5.3 vs 5.0

Badass69 · May 4, 2016

I have a 2014 5.0 EXT Cab F150 for work with 3.55 gears as well. Compared to my 6.2L, it is a dog and gets about 3 mpg worse mileage.

Complicated is an understatement when it comes to the VVT on the 5.0L.

From WIKI

"The Coyote features all new 4V DOHC cylinder heads that have shifted the camshafts outboard, which allowed for a compact roller finger follower setup with remote hydraulic valve lash adjusters and improved (raised) intake port geometry. The result is an intake port that outflows the Ford GT intake port by 4 percent and the Yates D3 (NASCAR) intake port up to 0.472" (12 mm) lift, which is the maximum lift of the Coyote's intake cams. Engine redline is 7000 rpm.^[13]

The Coyote is Ford's first implementation of its cam-torque-actuated (CTA) Twin Independent Variable Cam Timing (Ti-VCT) in a V8 engine, which allows the power-train control module (PCM) to advance and retard intake and exhaust cam timing independently of each other, providing improved power, fuel economy and reduced emissions. The engine is assembled in Ford's Essex Engine Plant in Windsor, Ontario, using existing Modular tooling.^[14]"

We run strictly F150s with 5.0Ls where I work. This "twin independent variable cam timing" has been the root of 8 separate head jobs that were required on the trucks once they hit 50k miles. It seems common for the timing of the intake and exhaust valves to go south and the result is a rough sounding engine and feels like it wants to quit on you. CEL comes on, off to the dealer for a 20 hours labour head replacement.

These issues alone have shifted my view on Ford's engines, I think the Ecoboosts could be more reliable in this aspect but then again we haven't had any. We have since started to phase out F150s and returning to F250s with the 6.2L.

Ecoboosts have similar problems too and especially the 2011 and 2012's have had quite a few timing chain failures.... either the main or the intermediate that connects the 2 cams ( the 3.5 anyway has 3 timing chains to contend with lol). Ford engines in general are relatively complicated and have off beat failures...... Take even the 6.2..... attach a blower to it and if you want any boost at all the recommendation is upgrade the oil pump gears to billet pieces. The Ford 6.2 uses the exact same setup for an oil pump as an LS GM.. or these LT's..... it's a gerotor that is driven off the front of the crankshaft. I don't think I have a found a failure with a GM yet being boosted and shattering the oil pump gears unless they installed the pump wrong and it binds..... but Fords..... no the gears self destruct if you try and push more than 5 or 6 PSI of boost...... Pathetic. So what... the crank flexs so bad it binds the gears and rips them to pieces......beautiful. I sold both my 6.2 Ford's and don't miss them one day at all lol.

HondaHawkGT · May 4, 2016

The 5.0 oil pump gerotor is powdered metal. It. Powdered metal makes it hard and wear resistant but a lot more brittle. Crankshaft harmonics can cause it to fracture at high engine speeds. When a supercarger is installed, the load on the snout can cause it to deflect enough to cause the pump to bind and fail too.

I guess some guys have fractured their pump by missing a shift and bouncing of the rev limiter.

Powdered metal would wear better in the long term but I'd rather replace a pump that gradually loses oil pressure over one that fractures at high rpm.

Badass69 · May 5, 2016

Never looked at what GM uses for gears... wouldn't surprise me if they are powdered metal as well in the oe pumps... they don't shatter. Ford is just pathetic both to own and to mod, period.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

HondaHawkGT · May 5, 2016

Never looked at what GM uses for gears... wouldn't surprise me if they are powdered metal as well in the oe pumps... they don't shatter. Ford is just pathetic both to own and to mod, period.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Here are the wet sump and dry sump versions of the oil pump used on the Gen V's. I noticed that GM changed something on the wet sump oil pump at some point, there's an old discontinued part number and a new part number listed when I look up my engine. Any GM techs in here that know what changed?

I guess we'll find out how they hold up over time.

Badass69 · May 6, 2016

Different vane design. The dry sump one looks like an LS pump inside... the wet sump one is a different rotor and housing altogether. They have been out for a while and they don't grenade... doubt they will either... it's not a Ford lol. I quickly tired of my Ford as they were so useless to modify.. at least with GM there is real aftermarket support.. not a few pathetic overpriced vendors.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

HondaHawkGT · May 9, 2016

Yeah the gains of a DOHC V8 isn't worth the price of admission IMO. 3 extra cams, two gigantic timing chains that make the engine way more sensitive to wear. The cost of most OHC V8's is huge compared to an LS-based engine. We don't give up much with an OHV VVT V8:

“Independent cam phasing would have added mass and could have been a packaging issue,” says Rydzewski. “With an overhead valve engine, that means cam-in-cam. We still get 80 percent of the benefit with our dual equal variable valve timing. Technology has to earns its way in,” echoes Jordan Lee, chief engineer on the small-block program. “We did exhaustive studies on cam-in-cam and dual independent. The benefits just didn’t show it was there.”

http://www.enginelabs.com/engine-tech/is-the-gen-v-engines-combustion-system-really-new/

Daryl LBZ · May 9, 2016

I never found Ford's V8's all that impressive. They shove their DOHC setup in their engines with all that added complication and moving parts and they don't make much more power if any over a GM V8.

Jordan18 · May 9, 2016

I read on wiki that these LS engines are "generally" the same in block design since they first came to be 60 odd years ago. The biggest differences are fuel injection, timing, cylinder deactivation, etc for the most part. Another being aluminum over steel.

