: 1987 Brougham 5.0 vs. 1991 Lincoln Town Car 4.6



hillbillywood
10-11-08, 08:22 PM
If you compare a 1991 Lincoln Town Car with a 4.6L to a 1987 Brougham with a 5.0L, would the 5.0 Brougham feel underpowered? Any input is appreciated.
óJohn

Slacker
10-12-08, 05:07 AM
Are the engines stock or modified? I'm thinking, owning a 4.6L Towncar and having a 307 in my '82 Deville... it's a pretty moot conversion. They both get the job done. (It's only a difference of .4Ls...)

hillbillywood
10-12-08, 01:23 PM
Are the engines stock or modified? I'm thinking, owning a 4.6L Towncar and having a 307 in my '82 Deville... it's a pretty moot conversion. They both get the job done. (It's only a difference of .4Ls...)

They are both stock. I'm thinking of trading in my Town Car with 96K miles for a low-mileage Brougham. I love the power of the Town Car, and I'll be perfectly happy if the Brougham pulls that well. I'm not looking for anything fast, just dependable. Thanks.

Slacker
10-13-08, 02:18 AM
From what I just looked up (for a more numerical response..)

The 4.6L is around 190hp with 260lb-ft torque
The 307 is around 140hp with 255lb-ft torque

So basically you're really only looking at about 50hp difference. I still wouldn't use the word underpowered, I feel both do the job quite well.

hillbillywood
10-13-08, 08:28 AM
Thanks, Slacker.

N0DIH
10-13-08, 12:06 PM
Clarify the rpm if you can (hard to find on the 307)... If you could plot the curves you will see the 307 in most cases is probably more powerful. The 140 hp comes in around 4000 rpm and the 255 lb/ft torque comes in around 2800. The 4.6 will do it all much higher in rpm.

Which in turn, same weight, same gears, the 307 will probably be more enjoyable to drive all things being the same. Add some good gears to the 307 and a bigger cam and it could easily make more power and use it. Cam swap to the HO cam on the 307 was 180 hp and 245 lb/ft torque.


From what I just looked up (for a more numerical response..)

The 4.6L is around 190hp with 260lb-ft torque
The 307 is around 140hp with 255lb-ft torque

So basically you're really only looking at about 50hp difference. I still wouldn't use the word underpowered, I feel both do the job quite well.

hillbillywood
10-13-08, 12:16 PM
N0DIH, Thanks for the info. I'll be honest and admit that I don't know anything about the technical stuff. Your input is greatly appreciated.

óJohn

N0DIH
10-13-08, 12:28 PM
The 307 gets a bad rap for hp, but it isn't too bad really, just wrong engine for such a heavy car. And they coupled it with pathetic gears (to match the pathetic cam....) too. EASY simple cheap swap, swap in an axle from a HT4100 car. They are all 3.42's except for high alt cars, they are 3.73. They are the weak 7.5", which a lot of 307 cars have too. The 8.5" is much tougher, and I still find them regularly on car-part.com with 3.73's for good prices. Then add the 307 HO cam, do as much head port work as you can afford, duals and I would expect in the 220-230 hp range EASY. Get a modern grind cam and likely more power too.

The 307 may be a weak engine stock, but it wasn't made to be a power house. Still $ for $, the Olds 350 or 403 or 455 is a far better swap. But the 307 can be made to do pretty well in its own right. A 301 Pontiac was always the edge up on the 305 Chevy (the 301 HO Pontiac made 170 hp with essentially the 400 220 hp cam in a 301, very mild really, and heads, well if you saw them a joke...., the L69 HO 305 Chevy with roller cam and a fairly stout cam only made 165), so a 307 Olds can do very good if done right. The heads are the curse, and 80-84 307 heads are decent. Toss them on with larger valves (watch the bore! The 307 is a 231 sized 3.8" bore, they shared tooling), but never ever tell me that a small bore engine can't run, ask any 4.8/5.3/5.7 Gen III v8 owner if they run good with a small bore. The key, air in and air out.

Sorry if that is a tangent on your question, but some info there to fill in why the 307 is what it is....

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-13-08, 11:55 PM
In simpler terms (no offense N0DIH, your technical knowledge never ceases to amaze me), the 1991 Town Car will WALK all over a 307 Brougham in a drag race. I think the Town Car weighs less too....maybe by only a 100 lbs or so, but it's got 50 more hp, and another 5 lb/ft of torque, not to mention much more precise fuel management that's also much more driver friendly when it comes to throttle calibration/managment. The 307 Brougham does 0-60 in 13-14 seconds, the 4.6L Town Car does it in the mid 9's.

N0DIH
10-14-08, 10:58 AM
I personally haven't driven a 4.6L at all, in any shape, but how is the 4.6L in low end daily driving putting around power? The 307 is decent there, my 85 Cutlass with 2.14 gears and a THM200C trans did amazingly well for only 140 hp.... And to boot, 27.3 mpg best highway....

Agreed the 4.6L is light years ahead of the 307, but I do feel the 307 can be made to run good, but in all honestly, it isn't financially worth it, for the money, get a stronger engine like a 350, 403, 455, or go LT1 or better yet, 5.3L with DOD/AFM. Throw old school behind....

brougham
10-18-08, 12:18 PM
It sounds like youre interested in both so just test drive some and see what theyre like for yourself. Youll probably notice a big difference tho.

N0DIH
10-18-08, 02:02 PM
Yup, if I hadn't bought my FW, a sharp TC came up after from a friend of mine's dad who works at a Toyota dealer (#1 sales guy, drives a Lincoln not a Toy...)

hillbillywood
10-20-08, 08:58 AM
It sounds like youre interested in both so just test drive some and see what theyre like for yourself. Youll probably notice a big difference tho.

Actually, I would like to trade in my '91 Town Car Cartier on an '87 Brougham. My Town Car runs well, but has a lot of miles and needs some things fixed. The Brougham has very low miles and is in mint condition. The Town Car is a great car, but I want something a little less used, and I want a Cadillac for my daily driver.