|
|
Post by wireless on Apr 29, 2012 9:33:03 GMT -6
Sorry if this has been stated somewhere - but it's just something I've been wondering..
Do the Aurora motors have their own cam, specifically for the 4.0?
Or do they have the VIN 9 (275hp cam)?
If I was to do a swap, and we have our own cam's, I'd likely go for the VIN 9 for the low end, but that's just me lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc on Apr 29, 2012 10:00:35 GMT -6
All Aurora 4.0s have the same cams as the 275 HP Northstar. The Shelby Aurora 4.0 has the cams from the 300 HP Northstar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blacky Bulger on Apr 29, 2012 10:32:47 GMT -6
So we could make a hybrid Shelby 4.0 with just a cam swap from a 4.6???   |
|
|
|
Post by genone on Apr 29, 2012 13:25:28 GMT -6
No, you would just make a 4.0 with lower torque. I hate this "Shelby" stuff. There is no such thing as a Shelby motor!
|
|
|
|
Post by renaldo0613 on Apr 29, 2012 15:20:51 GMT -6
No, you would just make a 4.0 with lower torque. I hate this "Shelby" stuff. There is no such thing as a Shelby motor! Then you need to talk to "shelbyracing" a member of ours who has a Shelby in his Aurora right now. The only member of this forum to have one. |
|
RCA1186
Administrator 
Rob
Go Pack Go!
Posts: 4,853 
Staff Member
|
Post by RCA1186 on Apr 29, 2012 16:25:56 GMT -6
No, you would just make a 4.0 with lower torque. I hate this "Shelby" stuff. There is no such thing as a Shelby motor! Yes....yes there is..........well not shelby produced, but shelby modified "In stock form, the Aurora's DOHC V-8 produces 250 horsepower at 5600 rpm and only 260 pound-feet of torque at a relatively lofty 4400 rpm. Not a lot of grunt for a Shelby sports car, even one that weighs only 2650 pounds. To build in an additional 70 or so ponies, Shelby's engineers have stretched to the limits all that can be done to a stock motor without changing displacement or adding a supercharger. Basically, that means new camshafts, a computer chip, a freer-flowing intake manifold, headers, Delphi high-flow catalysts, and a low-restriction Borla stainless-steel exhaust system with 2.25-inch pipe and twin XRI mufflers. The sound is spot-on perfect, with a muscular burble at idle and a '60s rasp to the pipes when you're really legging it. Final power figures haven't been established, but we're told to expect somewhere around 320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm." Read more: www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sports/112_9811_shelby_1_series/viewall.html#ixzz1tTG5jgQ4Then you need to talk to "shelbyracing" a member of ours who has a Shelby in his Aurora right now. The only member of this forum to have one. He's not the first/only member to have done it either haha |
|
|
|
Post by renaldo0613 on Apr 29, 2012 16:48:11 GMT -6
My bad lol. I should have said that I know of.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on Apr 29, 2012 18:36:21 GMT -6
Was just thinkin'  only if the Autobahn Aurora had Vin 9 cams ;D that would have been bad Then it would in fact be an almost everyday Aurora engine, & we would have what the Seville does. An Aurora GT.. With factory tuned computer.  |
|
|
|
Post by wireless on Apr 29, 2012 19:12:05 GMT -6
zzz i just hate how little bottom end torque these motors have..
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on Apr 29, 2012 23:59:59 GMT -6
Basically, that means new camshafts, a computer chip, a freer-flowing intake manifold, headers, Delphi high-flow catalysts, and a low-restriction Borla stainless-steel exhaust system with 2.25-inch pipe and twin XRI mufflers. The sound is spot-on perfect, with a muscular burble at idle and a '60s rasp to the pipes when you're really legging it. Final power figures haven't been established, but we're told to expect somewhere around 320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm. That sums it up! Basically, it is a stock AURORA(not Shelby) motor that Shelby has added performance parts to that WE CAN NOT GET!!!!!!! The chip(the Series 1 runs on an LS PCM), intake, headers, exhaust, everything that makes that extra 70hp, can not be done to our cars. So this Shelby nonsense is just that, nonsense. Shelby cars use our motors, we do not use theirs and we can not use the modifications they used to make that extra power. The Vin 9 cams can be added to our cars but we will lose torque due to the smaller displacement and we can not utilize the top end power without having our car tuned, which I am finding out is very hard to do. |
|
|
|
Post by nelson480 on Apr 30, 2012 0:04:52 GMT -6
"320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm"
Thats like, no lower end power...
