SVO Thunderbird

superdadsc said:
Simply AWESOME!!!!!!!
Would love to see that at WOT and 9K!
Click to expand...

This is how most people view the SVO V6 engine - as an all out drag racing screamer, but the truth is that the beauty of the design is not in its racing form. 9000rpm is an interesting concept, but the maintenance and hardware required to do that and live is another story. 9000rpm engines need valve springs replaced every 20-40 1/4 mile passes and they are as liable to shoot parts out the bottom as they are to live to race another day. There are some V6 SVO motors running in NHRA Super Stock if you really want to experience a 9000+rpm SVO.

The beauty of the SVO V6 is in the fact that it is built like our V6's would have been built if Ford didn't have budgets and emissions regulations to contend with. It has a priority main oiling system, 4.0" bore, a billet steel cranskshaft, and cylinder heads that will stay on pretty much no matter what. The ports are not gigantic and yet flow is exemplary. The entire engine is a model of efficiency and design intelligence. It will make an excellent street motor with rock solid durability and a torque curve that doesn't quit. The beauty of this engine build is not so much it's extreme nature as it is in it's simplicity and effectiveness.

It is my opinion (and only my opinion) that Ford actually intended for people to put these motors into street cars and have fun with them. Why people never really did is a mystery to me.
 
Then I will revise my statement. Would love to see it at WOT at 7k!

I think this is really cool what you and Dave are doing. If I had the funds I would have bought that other engine but I am over my head with the two I have got. What else is new! To have a six that can be built for the street and put out the power that it will put out regardless of the final number is crazy. It is a shame that they are so rare and hard to find.

I personally would rather be driving a car on a road course like Road Atlanta than a 1/4 mile strip any day of the week. I would love to get a SC on a course but they don't seem to be built to handle that type of driving. A svo on the other hand would be would be a nasty combo plus the shock in people eye's when they hear it is a six would be priceless!

Lunch and beers are on me if I could just go for a ride in it.

Best of luck with your build!
 
Last edited:
XR7 Dave said:
The beauty of the SVO V6 is in the fact that it is built like our V6's would have been built if Ford didn't have budgets and emissions regulations to contend with. It has a priority main oiling system, 4.0" bore, a billet steel cranskshaft, and cylinder heads that will stay on pretty much no matter what. The ports are not gigantic and yet flow is exemplary. The entire engine is a model of efficiency and design intelligence. It will make an excellent street motor with rock solid durability and a torque curve that doesn't quit. The beauty of this engine build is not so much it's extreme nature as it is in it's simplicity and effectiveness.
Click to expand...

Sweet... Now that sounds like money well spent. It should be a fun ride!
 
XR7 Dave said:
This is how most people view the SVO V6 engine - as an all out drag racing screamer, but the truth is that the beauty of the design is not in its racing form. 9000rpm is an interesting concept, but the maintenance and hardware required to do that and live is another story. 9000rpm engines need valve springs replaced every 20-40 1/4 mile passes and they are as liable to shoot parts out the bottom as they are to live to race another day. There are some V6 SVO motors running in NHRA Super Stock if you really want to experience a 9000+rpm SVO.

The beauty of the SVO V6 is in the fact that it is built like our V6's would have been built if Ford didn't have budgets and emissions regulations to contend with. It has a priority main oiling system, 4.0" bore, a billet steel cranskshaft, and cylinder heads that will stay on pretty much no matter what. The ports are not gigantic and yet flow is exemplary. The entire engine is a model of efficiency and design intelligence. It will make an excellent street motor with rock solid durability and a torque curve that doesn't quit. The beauty of this engine build is not so much it's extreme nature as it is in it's simplicity and effectiveness.

It is my opinion (and only my opinion) that Ford actually intended for people to put these motors into street cars and have fun with them. Why people never really did is a mystery to me.
Click to expand...

All great points. I think that the main reason that Ford didn't put the 4.5 SVO into major production is because of what you mentioned.....budgets and emissions. High performance cars generally do not sell well enough on their own to make their existence viable. If it weren't for the multitude of 4 and 6 cylinder Mustangs, the higher performance ones wouldn't make enough money.....it is probably the same thing with the SC's as well, seeing as that Ford had already gone $900 per car over budget to build an SC with lots of power, luxury and forward thinking things like IRS at the time.

To draw a parallel, Shelby had said that the AC Cobra experiments and the cars themselves had lost a ridiculous amount of money, but Ford had wanted some presence on the race track, so the monetary losses became more easy to atone to the company. I'm thinking that the 4.5 SVO was much the same way.....in order to get it approved for widespread street use, they likely would have to run a detuned and neutered version of it for emissions.....and insurance purposes. The rumors about Ford purposely restricting the exhaust on the SC's--as to whether that's true or not as an intention--you have to wonder if it is true for emissions purposes or whether it was mainly so as to not compete widely with their Mustangs and 5.0 engines. If the 4.5 V6 did that much better than the 5.0, then you wonder if it wouldn't have made the 5.0 redundant. I guess we'll see with the new Mustang turbo 4, whether it sells well enough as a mid level option over the base 305 HP Mustang. I'm thinking that it may split its vote, and we may see some pretty unreliable 4 cylinder turbos with people intentionally voiding their warranty.

