no comprende

[zukirider21]

http://www.race-dezert.com/cgi-bin/trader/atl.cgi?ct=7&md=second&id=4042

uh... WHAT???

and to think i thought i knew of all the ford engines...

just think how intense this would be in a ranger... and probably easy to fit too...

 

[Captain Ledd]

They did make a V6 that was basically a 351 with 2 cylinders missing. Similar idea to the GM 4.3. Ford never did much with it, but it was a crate engine for a short while. Mostly race teams picked them up.

There was something running with one at Pikes Peak a while back, I wanna say it was a Ranger too.

*EDIT: Found it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEptw_tV010

 

[bandit]

i want one

 

[baddad457]

Looks like it's based on the 4.2 V6 from the pickups. The 3.8/4.2's had some outstanding heads from the factory. If Ford had used these on the small blocks, they would have really had a killer combo from the factory.

 

[AllanD]

Looks like it's based on the 4.2 V6 from the pickups. The 3.8/4.2's had some outstanding heads from the factory. If Ford had used these on the small blocks, they would have really had a killer combo from the factory.

No not based on the 3.8/4.2 at all.

similar starting point, parallel development, different purpose and results.

The 4.5 was developed in the mid 90's when the saturday NASCAR racers ran V6 engines and the sunday "cup" cars ran the V8's.

the 4.5 is an "odd fire" 90deg engine, no split rod journals.

 

[dangerranger83]

I think I know where one of those are at a JY. Its sitting inside the building,office, might be for sale, looks just like that.

 

[BlackBII]

I like the distributor in the front idea. Way to go Ford!

Now if only our RBV's were that way...

 

[dangerranger83]

Why did for they put the distributor in the rear of the RBV? Was somebody looking at a chevy diagram at the time?