3.7l ecoboost ???
06-04-2016, 09:47 PM
#21
Senior Member
I seriously doubt that the Ecoboost block can be bored. The aluminum cylinders are coated using Plasma Tranfer Wirre Arc technology. Here is an article that briefly describe it.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009...-20090529.html
Basically, there is no sleeve that can be bored. And given that the engine block is designed for strength and weight, taking any metal from the cylinders could weaken the entire block. That and the fact that the plasma coating would be removed would pretty much render the block useless.
Hope that helps.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009...-20090529.html
Basically, there is no sleeve that can be bored. And given that the engine block is designed for strength and weight, taking any metal from the cylinders could weaken the entire block. That and the fact that the plasma coating would be removed would pretty much render the block useless.
Hope that helps.
I thought the 1st gen 3.5 Ecos had pressed in iron cylinder sleeves in the aluminum block?
06-05-2016, 06:51 PM
#22
Senior Member
Though this is purely speculation, I believe Ford biased the cam timing on the 3.5 to give it more low end, and sacrificed hp in the process (but then got it back with boost). Turbo's usually just amplify the stock torque curve, so I thought it odd that the 3.7 torque and hp peaks are 1000+ higher rpm than the EB. It's clear from the boost curve they were going for low-end.
So what does this mean . . .
I did some quick-and-dirty calcs and found that the 3.5 EB would actually only make about 240 hp naturally aspirated, versus the 302 hp 3.7. Sooo. . . if you could bump the EB displacement to 3.7 liters and install the 3.7 camshafts (assuming the heads are the same), then you'd be looking at ~460 hp using all factory ford parts and the stock boost level. Realistically, though, it's not practical or worth it to bump the displacement, so take that .2 liters away and you're still talking 435 hp reliably. If you were willing to sacrifice some reliability, bumping the boost up a bit (as long as the turbo's don't choke) will get you that 25 hp back pretty easily.
So who's gonna be the first to figure out if the 3.7 cams will work in the EB?
So what does this mean . . .
I did some quick-and-dirty calcs and found that the 3.5 EB would actually only make about 240 hp naturally aspirated, versus the 302 hp 3.7. Sooo. . . if you could bump the EB displacement to 3.7 liters and install the 3.7 camshafts (assuming the heads are the same), then you'd be looking at ~460 hp using all factory ford parts and the stock boost level. Realistically, though, it's not practical or worth it to bump the displacement, so take that .2 liters away and you're still talking 435 hp reliably. If you were willing to sacrifice some reliability, bumping the boost up a bit (as long as the turbo's don't choke) will get you that 25 hp back pretty easily.
So who's gonna be the first to figure out if the 3.7 cams will work in the EB?
The 3.5's in the NBS F150's makes very similar number (stand's to reason as it's essentially the same motor).
Probably why you can get such a bump in HP and TQ on the eco with some bolt-ons and a tune.
I think it would be neat to put turbos on the 3.7. I wonder if anyone is making better rods/pistons, etc. to handle forced induction. Who knows, with lower boost numbers and a good tune, it would likely be pretty reliable. I'm sure you would see higher HP numbers.
If the NA cams or 3.7 cams made sense in the Eco, it would probably see some nice gains.
Last edited by Blown F-150; 06-05-2016 at 10:48 PM. Reason: Everything
06-07-2016, 02:05 PM
#23
Opinionated Blowhard
To my knowledge the first gens all had the Wire Arc Plasma Transfer process. Now, they may have done some early development with sleeves as a proof-of-concept engineering approach. But I know they worked hard to perfect the plasma technology.
11-18-2016, 09:06 AM
#24
I made this comment on another post but I think it got lost............Does anybody have an opinion as to why Ford has 2 V-6 engines that are so much alike........why not just put turbo's on the 3.7L......with all things being equal with the 3.5L ...the 3.7L would be rated at about 385HP and 444 lb/ft.......makes sense to me....sure would save alot of money in production cost
11-18-2016, 09:36 PM
#25
Crotchety Old Man
Pretty sure there are single and twin turbo builds on the 3.7 mustangs. Just have to spend some hours on the mustang forums and find out what can be ported to the F series.