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on Apr 30, 2012 0:11:47 GMT -6
Only gotta worry about that 1/2 way through first gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on Apr 30, 2012 3:55:10 GMT -6
"320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm" Thats like, no lower end power... And remember, we redline at 5900rpms. We can't even get to where that car made its most power. |
|
|
|
Post by Marc on Apr 30, 2012 7:28:58 GMT -6
"320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm" Thats like, no lower end power... And remember, we redline at 5900rpms. We can't even get to where that car made its most power. The 2G is redlined at 6500. Isn't the Classic redlined at 6200? |
|
|
|
Post by renaldo0613 on Apr 30, 2012 8:06:35 GMT -6
And remember, we redline at 5900rpms. We can't even get to where that car made its most power. The 2G is redlined at 6500. Isn't the Classic redlined at 6200? That's what I thought it was for the classic. |
|
|
|
Post by wireless on Apr 30, 2012 15:39:40 GMT -6
I've never seen my classic go above 5900.
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on Apr 30, 2012 19:32:33 GMT -6
Yeah our true top RPM is 5950. The tach is typically a little over excited and reads a little more than what we are actually turning.
|
|
RCA1186
Administrator
Rob
Go Pack Go!
Posts: 4,853
Staff Member
|
Post by RCA1186 on May 1, 2012 14:28:43 GMT -6
Basically, that means new camshafts, a computer chip, a freer-flowing intake manifold, headers, Delphi high-flow catalysts, and a low-restriction Borla stainless-steel exhaust system with 2.25-inch pipe and twin XRI mufflers. The sound is spot-on perfect, with a muscular burble at idle and a '60s rasp to the pipes when you're really legging it. Final power figures haven't been established, but we're told to expect somewhere around 320 horsepower at 6500 rpm, and 290 pound-feet of torque at 5000 rpm. That sums it up! Basically, it is a stock AURORA(not Shelby) motor that Shelby has added performance parts to that WE CAN NOT GET!!!!!!! The chip(the Series 1 runs on an LS PCM), intake, headers, exhaust, everything that makes that extra 70hp, can not be done to our cars. So this Shelby nonsense is just that, nonsense. Shelby cars use our motors, we do not use theirs and we can not use the modifications they used to make that extra power. The Vin 9 cams can be added to our cars but we will lose torque due to the smaller displacement and we can not utilize the top end power without having our car tuned, which I am finding out is very hard to do. Just saying, they do exist, and you can get the motors with the vin 9 cams that shelby modified lol |
|
|
|
Post by sall on May 1, 2012 15:50:44 GMT -6
I have to agree with genone. It's an Aurora motor modified by Shelby. So, if I change the cams myself do I have a 'Shelby'? No. I have modified Aurora motor.
|
|
RCA1186
Administrator
Rob
Go Pack Go!
Posts: 4,853
Staff Member
|
Post by RCA1186 on May 1, 2012 17:31:59 GMT -6
I never said it was a shelby made motor lol, i said it was modified by shelby
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 1, 2012 17:50:39 GMT -6
If you had a 5.4 modded to Ford GT spec would you call it a Lincoln Navigator motor that was modified?
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 1, 2012 17:52:41 GMT -6
While I still would agree to call the engine in a Shelby Series 1 a modified Aurora engine, I don't see it not fitting to say my engine was a Shelby motor, or modified to what the Shelby Series 1 used. It is just easier and simpler to say it was a Series 1 motor. Esp. to people who do not understand what cams are or modifying an engine really means.
