• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

4.0 OHC Question


tpelle

Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
22
Transmission
Automatic
I'm curious about the 4.0 OHC engine. From what I gather, this is the old Cologne V6 which started out as a 1.8 (!) liter OHV engine way back when. It's been used in a wide variety of Ford vehicles over the years, as well as some other vehicles (like the TVR sports cars in England).

I'm curious, though, as to why Ford went to the trouble of converting it to OHC? As I understand it they simply replaced the single camshaft located in the block with a jackshaft, and they drive one cam off of the front of the jackshaft and the other off of the rear. Seems like an odd thing to do, and I wonder what they gained by doing so.

Secondly, was the 4.0 OHC version of the engine used in the, say, 2011 Ranger built in Cologne, Germany, or was the engine also made in the US?
 
They gained about 47 HP and 13 lb-ft of torque by going to the OHC. A higher red line is also gained by making this change. You may ask how can they gain more power with the OHC. Once they can got rid of the push rods, it freed up the design of the intake and exhaust ports. Since air and gas flow is one of the main factors in producing power, the better designed ports improve flow and power. Getting rid of the push rods also gets rid of a lot of mass flying back and forth which makes it easier to go to higher rpm.

While the OHC does peak the power at higher rpm it also is producing considerably more power at the same rpm when the push rod engine hit its peak power. What is not to like about the OHC? I have to say the design is not optimum because they started out with a push rod engine but it still works very well.

I am not sure where the OHC engine is made but I doubt it was made in Germany.
 
What is not to like about the OHC?

Water and oil flow through the heads was altered, that changed the shape of the head gaskets a bit, and made them a bit of a problem.

The timing sets were also a weak point, and seeing as how the engine has to be removed from the vehicle to service the rear timing cassette, or the bank 1 head gasket, I'd say there are things to dislike about the OHC design.

Getting aftermarket and Mustang parts helps though. The factory head gaskets were .030" compressed. A V6 Mustang performance company has made one with a few extra layers to make it .040" compressed and less likely to blow.

The Mustangs also seemed to have fewer issues with the timing chains.
 
They gained about 47 HP and 13 lb-ft of torque by going to the OHC. A higher red line is also gained by making this change. You may ask how can they gain more power with the OHC. Once they can got rid of the push rods, it freed up the design of the intake and exhaust ports. Since air and gas flow is one of the main factors in producing power, the better designed ports improve flow and power. Getting rid of the push rods also gets rid of a lot of mass flying back and forth which makes it easier to go to higher rpm.

While the OHC does peak the power at higher rpm it also is producing considerably more power at the same rpm when the push rod engine hit its peak power. What is not to like about the OHC? I have to say the design is not optimum because they started out with a push rod engine but it still works very well.

I am not sure where the OHC engine is made but I doubt it was made in Germany.

All of the "Colones" are/were made in Colone Germany.

The OHC IMO was kind of a joke when they already had the 4.2 available (or even the 3.5/3.5 in later years) The whole thing is more or less of a bandaid on an old engine. Not quite as big of a deal as converting it to a six cylinder though...

The parent's '02 Explorer just started the good old timing chain rattle... I already didn't like the car and that is just one more thing to add to the list.

Somebody at Ford must have really liked it for as many changes at it got over the years to stay a semi-viable engine.
 
Last edited:
All of the "Colones" are/were made in Colone Germany.

The OHC IMO was kind of a joke when they already had the 4.2 available (or even the 3.5/3.5 in later years) The whole thing is more or less of a bandaid on an old engine. Not quite as big of a deal as converting it to a six cylinder though...

The parent's '02 Explorer just started the good old timing chain rattle... I already didn't like the car and that is just one more thing to add to the list.

Somebody at Ford must have really liked it for as many changes at it got over the years to stay a semi-viable engine.


^^^correct. The Ford Cologne V6 has been made by the Ford Motor Company in Cologne, Germany since 1968. The engine started as a 1.8, then the 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 litres engines.
 
