Mustang Bullitt Forum banner
1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Besides a blower? I expierenced the greatness of the new 3V 4.6,in my neighbors '07 GT. I drove him up,in my Bullitt,to pick up his car after a 4.10 gear install. Now he has a tune,cat back exhaust and a CAI kit. We got on it,in his '07 GT, and man,I wish I had that mid-range to top end pull of that 3V engine,not to mention the 70-80 Lb. weight advantage that engine enjoys!! The 4.10 gear really woke it up. My old 2V has nothing for him from 4000 RPM up,and I have the long tube headers,tune and 3.73.
Then I just read where [email protected] with Patriot,have released an all new 3V head casting,and intake for the 3V crowd,as if they really need anything better!!
I wonder if their new head will bolt on to the 2001 2V block?
Man we need some help here. How about some kind of tunnel port 2V head.Now the 2001 Bullitt is still a fantastic platform,but I am feeling like the old guy with his 1966 Mustang with an old 2 barrel carbed 289!
You 3V guys have it so easy now!!

You know,I have no trouble trying to stay even,in the power race,with my even older '85 LX. I have them all beat on running weight,plus all that I need is to go up agian to an easy to get 392 cubes,and hotter roller cam. A cake walk compared to beefing up the '01 Bullitt!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
Plenty of 2-V Power Plans Out There

Mus408 said:
Man we need some help here. How about some kind of tunnel port 2V head. Now the 2001 Bullitt is still a fantastic platform,but I am feeling like the old guy with his 1966 Mustang with an old 2 barrel carbed 289!
I must respectfully disagree with you here. After an extended period of time reading and researching the hundreds of parts books, I've discovered there is an ENORMOUS amount of go-fast parts available out there. The 2-V is out of mainstream production and simply is no longer the main focus but by no means is it forgotten. Our platform provides as many opportunities as the new platform does. Personally I think things are really just starting to look better.

You want some power goodies ... check out KarKraft's web site some time. There is also Sullivan's. Check out DSS racing in Illinois (they and KarKraft are also on E-bay). They offer lots of stuff for the 2-V engine. Since 2-V(s) were developed first you already have lots of cams, blowers, turbos, blocks, and heads. FRPP 5.0 MOD motor blocks (both aluminum FR500C and the cast-iron versions), TrueFlow has duplicated our 2001 BULLITT intake and offers them in various finishes and pieces. There are all kinds of CNC-oriented machine shops out there that are starting to lower their prices (or otherwise offer more for the buck) for 2-V blueprinted parts. The variety and amount of parts availability is impressive to say the least.

Saleen still offers their blower package for the 99-04 2-V motor. Not much pricier than the others (or the current 3-V & 4-V FRPP Whipples) it seems like it would be a worthwhile kick-in-the-A$$ if that is what you're out for. BruceBotti just did an SC install and seems to like it. Check out GBoger's BULLITT ... it's the best one on here IMO and looks like it rolled of the assembly line that way. There's plenty of things to do with our 2001 models. :wink:

Nothing wrong with the 3-V as far as I know (maybe except for some funky spark plugs I keep hearing some folks groan about on occasion) but I just cant accept a plastic intake manifold on a V-8 engine and there seems to be only one port size for 3-V engines. Outside of that I haven't learned that much about them and unless FORD pulls off a better intake manifold I probably won't give much attention to it neither. :frown:

I see no reason why you couldn't do a 3-V conversion with the 2001 ... the stock crate motors aren't that expensive through various sources (see KarKraft again, DSS racing, PowerHeads, to name a few). You might like the results ... (???). Should all bolt right up.

The DOHC engines are a whole different story. Plenty of parts for them too. They are also pricier but sure seem to produce some good power for what they are (especially when supercharged). They also seem to fit pretty much anywhere the 2-V and 3-V engines will. I guess it's the same as it's always been; the more you spend the more you get the more you get the faster your go-fast will go. :badgrin:

The 289 was such a sweet engine. Too bad they didn't duplicate that bore and stroke with the MOD motors. :frown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,924 Posts
Unfortunately here's what we are dealing with. Our engine was originally built as a truck motor not a high performance motor. Yes there are parts you can buy and make it faster but the bottom line is our engines were built to be assembly line, run of the mill, everyday motors, nothing fast, nothing special. They don't have a good bottom end or internals so supercharging or turbo charging them is a death sentence for the engine unless you dump $$$$ in it then you might as well start over with a DOHC.