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on May 1, 2012 18:53:59 GMT -6
If you had a 5.4 modded to Ford GT spec would you call it a Lincoln Navigator motor that was modified? No you call it a Ford Mod motor. When is the last time you heard about an MG 4.6 Mod motor? You won't because even though they lightly modified Ford's venerable 4.6 SOHC to use in the MG cars, it was still called a Ford 4.6 SOHC. Not an MG engine. The modifications Shelby made to the Aurora motor are null and void on our cars. Lets just say you do manage to find a Shelby intake, get the car running on an 0411 PCM, run a Shelby spec exhaust and figure out a way to mount a T56 sideways to our front wheels, you still don't have a Shelby engine. You have an Aurora engine with a couple Shelby parts. That is like me putting a Summit stage II intake, exhaust and carburetor on my 350 and calling it a Summit Stage II engine. It just isn't, its a small block Chevy with some bolt ons. An example of an engine modified to truly be something different is a Nascar engine. I have the extreme fortune to know Awesome Bill From Dawsonville(Bill Elliot) and have personally turned a wrench on a former Nascar engine. Those things are SICK. Full dry sump, mechanical belt driven fuel pump, knife edged billet or forged crank, super crazy billet cams, the works. Bill offered to sell me a Dodge Busch Series engine for about 8 grand and, something I seriously, seriously regret not buying, his Dodge Intrepid Winston Cup road course car. Symmetrical suspension(not jacked up on the right), still had tire circles on the fender. He only asked me 20k, which is a steal. It is nearly impossible to find a fairly current Car for sale, it is impossible to find one for 20 grand and is completely unheard of for a road course car. I met him through his plane mechanic. His mechanic needed some performance insight on his Lincoln Aviator and called my company, who forward all of those calls to me. After explaining we could use Mach 1 parts and I could tune it with my SCT software, I went to meet him at his hangar. Saw a bright red plane there and asked about the story, he told me it was Bill's and explained he did all of Bill's aviation work. One thing led to another and come to find out Bill has a shop in North Georgia that was rarely used, complete with a chassis dyno and stocked full of tools. It also has a plethora of former and current Nascar parts. I had to cover my pants walking through the place, just too much excitement to contain. He has a private runway behind the shop as well, with lots and lots of rubber laid down it. Wow^^ Serious digression there. Sorry! |
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 1, 2012 19:34:25 GMT -6
Well I agree to disagree on the manner people can call things what they want. If I pulled a motor from a Vette most would say it was a Vette motor, or you could call it an ls.. Whichever it technically may be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blacky Bulger on May 1, 2012 21:05:24 GMT -6
I should have never said the word "Shelby"  its an easy reference!!! a 4.6 swap would be more suitable.... Even if we put vin vin y cam we would still have little to no torque?
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 1, 2012 21:22:12 GMT -6
More displacement= more torque. It is easier to reference the series 1 than tell em what is done. Although I always explain to people that it was originally designed for an Aurora n it was such an awesome motor they swapped cams for high rpm power cams so it would go faster and have more power.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 1, 2012 21:35:58 GMT -6
I tell people that actually know about cars everything I know about it though lol. Some don't care, most are intrigued esp about the awesome IRL Modded motor. Which really is pretty much its own motor. Totally different. And the Cadillac LMP.
The Aerotech actually had the cam modded motor first but not on a production vehicle. It was tached to 7,200 rpms.
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on May 2, 2012 6:27:20 GMT -6
Remember that Wikipedia articles are written by the people who read them. Anyone can adjust what they say. And no, you don't say Vette motor. You say LS1, LS6, LT4, LT5, etc. People who say "Vette motor" are the kind of people who have no earthly idea what they are talking about and probably tell people they don't know what all the mods are because whoever had it before them must have done "serious" internal work. If you knew how many idiots troll around telling people they have a "swapped" Honda when all they have is a hot air intake and fart can you would piss yourself. And chances are telling people you have a Series One motor makes them think even less of you. Most of them don't know what a Series One is so they assume you are talking out of your rear end because your engine looks and performs identical to all other Auroras, and those who do know what the car is know that it simply used an unmodified Aurora motor(sans the bolt ons).
I have owned 6 Shelby vehicles, all of them Dodge, and never called the engines Shelby engines. One was a Dakota, one Durango and the rest were GLH-S cars. All had much, much more extreme modifications than the Series One Aurora motor. The GLH-S cars were turbo, intercooled vehicles with serious suspension tweaking and weight saving. One engine I refer to as a Lotus headed engine was the TIII in my Spirit and Iroc R/T cars. While they used a Chrysler block(heavily modified) they used a Lotus head and cams, forged pistons, rods and crank, DIS(first time it appeared on a Chrysler vehicle) and balance shafts. That was one factory Chrysler engine that I referred to as a Lotus headed engine.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbyracing on May 2, 2012 8:17:15 GMT -6
My research goes beyond Wikipedia, that is merely a good starting source.
It also does not perform identical to other Aurora's.
|
|
|
|
Post by genone on May 2, 2012 9:12:18 GMT -6
Does according to your tach out. I already showed that. Power bands are identical, time to redline is identical, redline itself is identical. I can post the video again.
|
|
only if the Autobahn Aurora had Vin 9 cams ;D that would have been bad 
its an easy reference!!! a 4.6 swap would be more suitable....