Right but you are matching parts together that Ford did not intend on matching, at least they didn't build it. The compression ratio of a 3L with 2.5 heads is well over 11.5:1 from what I recall. That is a very high compression ratio for a car which is to rack up significant mileage, i.e. >60K. If it was 12:1 that would likely be not much different than what a blown 2.5 sees at boost. That is a load on the engine which exceeds production specifications, and that is precisely why I am curious to see how the engines hold up.
I personally think they'll be fine, as the bottom end of the SVT engine (is the vanilla duratec different save for lower compression?) is rather well built. However, better someone else to verify that it will last! Of course they get kudos for being the one to pony up the labor and $ to give it a try...
Originally posted by David Z:
yup
Originally posted by AirKnight:
[qb]emm... the reliability will only depends on how good the guy working on it. Afterall, it's just like rebuilding the 2.5 except using a 3.0 block, right?
Originally posted by ancosta:
[qb]FWIW, I say play with the 5.0, as long as your daily driver is running A-OK. Also consider that the 3L conversion is still an immature mod. It sounds like a really hot swap, but I'll call it a reliable swap once some guys rack 20K+ up on a 3L with SVT heads.
[/QB]
