You are here:
Auto News >
Ford's new 3.5-liter V6 rated at 265 hp

Ford's new 3.5-liter V6 rated at 265 hp

Posted Apr 12th 2006 3:27PM

CommentsAdd

Ford Motor announced today that its all-new 3.5-liter V6 engine has been officially SAE-rated at 265 hp on 87-octane regular grade fuel. According to Ford, this positions their new powerplant above the competing FWD V6 units offered by GM, Chrysler, Nissan and Honda.

The new engine will power the Ford Edge (shown) and Lincoln MKX crossovers when they debut this fall, as well as the Lincoln MKZ sedan.

Even more power is on tap for the future - the V6 was designed from the outset to be compatible with direct injection and turbocharged direct injection technologies. Specs after the jump.

[Source: Ford]

Ford 3.5-liter V-6 - Technical Specifications

Type
    3.5L DOHC 24-valve V-6

Manufacturing Location
    Lima Engine Plant, Ohio

Configuration
    60-degree V-6, aluminum block and heads

Intake Manifold
    Composite, split plenum

Exhaust Manifold
    Cast iron

Crankshaft
    Forged steel

Redline
    6700 rpm

Throttle Body
    65mm, electronic

Valvetrain
    DAMB, 4 valves per cylinder, intake variable camshaft timing

Valve Diameter
    Intake: 37mm Exhaust: 31 mm

Pistons
    High temperature cast aluminum alloy with low-friction coated skirts, low-tension rings

Connecting Rods
    Cracked-powder metal

Ignition
    Pencil coil

Bore x Stroke
    3.6 x 3.4 in/92.5 x 86.7 mm

Displacement
    213 cu in/3.496 cc

Compression Ratio
    10.3:1

Horsepower
    Ford Edge & Lincoln MKX - 265 @ 6250 rpm
    Lincoln MKZ - 263 @ 6250 rpm

Horsepower per Liter
    75.7
    75.1

Torque
    250 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
    249 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm

Recommended Fuel
    87 Octane

Fuel Injection
    Sequential multiport fuel injection

Oil Capacity
    5.5 quarts, with filter

Recommended Oil
    GF4, 5W-20

Category: Sedan, Technology, Crossover, Ford

Ford

2013 Ford
Ford Sedans
Ford SUVs
Ford Vans

Ford Cars

Add a Comment

Sign in »

37 Comments

Filter by:

rizzo

I'm just curious why no one yet has brought reliability ratings on the table.

Forget horsepower, I want to know how reliable this engine will be down the road.

Anyone has any thoughts on Ford engines?

May 09 2006 at 11:06 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

stuart

It seems there is someone being left out...
Chrysler. In 1999 Chrysler had a 3.5 liter V6 in a number of their front drive vehicles capable of 253 hp and 250 lb/ft of torque on 89 octane fuel. This is a full 3 years before Nissan was able to achieve 255 hp out of their 3.5 V6 with premium fuel. I own both a Maxima and a 300M and as far as refinement goes, the Nissan wins. But, I must say, a 300M is quite an enjoyable large car.

April 25 2006 at 5:26 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Christian

I love the fact all the hitech and top trim level import engines (the ones with the horspower they are marketing so hard, and we hear about endlessly) need PREMIUM. Talk all you want about specific output, some of these cars EAT gas. My 05 stang GT uses 87 octane ONLY, so my fill ups will always be less $$$ than a G35/350Z, and with nearly the same frequency.

April 13 2006 at 7:31 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Fabulo

Amazingly long discussion about ONE number. Peak horse power.

That's what the marketing dept likes I guess. "My car has 4 more HP than yours, it must be better."

HP for an engine is just as good as megahertz for computer. "how fast does it spin?"

I'm more interested in how much peak torque do I have available? at what RPM? "how hard does it push?"

What's even more interesting is a chart with a torque curve, this is a much better indication of how an engine will feel. But I guess the marketing department doesn't really want to show me that chart. They just want me to know that their engine spits out a trillion HP, excactly 2% more than the competitors.

April 13 2006 at 6:05 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Riker

A followup point about engines and innovation - my 1994 Taurus SHO has a Yamaha-sourced 3.0L which kicks out 220hp at it's 7000+ RPM redline. The engine itself actually tested out successfully at speeds over 8500 RPM (which would then have raised its peak HP figures a bit), but the production version kept a lower redline to protect the belt-driven accessories under the hood. But still, in production trim it was flirting with 75HP/liter as well, thanks heavily to the F1 racing technologies Yamaha had experience with.