I guess because I always owned older muscle cars when I got this car I was REALLY dissapointed in the engine compartment. It wasn't until I recently rode in an 2004 Mach 1 did I really realize how much we got screwed seeing the difference there is between our engines designed for a truck and an engine designed for racing.

With that being said I would also like to say that OVERALL #801 has been my FAVORITE car I've owned!!! Every car or truck has advantages and disadvantages, to me the good things far outweigh the shortcomings in the engine compartment!! When the engine does go in #801 I will replace it with the DOHC....THEN I will be 100% happy!!!! :grin:

*This is of course my opinion and I don't want to upset anyone! I LOVE MY BULLITT!!! :grin:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I like the Ford N/A 4V Aluminator long block. Just add a used Mach 1 intake,still might be able to use my exsiting CAI. Ford states a $6800 price tag,but might find it cheaper. It has known OEM durability. But what about the computer module/harness hook up? That is what I am looking at. Ford should have given ALL their Limited Edition cars, the 4V engine,even if the price was the same as the 2001 Cobra,I would have bought the Bullitt!
Back, at the time, I had a Comp. Orange 2001 Cobra on order also. The Bullitt being an unkown quantity,until it arrived. My Bullitt came in first,I liked it. Later,the Cobra came in,the Bullitt,to me handled better,was different,but then the power surge I felt,in the Cobra,over 4000 RPM, was definitely something!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Rikki Racer said:
Unfortunately here's what we are dealing with. Our engine was originally built as a truck motor not a high performance motor. Yes there are parts you can buy and make it faster but the bottom line is our engines were built to be assembly line, run of the mill, everyday motors, nothing fast, nothing special. They don't have a good bottom end or internals so supercharging or turbo charging them is a death sentence for the engine unless you dump $$$$ in it then you might as well start over with a DOHC.

I guess because I always owned older muscle cars when I got this car I was REALLY dissapointed in the engine compartment. It wasn't until I recently rode in an 2004 Mach 1 did I really realize how much we got screwed seeing the difference there is between our engines designed for a truck and an engine designed for racing.

With that being said I would also like to say that OVERALL #801 has been my FAVORITE car I've owned!!! Every car or truck has advantages and disadvantages, to me the good things far outweigh the shortcomings in the engine compartment!! When the engine does go in #801 I will replace it with the DOHC....THEN I will be 100% happy!!!! :grin:

*This is of course my opinion and I don't want to upset anyone! I LOVE MY BULLITT!!! :grin:
Well the 4.6 SOHC engine was really designed for FWD/RWD big car applications,when drawn up,in 1991. Mostly targeted at the Lincoln and Crown Vic. This is why they went with a compact cylinder bore spacing,and the basic problem for getting larger cubic inches/bore size.
The overhead cam deal was for "New Advanced Technology" claims to justify all the new tooling expense. The small bore/long stroke idea also made the engine easier to pass tighter emission restrictions. The overhead cam setup,didn't really do much for horsepower,since the cylinder head flow was done at 4900 RPM on the 2V version. Just take a look at the Chevy LS series engine potential for further explanation regarding the benefits of Overhead cams for street use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,924 Posts
Mus408 said:
Well the 4.6 SOHC engine was really designed for FWD/RWD big car applications,when drawn up,in 1991. Mostly targeted at the Lincoln and Crown Vic. This is why they went with a compact cylinder bore spacing,and the basic problem for getting larger cubic inches/bore size.
The overhead cam deal was for "New Advanced Technology" claims to justify all the new tooling expense. The small bore/long stroke idea also made the engine easier to pass tighter emission restrictions. The overhead cam setup,didn't really do much for horsepower,since the cylinder head flow was done at 4900 RPM on the 2V version. Just take a look at the Chevy LS series engine potential for further explanation regarding the benefits of Overhead cams for street use.
OK...well regardless what it was desinged for I can tell you what it WASN'T designed for....PERFORMANCE!! :grin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
well yes the 3v and 4v clearly have an advantage n/a , I have been hearing rumors that trick flow, and another company ( I can't remember who) will finally becoming out with an actual aftermarket head for our 2v's! So hopefully soon we will be able to see the true potential of our motors in n/a trim
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,432 Posts
Mus408 said:
Well the 4.6 SOHC engine was really designed for FWD/RWD big car applications,when drawn up,in 1991. Mostly targeted at the Lincoln and Crown Vic. This is why they went with a compact cylinder bore spacing,and the basic problem for getting larger cubic inches/bore size.
The overhead cam deal was for "New Advanced Technology" claims to justify all the new tooling expense. The small bore/long stroke idea also made the engine easier to pass tighter emission restrictions. The overhead cam setup,didn't really do much for horsepower,since the cylinder head flow was done at 4900 RPM on the 2V version. Just take a look at the Chevy LS series engine potential for further explanation regarding the benefits of Overhead cams for street use.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Luxo barge engine first. Just made sense to use in a pickup with the low end torque. It was never designed to be a rev machine. The 3V isn't either. It only has 500 rpm more on the top end. BTW, the overhead cam design and drive off the crank was ripped off from Mercedes V-8 engines. Ford improved it and made it more efficient and reliable. Key word there being reliable. The Mercedes has a couple parts on them that are prone to fail. And remember, until the 2V hit the streets there wasn't a reliable ovc engine made this side of the pond. The 5.0L was long, real long of tooth. The 4.6L was light years ahead of it in design and execution. The 5.4L not so much...:lol:

