3.8L vs 3.9L

megax29 · **3.8L vs 3.9L**

I got a 2004 3.9L auto and was wondering what the changes were between mine and 3.8L. If I am right 3.9L is the volume of oil that runs through the engine. If there's 3.9L in one that means I got .1L more running through mine than the 3.8L meaning it's bigger, doesn't it. I really don't know and that's why I'm writing, see if someone can correct me.

megax29 · 07-20-2004, 03:25 PM

Most say there's no difference in performance, but I wonder why wouldn't there be if engine is bigger.

n8r · 07-20-2004, 03:37 PM

From what I have read, there really isn't a difference of size, Ford just rounded up more. So there really is no difference between them.

STEVE · 07-20-2004, 03:59 PM

its pretty much the same .1l makes no difference

Laser02 · 07-20-2004, 04:01 PM

3.9 has more stroke.

It has nothing to do with the volume of oil running through your engine. The volume of oil is in your owners manual. I believe it's 5 quarts.

ttpancakes · 07-20-2004, 08:53 PM

Someone told me here, that it had to do something with ford making a freestar that had the same engine in it, so they had to swap it out so it wouldnt be the same. Also the main improvments that american cars do is bigger so there was bound to be a bigger engine in this year after the 3.8 mustangs after awhile.

Funky4.6VERT · 07-20-2004, 09:01 PM

I work for Ford and they sent us a special memo stating that it had blah.blah.blah reasons for making 3.9L but none of the reasons had any performance benefits. All of the Ford plants in the world have assembly lines that with a few clicks of a button can produce any vehicle in the Ford lineup...kinda cool! Basically it is easier and more cost effective to run the 3.9L in the Freestar AND Mustang instead of 3.9L Freestar and 3.8L Mustang...especially since they are basically putting the explorer v6 in it next year. a temporary solution for production issues between vehicles.

Ted

ttpancakes · 07-20-2004, 10:26 PM

Makes sense to me, although now instead of just racing with other cars we can put freestars in the mix. alllrriiiggghhtt.

Laser02 · 07-20-2004, 11:12 PM

Prior to 04 Freestars could own V6 mustangs?

Scuba · 07-20-2004, 11:56 PM


Quote: Originally Posted by Laser02 Prior to 04 Freestars could own V6 mustangs?

hahaha Id lovvve to see that.

Danger Dude · 07-21-2004, 06:58 AM


Quote: Originally Posted by Laser02 Prior to 04 Freestars could own V6 mustangs?

If it is basically the same engine with no performance gains why would a heavy Van own a stang. the 3.8-3.9 in our mustangs has been offered in just about every car or van ever made by Ford.

Please think before typing.

Laser02 · 07:29 AM

Our cars are not exactly light. The 500lb difference can be made up in so many ways its not even funny.

n8r · 07-21-2004, 11:03 AM

lol my 88 cougar had a 3.8 in it, man i miss that thing

Danger Dude · 07:28 AM

Well thanks for the compliment

we might not be light but we are at least 500 lbs lighter and way more aerodynamic. The only way you are going to make that up in a van with the same HP is to put a nitrous kit on it or force the mustang to add 500 lbs and make it drive in reverse!!!! Not to mention the van has front wheel drive and has not nearly the gearing for acceleration.

Funky4.6VERT · 07-21-2004, 11:17 AM

Freestars Rule!!!
J/K Ive sold many of both and would have to say a v6 stang is no slouch
50%car/50%driver

Laser02 · 07:29 AM


Quote: Originally Posted by Danger Dude Well thanks for the compliment we might not be light but we are at least 500 lbs lighter and way more aerodynamic. The only way you are going to make that up in a van with the same HP is to put a nitrous kit on it or force the mustang to add 500 lbs and make it drive in reverse!!!! Not to mention the van has front wheel drive and has not nearly the gearing for acceleration.

But 04 Freestar could still smoke those POS pre-99s.

They also have 264lb-ft of torque@3650. Compared to the mustang's 225. It wouldn't be hard to get one to outrun a mustang.

Funky4.6VERT · **Freestar What?**

not to throw a stick in the discussion
3.9L Freestar V6 193 Hp @4500RPM/ 245TQ @3500RPM
4.2L Freestar V6 201 Hp @4250RPM/ 263TQ @ 3650RPM
3.9L Mustang V6 193Hp @5500RPM/ 225TQ @ 2800RPM

Freestar Curbweight:4263-4396lbs
Mustang Curbweight:3070lbs

Info Straight from the Ford Sourcebook

Laser02 · 07-21-2004, 11:57 AM

That weight of the mustang is entirely incorrect.

Funky4.6VERT · 07-21-2004, 12:07 PM

Ford States Bas Model Curb Weight (Approx. Lbs.) 3070 coupe 3254 conv.
asterisk #3 states base model with manual transmission, gt model with manual is 3317 coupe and 3429 convertible.

This is the info Ford gives dealers directly to train off of and research our products. if it is totally incorrect it is none of my doing.
Don't Shoot The Messenger, Man!

Ted

Laser02 · 07-21-2004, 12:24 PM

Maybe it's without any fluids. I've seen v6 stangs weigh closer to 3450 and 3700 with the convertible.

Danger Dude · 07:28 AM

Well look at the torque when it is available the torque comes up quicker by a 1000 RPM not to mention the Mustang is 2000 to 3000 lbs lighter

I dont know why you think a ford van would outrun a stang and please dont start a pre99 war. My 98 before my mods toasted a couple of vans that thought like you and your thinking is diffinately way off base!!! Where in the world have you ever seen a mustang weigh 3700 pounds unless it had dead bodies in it.

STEVE · 07-21-2004, 12:45 PM


Quote: Originally Posted by Danger Dude My 98 before my mods toasted a couple of vans

you mean to tell me a sports car can beat a van when racing no thats un heard of.

laser how the hell could you think a free star could beat a stang.