Sometimes I wonder, as well, whether Ford didn't assume that people would run on 87 octane in the SC engines. I would imagine that they were pretty aware of the nature of people accidentally running lower octane or just not caring about those types of things. I suppose that they certainly had to allow for some margin of error for things (ie: bad gas as well, also driving the cars as daily drivers in the dead of winter or in very hot climates), so they'd made some concessions with the performance of the supercharged 3.8. Roadworthy and reliable engines always seem to have some compromises to them. I'm kind of surprised that we don't see more blown headgaskets or messed up engines, just in terms of the heat and detonation that are inherent in the nature of a high performance engine. That's why I wonder if the 4.5 SVO was just considered as not being worth the headaches. I was watching a history of the Chrysler turbine engine recently, and they'd gone through massive troubles to meet emissions standards and had spent over 100 million on experiments, I believe....and decades of research as well.
 
Emissions could be a concern, but I wonder if parts commonality and cost weren't the real problems keeping the SVO out of common production.

What I like about it is that it's so much like a production engine, but BEEFY. Like what a gearhead would dream up to put in their street car. :)
 
Cost..The only reason it was produced was due to nascar series rules at the time. There was no market otherwise for this when you can go v8. Also Sc guys like to think the Tbird was detuned not to compete with the mustang. It was all about making it quiet, no resonation. It wasn't a sports car and would need a heck of alot more than an exhaust to compete with a lightweight stang which didnt even make the same power. There is not one exhaust that I have ever heard with aftermarket components that is nearly as quiet as the stock system. Im all about keeping the v6 in an SC however because that makes it unique. If I were to do it again Id definitely go SVO. For high hp it just makes sense. Im real curious to see what the procharged svo engine will do.
 
Last edited:
I think cost would have played a large part in why this engines were not more widely accepted. I don't have any of the matching price sheets but I'm sure the cylinder heads and crank shaft would have been way up there in price.
 
Cost would be the reason the SVO never made it to mass production. The quality of the castings alone vs. the mass produced SC castings shows a considerable amount more was spent. The cylinder heads by far are in no comparison.

The knock sensor is there for a reason and running lower quality fuel then required it will protect the engine to some extent. So they did anticpate the lower quality fuel.
 
XxSlowpokexX said:
Cost..The only reason it was produced was due to nascar series rules at the time. There was no market otherwise for this when you can go v8. Also Sc guys like to think the Tbird was detuned not to compete with the mustang. It was all about making it quiet, no resonation. It wasn't a sports car and would need a heck of alot more than an exhaust to compete with a lightweight stang which didnt even make the same power. There is not one exhaust that I have ever heard with aftermarket components that is nearly as quiet as the stock system. Im all about keeping the v6 in an SC however because that makes it unique. If I were to do it again Id definitely go SVO. For high hp it just makes sense. Im real curious to see what the procharged svo engine will do.
Click to expand...

You're likely bang on with this. Making the SC quiet was undoubtedly a huge factor in the T-Bird. I was considering aftermarket mufflers that would keep it on the quiet side, but the aftermarket ones always make it louder. Oddly enough, I swear that after I'd put 94 octane in it, that the exhaust was deeper and throatier...I could barely hear it at idle.
 
rzimmerl said:
Cost would be the reason the SVO never made it to mass production. The quality of the castings alone vs. the mass produced SC castings shows a considerable amount more was spent. The cylinder heads by far are in no comparison.

The knock sensor is there for a reason and running lower quality fuel then required it will protect the engine to some extent. So they did anticpate the lower quality fuel.
Click to expand...

Ford put a knock sensor in the SC's? Does it automatically adjust the timing to advance it when there's 93 or 94 octane in the car?

Sorry if it seems like i'm threadjacking this, guys.....as a new SC owner, i'm pumped!
 
Yes, there is a knock sensor on a 3.8 SC.

I don't think the SC was ever meant to surpass the Mustang. This car is much like the Challenger of today, a grand tourer. It is too bad Duffy is like a cloud to the club right now as I'd be curious if ever during his discussions with the MN12 engineers if the 4.5 SVO was mentioned. Given the photo I posted up a Ford Engineer at some point must have at least dreamed of the idea.
 
1FSTBRD said:
Ford put a knock sensor in the SC's? Does it automatically adjust the timing to advance it when there's 93 or 94 octane in the car?

Sorry if it seems like i'm threadjacking this, guys.....as a new SC owner, i'm pumped!
Click to expand...

It doesn't detect fuel, it detects "knock" in the engine to pull timing to keep from destroying the enigne.
 