I agree, keep the plastic intakes off the engines.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Ford could have easily upgraded the old 302/351. Could have gone to a long rod combo,that would have helped emissions/economy. Desinged a modern all aluminum block/head for lighter weight. New high flowing/swirl technology heads. In fact, they could have used OHC tech. on the old war horse Windsor.
Only problem on the SOHC design was the small bore capacity. The second,really major,problem was Ford only allowing the improved HP versions,read as 4V,only available in the top of the line Cobra Mustang and Marauder.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,432 Posts
I wouldn't look to those engines as being a Nirvana engine to solve the power parameters that some people expect of Ford. Remember, Ford is a high production inexensive and durable engine builder. The 4V engines that you cite are low production hand assembled high output engines that were/are quite expensive to build. You get more bang out them, but you have to come up with several more bucks to get that bang imo. My belief is that most people would not be interested in paying that money for a more hp that they wouldn't use except on an occassional basis. I think Ford put the correct engine from their inventory in the Bullitt then and now. At least in terms of what the market demands. Like I said, imo!
 

·
Charles
Joined
·
13,303 Posts
Larry,

You're absolutely right about the mid and upper range pulling power of the 3V over the 2V. I would like to see for myself how the difference some worked heads would feel on the 2V. I know there is a lot of quick 2V cars out there. But you can't substitute for cubic inches. Period.

My '01 still feels a lot quicker and nimble but once I hit the 3500 rpm mark the 3V is like shifting gears.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
922 Posts
Personally I like the 2V. Having worked on the 4v and 2v I would much rather the 2v the simplicity of the design is great. But it does have its down sides as weak bottom end and low flowing heads. Now if you want to have the most power on your block, yank out the 2v and put in a 347 tried and true power maker. The mod motor is a relativily new motor if you put it up against the other motors. But I wish ford would have put in a aluminum block rather than iron. But the 3v is a more power making motor than the 2v the more time spent on researching the variable timing has shown up with the power producing numbers on the dyno.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
873 Posts
....I know you said "besides a blower", but I can't resist. A Kenne Bell power adder ain't cheap, but it will completely transform your Bullitt and put the 2V versus 3V debate to rest. I grimaced over the cost until the first time that I gave it some WOT.....I've never been the same....:smile:
Just my $.02 and worth every penny of it...:lol: :lol:
Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,977 Posts
Well I will let you folks know in about a week how well my 2v does,am putting the final bolts and accesories back on 1543 using an 03 cobra block,crank,and rods along with the 2v heads off the stock bullitt motor. Went 20 over on the block, using probe 18cc dished pistons, BBK shorty headers with my K-B. The stock motor made 380rwhp on the K-B tune, at 9psi, with the new combo and 14psi should make around 460 to 470 at the wheels according to my son who is going to tune the car, and thats on pump gas. This is a reasonable tune considering some he has put out. BTW I left the heads stock,no changes to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dg517