It is pretty neat that such a design has stood the test of time vs those of other car manufactures. Ya Dodge has their "hemi" homage, but I think that is really the only similarity to their original engines. Ford has gone through so many designs it's hard to keep track.

HondaHawkGT · May 9, 2016

The LS actually was actually a big change from the original SBC. It shares its block design with the old Ford Y-block with its deep skirted block. GM changed the firing order with the LS too. The heads are quite a bit different from the SBC too.

Things change over time. When Chrysler brought back the Hemi, they changed quite a few things vs the old Hemi design. The combustion chamber shape had to change for emissions reasons.

GRN69CHV · May 19, 2016

Whether overhead cams or conventional pushrod design, it's going to come down to weight and gearing. Both motors are within .030 stroke (3.62 for 5.3, 3.65 for 5.0). Chevy has .140 bore advantage, which is a lot of breathing in small bore applications. I always try to look at how any of the modern powerplants stack up against a 350/5.7 Chevy with a 4.00/3.48 bore/stroke ratio to see how what the power curve might look like. Ford's original 302/5.0 had a 4.00 bore with a really short 3.00 stroke, you really had to rev those. By comparison, if you look at the 6.2L with a 4.06/3.62 bore/stroke, you're approaching 402" big block territory (4.125/3.76 bore/stroke). Haven't dived into a 7.0L so can't really comment on what goes into fitting a 4.125/4.00 bore/stroke ratio on this platform, and given the investment in tooling for the 3.62 crank/rods/pistons, it's highly unlikely to see a change.

mookdoc6 · May 19, 2016

Wow....Either I am old or people forget or just don't know............

We all know I absolutely loathe FORD and their over engineered products....Just the Fox platform alone was enough to kill me? And people like it?

Anywho GM actually invented the HEMI and sold it off to Chrysler decades ago people......It was a GM invented Hemispherical shaped combustion chamber and Chrysler was sold the rights decades ago.......................................It's now gone on to URBAN LEGEND as something from outer space!

Dynasty need I say more...............................GM powertrain you fools!!!!!

GsBowtie · May 21, 2016

I like Ford and Chevrolet. My first 2 full size trucks were 88 and 89 Silverados . I loved the 89 4x4 and still miss it. I will say i don't like when ford went to the modular engines in the mid 90s. I always did and still feel that was a mistake. I liked the old 5.0 ford from the late 80s/early 90s. The roller cam 302 was very stout and you could run the heck out of it and it would come back for more. The 351 Windsor was also a very good engine.

I've owned a few 5.4 triton v8s, and they ran strong, but what a PITA to work on especially how ford shoved them back under the cowl. This does not even get into all the spark plug issues ( plugs breaking, getting ejected from the head, etc) thankfully mine never did that, but it was a constant worry. When i opened the hood on those i felt nauseous. What an over complex mess.

I have nothing bad to say about the newer dodge v8s, I'm just not a Mopar fan at all.

I really like my 5.3. It's still a pushrod v8. I can open my hood and still see where most everything is. That's one big reason, among many i sold my ford and returned to my roots with Chevrolet I'm old school, i like naturally asperiated V8s in my pickups. The ecoboost may outrun my 5.3, but will it 10yrs from now, or will it be on it's 2nd turbo and set of head gaskets by then? I don't trust a forced induction engine over the long term (small engines, not large diesels in otr trucks).

Plus i heard a friend at work leaving this week in his new 16 ford f150 with a 2.7 ecoboost. I'm sorry, again I'm old school, but hearing that little weenie V6 burble from the exhaust in a truck of that size made me laugh. That's just not me. Just my opinion of course.

GRN69CHV · May 21, 2016

Personally, I have nothing against a turbo'd motor. Modern 6 banger with EFI, DI, Turbo & Intercooler can out down a lot of power and nice flat torque curve. What might make sense is for GM to just move the 5.3L to a 5.7L by increasing the bore to the 3.92" of the 4.3L V6 (assumption made here that the 4.3L V6 is the same architecture of the V8's and could use the same pistons). The 400cc increase should net another 35-40HP and 40-45TQ.

truckguy82 · July 14, 2016

When I went to pick up my truck at the dealership, a friend took me there in a 2011 coyote mustang auto. I picked the truck up (2014 6.2L dblcab 3.42 rear) and the first thing I did with it was a highway pull against the mustang.

The stang pulled on the truck, but it was not that hard. He had maybe 1 car length from 40-90mph.

After putting 3000 miles on the truck and getting acclimated to it, I actually drove that stang for quite a while.

The stang feels about equal to my truck from the low to midrange power band. That last 1500rpm the stang pulls much harder than the truck.

Add 1500 lbs to the mustang, which I'd assume is similar to a 5.0 f150. It would be far far slower than a 6.2 in everyday driving and slightly slower at full tilt.

Coyote is an incredible engine, one of the best v8's I've ever driven. Feels like it belongs in a bmw M or porsche. It has no business being in a truck though.

L86 All Terrain · July 16, 2016

^^ My friend though his 08 GT was fast too... He hates my truck now.

I think a 5.3L on E85 would run down a fiveoh. Stock, gas against gas, I somewhat doubt it. HP equals speed, torque gets you to that speed faster. Although the torque curve is ugly with the 5.0, I still think it would make enough up top to win, especially with a weight and gearing adv.