1FSTBRD said:
Ford put a knock sensor in the SC's? Does it automatically adjust the timing to advance it when there's 93 or 94 octane in the car?

Sorry if it seems like i'm threadjacking this, guys.....as a new SC owner, i'm pumped!
Click to expand...

This would be the definition of high jacking a thread. Start your own thread if you have a question about something other than the SVO Thunderbird build.
 
As long as we are pontificating as to why the SVO wasn't more relevant in street applications - lets not forget that we are talking about a 6 cylinder. Coming from the big block V8 era, anything short of 8 cylinders was considered a weakling. Sure the turbo K-cars and Ford turbo 2.3L were being explored, but the SVO Mustang also suffered the "its not a V8" syndrome.

The rush of FWD 4 banger econoboxes throughout the 90's (along with some potent imports) have helped make the under V8 crowd more socially acceptable, but even the triumphs of the Buick Grand National probably weren't enough to make something like the Ford SVO V6 a popular option.
 
On any given day you can find a GN with a racing block in it running at a dragstrip or pulling into a car show. That you can't find an SC with one anywhere is what puzzled me. I never expected that Ford would have mass produced the motor, I already said it was too expensive and not mpg or emissions friendly. That Ford didn't put it in a production vehicle is totally a dead issue. That the SVO block never got any street press at all is what I think is a bit odd, that's all. It's not that exotic that it couldn't be used in a street vehicle any day. If I had been in a different financial position back in the 90's, I'm quite sure I would have done it. I had visions of it at the time, but no way to make it happen.

I never expected or suggested that it be popular, just that it's odd no one did it.
 
I saw one a few years ago.

XR7 Dave said:
On any given day you can find a GN with a racing block in it running at a dragstrip or pulling into a car show. That you can't find an SC with one anywhere is what puzzled me. I never expected that Ford would have mass produced the motor, I already said it was too expensive and not mpg or emissions friendly. That Ford didn't put it in a production vehicle is totally a dead issue. That the SVO block never got any street press at all is what I think is a bit odd, that's all. It's not that exotic that it couldn't be used in a street vehicle any day. If I had been in a different financial position back in the 90's, I'm quite sure I would have done it. I had visions of it at the time, but no way to make it happen.

I never expected or suggested that it be popular, just that it's odd no one did it.
Click to expand...

There was a guy running one in a 32 hi boy around the cruise shows but I have not seen or heard of him for a few years now. It was crazy with a tunnel ram sticking over the hood and making all kinds of noise.. That is why I wanted to ask Tom where he got the one he was selling. There is also a 96 T-bird with SVO marking on it that was always sounding different than anything else but he would NEVER open the hood on that thing. He had it to one car show that I was at and never opened the hood...Don't know to this day what was under the hood but it did move when he left the show.....Rich
 
XR7 Dave said:
I never expected or suggested that it be popular, just that it's odd no one did it.
Click to expand...

NO, but you said it was somewhat of a mystery as to why the SVO never caught on in the street scene. I just pointed out that a "hot 6 banger" wasn't ever that catchy. The GN sure nailed it, but you'll notice that it lived a somewhat isolated and infamous life. I only mentioned the GN to show that it couldn't help usher people away from the V8 mentality - at least in the 1980's where something like the SVO V6 could have made a cool street motor (no offense to Tom). I still think it is cool - but those days are long gone as Tom has illustrated in his parts search.
 
The only reason it was ever built was to compete in the (then) NASCAR Busch Series, running V-6s with a max displacement of 4.5L. It was always intented as a circle track engine. Once NASCAR wised up that it was just as (or more) expensive for teams to build a fleet of V-6s as it is to build a fleet of Cup engines with lower compression and less carburation, they moved on and the rest is history. Tom's project is cool as heck and great job Tom! But really, when people back then could spend equal amounts of money on a SVO V-6 or SVO V-8; the V-8 is a clear choice. It is the underlying reason our Super Coupes are not popular performance cars: no V-8.

It really should not be any surprise why the 4.5L engines never really made it into the hands of anyone other than Roush and Yates who HAD to run them in Busch. Every bit of architecture benefit of the SVO V-6 was also a trait of the SVO V-8s of the era, and you get two more slugs.

Again, Tom; in keeping with the era and intention of the Super Coupe you have a cool project. Well done and I hope you enjoy the hell out of it.
 
IMO is real obvious people think ANY V8 > than ANY V6. I get it all the time at work where people can't believe that a SC is faster than BBC were in the 60-70s--even showing them time slips doesn't dissuade them. Plus look at the MN-12 people couldn't handle an T-brid/Cougar without a V8 even when the SC was faster and made more power.

SVO was a NASCAR only engine plain and simple.

Then the MN-12 was introduced in a down economy (remember Desert Shield/Storm and people complaining about $1.00 gas), and SC didn't sell well because of cost and then you add an other engine option to that wasn't going to happen, see the AWD SC.

Great project and I'd love a EFI SVO engine but I can't justify the money, nor do I have it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top