Ford Barra experts

fsbjjwillamina

Well-known member
The barra seems like the 4.9's final form.

I don't hate that people are doing custom crossflow heads for the 4.9 but it seems like the barra is a maxed out inline 6 platform.

It has DOHC, variable valve timing, cop ignition, sequential fuel injection and solid bottom end. Stock long block can reportedly handle 600-700 hp and the only reinforcement needed is the head studs and valve springs. That seems remarkably affordable.

Who here has experience with the barra? What has your experience been?
 
Ok, So they kept the bore spacing for the SBF6.

What would the function difference be in doing that? I see what you are saying now but I'm curious why you would choose one bore space over another?
 
Ok, So they kept the bore spacing for the SBF6.

What would the function difference be in doing that? I see what you are saying now but I'm curious why you would choose one bore space over another?
Weight, size, displacement range required, production line recycling, etc. Ford even used some of the old tooling to make the HSC 2.3 pushrod four (2/3 of a 200-6) engine when they couldn't up 2.3 OHC production to use in the Tempo. AU didn't make any 300s
 
Weight, size, displacement range required, production line recycling, etc. Ford even used some of the old tooling to make the HSC 2.3 pushrod four (2/3 of a 200-6) engine when they couldn't up 2.3 OHC production to use in the Tempo. AU didn't make any 300s
similar to how Toyota did 3SGE from the 2jz?
 
The S predated the JZ by 10 years, and the JZ was an evolution of the M inline six, but there are plenty of other examples from 153/230 Chevy, BMW 4/6, Volvo, Ford's "Modular" despite not evolving beyond 8/10 versions, ad nauseam.

Ok. The 2.4 thrift power is the first and the barra is the last. Thank you
 
Ford Australia stuck with the six right till the end of production, it started out as direct copies of the old 144/170 six, bore spacing and bolt pattern from my knowledge never changed. Almost everything else did! The answer would have been cost, to change bore spacing in the production machinery would have been costly, so why do it. the 144 had about 65 honest BHP, the last iteration the Barra, had nearly 270 (195kw). Ford never made a 4 cylinder version of it, we had mostly British engines in Escorts, Cortinas, and later Mazdas.
The six was used in the F100, but F250s and the D series truck had the 300ci six, it had torque, but fuel consumption was awful. Sales fell off as the Japanese trucks with good Diesels became affordable. Ford here did make copies of the Cleveland in Geelong, it was a 351 and 302ci, they all had the small valve heads, which didnt seem to slow them down at all.
6 cylinder engines were the most popular by far here, all the big manufactures had them, they were pretty good overall, V8s did sell quite well in the GM product, we did have a localy made GMH V8 for a while, it did perform quite well, Repco made a F5000 engine out of it, Phil Irving again.
We also had GMH use the Nissan RB30 engine for a while, its still used in turbo form quite a bit. Interesting?
 
I’ve always been jealous of what you got over there by way of the barra, and 335 options.

It’s so interesting to dig this deep into an engine because it’s like you can visualize yourself at the meetings discussing why they should or shouldn’t make a change.

I help some manufacturers improve their production processes via their boiler system. To think about reasons as to why they would stick with something so seemingly arbitrary as bore spacing is really interesting. It makes total sense if they had different manufacturing plants with different production capabilities and different tooling set ups.

Variability seems to be the way to go in terms of capturing maximum engine efficiency. To see something as mechanical as the original 144 evolve into its maximum state of potential is amazing.

Those engineers back then were probably chomping at the bit to have variable cam timing, DOHC aluminum cross flow heads, COP ignition, EFI, Dynamic engine management systems that have adjustable fuel and ignition delivery.

There’s almost nothing else I can see that can possibly be done on this platform unless we can address variable bore and stroke lol.
 
Found this treasure trove:

Check it out. the nissan VQ series DOHC engines have a bore spacing of 4.409". I called a machine shop today and talked about cutting 2 heads and mating them together and he's all for it. The best part is the VQ heads flow great in stock form.
1719857178774.png
1719857199921.png

I spent hours researching this last night. I finally found a head that I think will work. Nissan and toyota already have 4.5L twin cam I6's that are running crazy power. The TB48 is almost the same bore and stroke as the 4.9 but smaller bore spacing (3.799).

You'd have to run a dry deck and plumb the coolant to the sides of the head but you would only have to have 4 ports total. 2 in and 2 out for it to be liquid cooled. The camshafts would be the hard part. A channel on youtube called Buildityourself made a DOHC V10. They had a brilliant way to line bore it and they were able to find a person to make the cam. I bet that same guy who made their camms would make cam for this.

I think this is possible. I know "with enough money anything is possible" but this might actually be a viable blueprint. There is a huge aftermarket for the VQ and there's no shortage of 300 blocks. This engine would have everything. It would essentially be a BBB (Big Block Barra).
 
Back
Top