My point? This engine was developed before, and released by, 1989.

***Note: the fact that my car is a Ford is purely coincidental... I'm not giving Ford any credit beyond knowing who to buy an amazing engine from***

April 13 2006 at 12:56 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Kevin

About time they have a new power plant, using the some old tired technology over and over becomes the usual. Lets hope they didn't go cheap on the one, cause we will have to deal with all the recalls, extra work for trying to save a buck.
Kevin NYC.

April 13 2006 at 10:08 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Pete

There's also the GM High Feature 3.6 which has been around, in different applications, for the past 3+ years. Previously, they quoted 255hp; I see that, for the Outlook, they're quoting more than 265hp on two variations. Interestingly enough, they're talking about an "XR model (signified by a dual exhaust) puts out 267 hp and 247 lb.-ft. of twist..." while "the lesser single-piped XE is close behind, with 265 hp and 244 lb.-ft. of torque."

Why they haven't propagated this engine to more models (The Buick Lucerne uses the ancient 3800 as it's base engine, for *my* Pete's sakes!) is beyond me... I know it's got to be relatively expensive but it would be much more competitive and the economies of scale might actually bring down the cost. Instead, they have their High Value V6 family (which, in my line, "Value"="Cheap"; not a good thing)... GM may be the only company I know of with so many different engine families in the same basic range of displacement & applications (3800, HV6, HF6, the Chinese built 3.4 in the Equinox, etc.); This is symptomatic of part of their problem. They need to streamline... off the soapbox.

April 13 2006 at 9:04 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Pete

I'll add my 2-cents on the Honda/Acura bit...

If you look at this current generation of H/A V6 (to my knowledge, by the way, sourced exclusively from Honda of America Manufacturing's plant in Anna, Ohio for GLOBAL application), one thing that few people talk about but is, in fact, one of the more interesting technical details; It's an SOHC architecture. Remember, one of Honda's philosophies is "Simplicity" (hence the fact that their engines, per a previous posting, are really bullet-proof over the long haul and under extreme use). SOHC architecture allows for a smaller, lighter package (and, relatively speaking, lower cost). Though I don't know what the current state of the art is, when this engine architecture was introduced (original CL and 1998 Accord), it enjoyed a clear advantage over then-current Nissan & Toyota 3.0L V6es in terms of package, weight, power.

As for the M3's 3.2L L6, that may be true but, in that case, we're talking about a hand-built M-technic engine, similar to what Honda did with the Integra Type R engine (110+ hp/L); So far, Honda hasn't done a similar V6. The NSX was hand-built but the engine, in that case, was 15 years+ old, based on an even older basic architecture.

I REALLY like BMW L6es (and hope they never go the Mercedes route in replacing them with V6es) and I think there's room for both Honda & BMW to be applauded for their engine prowess. In fact, I always hoped they'd work together to do a 4-cylinder for the MINI (remember, they both, at different times were deeply involved with Rover); THAT would have been FANTASTIC!

April 13 2006 at 8:49 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

blt

In regards to comment 26. Honda/Acura is not the champ of high revving engines, that honour goes to BMW. Their M3 has a 3.2L inline 6 making 333 hp (and higher in special limited versions). What's more is this engine makes more torque than the Acura 3.5L in the RL and at a lower rev.

As for comment 27, I think we will see more rear wheel drive vehicles in the future if power and torque keeps increasing. GM has stated they will bring out a new rear wheel drive platform and Chrysler has been doing very well with their rwd platform in the past few years.

April 13 2006 at 2:55 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Muhammed

Brian, thanks for the enlightenment. I suppose I never really thought about why the VQ can make more power in a RWD application. Your explanation makes perfect sense.

It's nice to see Ford catching up, but I believe that's the problem with Ford as well as GM. Instead of playing catch-up they need to lead. They were able to do it once, and I believe they can do it again if they make the right decisions. This new engine is a step in the right direction.

As for the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr, i'm disappointed at Ford's decision to build these high volume bread and butter cars in a plant outside of the US. My understanding is that these cars are based on the Mazda6, which is built in Michigan (MazdaSpeed edition excepted of course). It should have been entirely possible to build the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr in Michigan as well.

April 13 2006 at 2:47 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply