I will retract the statement of the block design issue and change that to the bottom half was not designed for forced induction.
too late....... but I will agree with you on that.... And yes I will concur that most engines will handle forced induction regardless of the internals (just a matter of time when the internals fail). I should have thought more carefully about the SVT development of the 4.6L engine since ford had been in developing the engine block borrowed from the Lincolin. At that time Ford also was working on the IRS and it took about 5 years before it made it into the Cobra. There was an article from MM&FF called super stallions which had some of the Cobra concepts and most if not all of them had superchargers. So you are correct
the Teskid block was designed with forced induction in mind at the time of concept but the internals were not. Blame it on EPA for not seeing a supercharger earlier in the SVT cobra. It is obvious that Ford went to Iron for the terminator block due to the cost factor involved. Forced induction if planned for in block design regardless of material used will reduce the amount of block failures (cracks in cylinder walls, cracks in valley and so on). Since forced induction places more stress on the parts including the block. If the terminator can survive 800hp or more with forced induction and stock internals, it is more than just the internals that make it possible.
__________________
2004 SVT Cobra, Silver, February 2004
SVT Build # 2485 out of 3768
SLP Loudmouth Cat-back
UPR double lock firewall adjuster
UPR GMS extreme double hook quadrant
Wheels: Ford SVT 10th anniv. wheels (track duty)
SVE 10th anniv. style 17x9F, 10x10.5R
BBS RK Plasma 18x8.5F, 18x10R (retired)
(retired) 2001 black SVT Cobra, October 2001
missed but not forgotten
