• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

Ford Godzilla Crate Engine

ssray

Full Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
679
Loc.
South Central NE
Just noticed this post from 2020 below. Maybe C delayed Megazilla?

 

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
Just noticed this post from 2020 below. Maybe C delayed Megazilla?
The Megazilla is supposedly a twin turbo. While that should mean even more hp than a supercharger, the supercharger would be better-suited to most Bronco drivers.
 
Last edited:

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
I just put my 427 long block up for sale; planning on going with a naturally aspirated Godzilla, probably around 600 hp, for now. I could go higher hp but want to keep as much low end torque as possible as this is still a street Bronco that will spend most of its offroad time in the rocks.

Before I do irreversible damage by selling my new engine, someone please explain why this is a bad decision. The drivetrain is already built to handle much more power than this (fully built 6R80, Atlas Pro 3.0, upcoming 609s with 5.43 HP10s and 40 spline 300M shafts). The Godzilla would bolt directly to the 6R80 and not only give me another 70 hp at the flywheel (with the ability to go higher), but remove the Speed Gems adapter that would likely leach another 30 hp at peak.

Certainly there will be clearance issues to work through, especially with my HP10 in the front. Aside from the increased cost, why shouldn’t I do this, given my goal of a reliable trail/street rig that is fun to drive in all conditions?
 
Last edited:

Broncobowsher

Total hack
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
35,392
Probably need a new 6R80 case to put your good parts in. Bellhousing pattern is different.
 

reamer

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
1,249
Why go through all that, when Edelbrock makes the Pro-Flow 4? real fuel injection (not a crap sniper on Fitec) Bolt on intake and go.....
I installed Pro-flow in less than 12 hours....
 

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
I spoke with a guy at PBH Performance who told me that the 10R80s aren’t holding up to the abuse their customers put them through. I’ve always heard the 6R80 is stronger, but it sounds like the difference is larger than I expected. Part of this could be because there are currently more parts available to beef up 6R80s at this time.
 
Last edited:

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
With the aftermarket balancer the overall length should no longer be the limiting factor. still wide but doable, fender mods are way easier than firewall mods. I can say from experience swapping "other" engines in bronco's that a cowl hood will cover it with no body lift. 2" body lift and it should clear a stock hood just fine.
Which aftermarket balancer are you referring to? Is it part number 918073 by ATI Racing? I’m trying to find a pulley system that will support my hydroboost brakes and a big alternator, while fitting inside the engine bay. I’m looking at CVF Racing’s system, which uses this balancer. Does the balancer you’re referring to shorten the length of the engine?
 
OP
OP
Jmjuhl

Jmjuhl

Newbie
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Messages
89
Loc.
Cypress, Texas
Which aftermarket balancer are you referring to? Is it part number 918073 by ATI Racing? I’m trying to find a pulley system that will support my hydroboost brakes and a big alternator, while fitting inside the engine bay. I’m looking at CVF Racing’s system, which uses this balancer. Does the balancer you’re referring to shorten the length of the engine?
Indy Power Products referenced the aftermarket damper in their diagrams, which is the ATI damper. I think that diagram also included their water pump (off a 93-95 T-Bird I believe)...which fits on their billet timing cover...with their serpentine setup...which works with their oil pan...yada yada. That is where it got expensive...great that one vendor has a solution but its about the cost of another crate engine to make it all work. Probably worth a call to them to better understand it.
 

Yeller

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
6,653
Loc.
Rogers County Oklahoma
Indy Power Products referenced the aftermarket damper in their diagrams, which is the ATI damper. I think that diagram also included their water pump (off a 93-95 T-Bird I believe)...which fits on their billet timing cover...with their serpentine setup...which works with their oil pan...yada yada. That is where it got expensive...great that one vendor has a solution but its about the cost of another crate engine to make it all work. Probably worth a call to them to better understand it.
This was my reference as well
 

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
It’s a good compact system, but it’s expensive, as you said. If you’re looking to shave a couple of inches off the bottom of the oil pan sump, Danbury has a much cheaper, though still expensive, solution that modifies the original pan. It also has an optional oil cooler delete and oil filter relocation if pan width is a concern.

https://danburycomp.com/product/ford-7-3l-godzilla-shallow-oil-pan-kit/

The Indy pulley system and the CVF system appear to use the same damper, but the Indy uses the grooves on the damper ( and the CVF attaches a pulley to the end of the damper. They both appear to protrude about the same at the damper, but the Indy pulleys are in tighter.
 
OP
OP
Jmjuhl

Jmjuhl

Newbie
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Messages
89
Loc.
Cypress, Texas
417 Motorsports also makes a shallower pan as well...designed for the Fox Body mostly.


Just saw this video this morning...Gumby is starting a 7.3 Godzilla swap on 77 using a Mars pull out...guessing they are using the Mars modified control pack to run the 10R80 as well. This will be a fun one to follow along with.
 

blubuckaroo

Grease Monkey
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
11,795
Loc.
Ridgefield WA
Has anybody mocked one of these up in an EB to see if it will fit. I know the height is an issue but can be solved with shorter aftermarket intake and oil pan. Already being addressed by mustang guys cramming them into Fox bodies and such. It's narrower than a Coyote and weighs close to a WindsorÂ…I would think the biggest issue would be core support to firewall distance and radiator clearance but on the surface it looks close.

430HP/475 Torque make it very comparable to a 408 Stroker crate motor from Blueprint and builds power down low.
The Godzilla is going to make the Coyote obsolete on a Bronco.
 

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
9,237
It's a good start. Ford and more important after market is working on intake that fits and all the other issues.

Or a lot less money, just build a 408 In a few years, when there is more support, it will be a good viable option otherwise.

I agree that the Coyote was overrated. After the first install.

it still is for what it gives you, Unless it has a blower
 

hossbronco

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
361
Last I heard, Gumby was still working through some issues. I’m not sure which controller he’s using, but the oil pan and exhaust manifold where two of the issues he initially had. He modified the exhaust manifold and I think he went with the KMF oil pan.

I’m planning on using the OBR controller and the Quick 6.

While I think the Godzilla is a much better choice than the Coyote, I’m not sure I see it becoming more popular in the EB. (The 2nd Gen is a different story.) There are so many shops built around the Coyote and many of the new owners don’t prioritize low-end torque or ease of maintenance/repair. Most people don’t even know the Godzilla exists. I do think it will become a popular option for those who want more than what the Coyote has to offer though.
 
Last edited:
Top