to be deliberately shitty

The 400 engine (technically there's no 400M, just a 351M and a 400) was designed for use in trucks and large sedans originally, which means they prioritized low-RPM torque above almost everything else. They really never intended the 400 to be a screamer; it was always supposed to be a stump-puller.

ZV

 

[exdeath]

Heads/ports/valves are what make an engine. Displacement and block are also important, but only because things like bore diameter and bore centers determine how big valves/ports are and where they are located (eg: ports the right angle, right shape, right spacing, right volume, right length, etc).

The head design, port design, and most importantly, the valve angles, make the difference between a 130 HP 2.2L Camry that can't even get over 200 HP with a turbo and several $$grand, vs a 2.0L 700 HP capable MR2 engine. GTE head >>>>>>>>> FE head (in Toyota speak), there just isn't any way around it; there is nothing you can do to port the head out, change the valve angles, etc, the casting itself works against you the moment it's... well... cast!

Same goes for the 305 TPI and many other engines that are already limited to a maximum potential well before you spend your first $5 in mods. That's why it's always better to start with an engine swap, then modify the better engine later; much more return per mod vs wasting your money on a boat anchor. If you're going to spend $5,000 in mods, do you want a 200 HP engine that is now 250 HP, or a 300 HP engine that is now 550 HP?

 

[TehMac]

Heads/ports/valves are what make an engine. Displacement and block are also important, but only because things like bore diameter and bore centers determine how big valves/ports are and where they are located (eg: ports the right angle, right shape, right spacing, right volume, right length, etc).

The head design, port design, and most importantly, the valve angles, make the difference between a 130 HP 2.2L Camry that can't even get over 200 HP with a turbo and several $$grand, vs a 2.0L 700 HP capable MR2 engine. GTE head >>>>>>>>> FE head (in Toyota speak), there just isn't any way around it; there is nothing you can do to port the head out, change the valve angles, etc, the casting itself works against you the moment it's... well... cast!

So why does Toyota do this? Cheap design? Easier maintenance, they don't want the engine to produce more than 200 hp? What?


p.s. what is your opinion of the LA 340 V8 used in the T/A Challenger?

 

[TehMac]

Hell compare the old Hemi 426 or Chevy LS6 454 to the new Mustang GT 5.0L. The new 5.0L is putting down more RWHP that either of those old engines. The FE engines were torque monsters and felt pretty dang strong even with there lower HP ratings. Long list of engines too with the 352,360,390,410(Maurader), 427, and 428 engines all built the platform.

Well I'm not sure how fair this is.

The 5.0L puts down more horsepower because I believe the drive trains have become more effective at transferring power down to the pavement in the past 50 years or so, especially with high performance clutches and so forth.

The Hemi 426 was deliberately underrated and dual quads could produce some where in the neighborhood of 550-575 hp. Now that is gross HP, net HP would probably be around 500-525 or so, but that is still a ton. The 440 RB was pretty legendary, still is, and if with some heads and headers that can produce 650 hp--Edmunds claims this is the rating for the 70 Challenger they were driving.

The LS6 I'm not too sure about, I know the 454 V8 was rated at 450 hp, but I believe it could produce somewhere around 550 hp. Zora Arkus Duntov experimented with electronic fuel injection on the chevy 427 and was able to produce around 650 hp very easily so it's certainly possible.

Yea, Ford made some good V8s, the 289 K-code, 302 Boss, etc, but chevy was the king of intermediate and small block V8s, while of course Chrysler dominated with its Hemis and 440s.

One thing I don't quite get is the disparity in numbers between the 390 and the 406 cubic inch FE Ford had released in '63. The 406 with the triple 2-barrels made 405 hp, which back then was considered pretty epic. That engine made power very well, but it's de-stroked cousin did not, rather curious. I guess the carbs/camshaft may have something to do with it.

As an aside, I know an older guy who had a '57 Thunderbird in 1962 and installed a 406 cubic inch Ford V8 in it in '63 and went racing with the damn thing. Those were the days.

 

[exdeath]

So why does Toyota do this? Cheap design? Easier maintenance, they don't want the engine to produce more than 200 hp? What?

Cheap, ease of mass manufacturing and automated casting and machining procedures, packaging constraints (GTE head is much wider than the FE head), low end torque (compare 130 HP, 145 LB/FT to a Honda engine of the same period), fuel economy, emissions, etc. Trying to optimize and squeeze a little more low end torque out of an engine like that has a disproportionate and detrimental effect on maximum HP potential (eg: valve angles give 10% more of one thing at the trade off of forever eliminating the possibility of 30% more of the other, just to throw some made up numbers to illustrate a point).

p.s. what is your opinion of the LA 340 V8 used in the T/A Challenger?

Not familiar with it. I'm more a 440 kind of guy

 

[exdeath]

Well I'm not sure how fair this is.

The 5.0L puts down more horsepower because I believe the drive trains have become more effective at transferring power down to the pavement in the past 50 years or so, especially with high performance clutches and so forth.

Uh... the new 5.0L puts down more horsepower because it's MAKING more... for numerous reasons, namely that the old 5.0Ls where extremely cripped from the factory for starters. Then add superior heads, tubular headers from the factory, etc.

 

[TehMac]

Uh... the new 5.0L puts down more horsepower because it's MAKING more... for numerous reasons, namely that the old 5.0Ls where extremely cripped from the factory for starters. Then add superior heads, tubular headers from the factory, etc.

Ok, but we weren't comparing it to old 302s, we were talking LS6s and Hemis and so forth.

 

[TehMac]

Not familiar with it. I'm more a 440 kind of guy

That is a particular favorite of mine, do you have any experiences that you might want to share?

 

[exdeath]

That is a particular favorite of mine, do you have any experiences that you might want to share?

Nothing special really, had a Chrysler wagon with a 440, father had two 64 Furys with 440s, one an 11 sec race car with around 600 HP N/A. He's talking about putting that 440 into his '30 coupe...

I'm feeling the itch to go old school but people are retarded, they watch Barret Jackson and think their rusted hunk of shit is worth $1,000,000.00, etc. I'd like to do a RestoMod some day, something like a 70 Challenger or GTX with a bored and stroked 440 with a modern port SFI system, but it probably won't happen since you have to be Bill Gates just to get a damn rim or headlight for those cars now thanks to that piece of shit show...

Shit when I was 10 you could find those cars in people's back yards sitting on 4 rotted tires for $500.

 

[TehMac]

father had two 64 Furys with 440s, one an 11 sec race car with around 600 HP N/A.

very hawt. The '64 Fury is a sexy car.

 

[exdeath]

very hawt. The '64 Fury is a sexy car.

Push button tranny