^^^correct. The Ford Cologne V6 has been made by the Ford Motor Company in Cologne, Germany since 1968. The engine started as a 1.8, then the 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 litres engines.

I feel the need to point out that the line goes farther back as the design is loosely based on the Tanus V4 that came in displacements of 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7L.
 
Last edited:
I feel the need to point out that the line goes farther back as the design is loosely based on the Tanus V4 that came in displacements of 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7L.


You are correct!!! Taunus V4 was introduced by Ford Motor Company in Germany in 1962. This V4 powered the Ford Taunus and German versions of the Granada, Capri and Transit.
 
You are correct!!! Taunus V4 was introduced by Ford Motor Company in Germany in 1962. This V4 powered the Ford Taunus and German versions of the Granada, Capri and Transit.

And even the very first Mustang (concept)
 
Last edited:
Water and oil flow through the heads was altered, that changed the shape of the head gaskets a bit, and made them a bit of a problem.

The timing sets were also a weak point, and seeing as how the engine has to be removed from the vehicle to service the rear timing cassette, or the bank 1 head gasket, I'd say there are things to dislike about the OHC design.
I have not heard of the head gasket problem. I have over 130K miles on my 4.0 SOHC and have had zero problems with the engine. The only thing I have done to it is change oil every 20K miles and the spark plugs and wires one time.

I was referring mainly about the performance aspects of the 4.0 SOHC not the design when I said "what is not to like". Every engine has their design drawbacks. Fortunately, I have not been bit by the SOHC design drawbacks yet like many others have.
 
All of the "Colones" are/were made in Colone Germany.

I knew the design came out of Germany but did not realize they were all built there. That is something to be sure to remember.
 
I have not heard of the head gasket problem. I have over 130K miles on my 4.0 SOHC and have had zero problems with the engine. The only thing I have done to it is change oil every 20K miles and the spark plugs and wires one time.

You only change your oil every 20,000 miles?

You are supposed to do it every 5,000 miles.
 
I do mine every 3,000 miles. I love all my vehicals. They are family....lol
 
I do mine every 3,000 miles. I love all my vehicals. They are family....lol

I recently went to 5,000 on the Ranger. But it's a fresh engine and I run diesel oil in it. More detergents and sulfur for my flat-tappet cam.
 
Your wasting money and oil if you change your daily driven vehicle at 3000 miles (unless you use cheap walmart dyno oil) Synthetics technology combined with todays close machining tolerances/material easily allow 4-5K oil changes.

The cylinder head design on the SOHC motor is good in theory but the casting is very poor (lots of slag and imperfections). The valves are cheap, too. There are 8 water ports and 4 studs around each cylinder, so the head gasket looks like swiss cheese. On a stock vehicle, these notations are probably never going to show themselves. But forced induction, for instance, is very difficult because of the weak head-to-deck mating surface and 9.3:1 compression.

I think Ford really goofed up on the valvetrain. The motor itself is very stout. The block and newer rotating assembly (which is balanced from factory) has seen power upwards of 350-400hp. It has excellent lubrication. The valvetrain and heads are the weak point. Too bad Ford couldn't run a conventional 4v setup. A 24 valve 4.0L V6 could make a LOT of BROAD power.
 
You only change your oil every 20,000 miles?

You are supposed to do it every 5,000 miles.

I have used extended oil changes on my Rangers since 89. I run a bypass oil filter along with the standard filter and full synthetic oil to allow me to do this. The first Ranger had almost 200K miles on it when I sold it to a co-worker. He now has over 240K miles on it and the engine still runs as good as new with no oil consumption problems. I used oil analysis to determine oil change interval. I do change the standard oil filter every 5K miles. Does that make you feel better?

Ford recommends changing the oil every 5K miles. I get to determine what I am supposed to do since I own the vehicle. I also have to deal with any problems I encounter because of my decision. I plan to drive my current Ranger at least 300K miles unless they take my license away.
:icon_cheers:
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

TRS Events

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Ranger Adventure Video

TRS Merchandise

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Sponsors


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Sponsored Ad

Back
Top