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Well,I think my dream plan of action would be the Ford Aluminator shortblock,to take advantage of the lighter block weight,forged internals, and the option of Stage 2 ported 2V heads and a step up on camshaft.
Then I can reuse the Bullitt intake,which would keep the stock look and begin to show it's performance abilities with the higher flowing heads. This plan would keep me right there,or ahead, of the new Bullitt.
Yeah,you can do it, and more,with a blower,but then the 3V guy adds the blower,and you are right back. I think the 2001 Bullitt would be a great ride with the added power and 70-80 lbs. off the front end!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,503 Posts
Bullitt 736 said:
But you can't substitute for cubic inches. Period.
Amen to that .

Want to go real fast in a Mustang ?

Buy a Fox body 5.0- imoprove the suspension, upgrade the brakes, drop in a 351W, pick a sturdy auto or manual and hang on.

Probably can create a car that's much faster than a '08 Bullitt for less than half the price.

For example , I have an employee here that dropped a Navigator engine into a '89 coupe and runs low 12's with a daily driver ! He didn't spend $9,000 total.

The Bullitt team intended to put in the Cobra engine , as I recall, and were prevented by the corporate beancounters.

The Mach1 got it and now we know what a Bullitt COULD have been.

What we have with the '01, IMO, is the best overall driving late model Mustang.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
DHGBULLITT said:
Well I will let you folks know in about a week how well my 2v does,am putting the final bolts and accesories back on 1543 using an 03 cobra block,crank,and rods along with the 2v heads off the stock bullitt motor. Went 20 over on the block, using probe 18cc dished pistons, BBK shorty headers with my K-B. The stock motor made 380rwhp on the K-B tune, at 9psi, with the new combo and 14psi should make around 460 to 470 at the wheels according to my son who is going to tune the car, and thats on pump gas. This is a reasonable tune considering some he has put out. BTW I left the heads stock,no changes to them.
If you don't mind me asking, why would you get a '03 Cobra block and use 2v heads on it instead of 4v heads? You already went through all the trouble of finding and buying the block, and it's originally made with 4v heads, so why not go the extra mile - which isn't all that long of a mile considering the hardest part is done - and get the heads that were intended for it? Well, I'm gonna go ahead and answer the question myself by saying that you just want 2v heads to stay true to the Bullitt, but I just wanna confirm.

FCMCBULLITT said:
The Bullitt team intended to put in the Cobra engine , as I recall, and were prevented by the corporate beancounters.
Since the Bullitt wasn't made by SVT, and the 4v engine was made by SVT, they said no :(.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
Mus408 said:
Well the 4.6 SOHC engine was really designed for FWD/RWD big car applications,when drawn up,in 1991. Mostly targeted at the Lincoln and Crown Vic. This is why they went with a compact cylinder bore spacing,and the basic problem for getting larger cubic inches/bore size.
The overhead cam deal was for "New Advanced Technology" claims to justify all the new tooling expense. The small bore/long stroke idea also made the engine easier to pass tighter emission restrictions. The overhead cam setup,didn't really do much for horsepower,since the cylinder head flow was done at 4900 RPM on the 2V version. Just take a look at the Chevy LS series engine potential for further explanation regarding the benefits of Overhead cams for street use.
This post may not set well with some, but it's only my thought on the subject- OK.
All this talk about the down side of the OHC 4.6 2v FORD engine kind of depresses me. To build A OHC engine that doesn't breath very well is pretty weak, whats the point! Flow done at only 4,900 RPM? I know I read about what the design was about,but still!! I have been A CHEVY guy for most of my life, and always believed that there wasn't anything wrong with A push-rod engine, and GM/CHEVY is still proving it. I guess I still would have bought the BULLITT regardless, but after the education about the 4.6 2v I'm not very impressed with it without mods. SC etc. I'm not A racer, but to be blown off by CHEVY LS power isn't a good thing. Like has been said I think we kind of got screwed by not getting the 4v like MACH 1. THE END
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top