SVTdriver said:But don't worry like every other good chevy name. They'll bring it back in some form of fwd V6.
SVTdriver said:not to be negative or anything. But so far I haven't heard anything other than rumor and speculation on the camaro's return. But you may have better sources.I don't even look at the gto as competition. It's price puts it into cobra realm. And for that it's no competition. I have not seen anything confirming the charger either. just some concepts. I don't know about the solstice but I thought it was a small car. i do hope there will be more muscle cars around. Competition is good. But for me there is no choice. I will be buying a mustang. Hopefully in the Cobra flavor.
yellow5.0cobra said:YEA I agree, but its true.
Mustang was never REALLY a performer.
mp67 said:How can you say that? Maybe your too young to know. Boss 302, Boss 351, Boss 429, 428 Cobra Jet, 428 Interceptor, Shelby GT500 and KR500, 351 Cleveland. These were awesome performers in their time. Then came the phony gas shortage, smog laws etc. But once the 5.0 came back and from 85 to 92 the Z28, despite being consistently rated higher hp than the 5.0 could not hang. I had a 90 5.0 with a 5 speed that was rated at 225hp and I paid 13,500 for it in 1990. The Z28 at the time was rated higher at about 245hp and considerably more expensive, but that 5.0 would smoke em. Hell, the 5.0 aftermarket is still going strong as ever even though the last 5.0 was produced almost 9 years ago. Look at the magazine racks and count the number of mags that are still mostly 5.0 dedicated. When people say the Mustang was never really a performer, I wonder how much they really know about the stang's history.
poor GM, can't make a cheap effective chassis on their own.Z28x said:GM north America is working with Holden on a new lower cost RWD platform to replace the current GTO/Monaro platform. Pontiac has a 3 year deal with Holden to build the GTO. Then a new GTO will be built in North America after that (along with it's platform mate the Camaro). If you are interested in whats going on at GM check out the 5th Gen section of Camaroz28.com, lots of good info over there. GMInsidenews.com is good too.
Solstice will be smaller and RWD (think BMW 1 series size) no V8, but at least it is RWD.
Hopfully the Dodge Charger will be built, Dodge already has a RWD platform that can fit the hemi, THey just have to make it into a coupe.
Z28x said:GM north America is working with Holden on a new lower cost RWD platform to replace the current GTO/Monaro platform. Pontiac has a 3 year deal with Holden to build the GTO. Then a new GTO will be built in North America after that (along with it's platform mate the Camaro). If you are interested in whats going on at GM check out the 5th Gen section of Camaroz28.com, lots of good info over there. GMInsidenews.com is good too.
Solstice will be smaller and RWD (think BMW 1 series size) no V8, but at least it is RWD.
Hopfully the Dodge Charger will be built, Dodge already has a RWD platform that can fit the hemi, THey just have to make it into a coupe.
kirkyg said:.....But seeing what they did to the GTO...they'll probably base it on the engine transmission of a freaking impala.
Dont believe everything you hear...your going to be extermely dissapointed. Its sad to have to admit this but ford is the only automobile maker in american that still holding on to the rwd v8 platform. Noone else even cares about it anymore. In the long run they will profit from it too IF they allow technology to continue to be implemented in the mustang.
Again dont believe everything you hear...rwd v8 is all but dead other than what ford is doing in american atleast.
kirkyg
Omegalock said:...Case in point the current GT is as fast or faster than some Cobras from the 80s...
And it looks like an assy import...Z28x said:THe GTO has a Covette engine and Z06 spec tranny.
Caddy is American and is swithcing back to RWD, you can get the CTS with 400HP V8 and 6 speed Manual.
Quotes from GM please? Never seen or read it.Chevy has already said they will have RWD cars out in the next few years.
Yes i stated above its the "wagon" if you will. Looks like crap its heavier than most SUV's will be and is far from a true performance vehicle.Dodge is putting out a RWD Hemi V8 cars this spring called the Magnum
quotes please...again certainly not in the sports car category but if its true thats a start...Chryslers new 300C will have a RWD & a V8 and be out this spring.
Pontiac has said the Grand Prix will be RWD in 2007.
351CJ said:I also believe that the 4 valve heads will pretty much fade away. If you look at the 3V #'s on 87 octane gas 300 HP / 315 lb ft and then add about 5% if the compression ratio was raised to 10.5:1 for 91 Octane you have 315 HP & 330 lb ft which is essentially the same as the 2004 Mach 1 4 valve engine. Now throw into the mix that the 3 valve engine is lower cost to manufacture, smaller in size and lighter in weight, where does that leave the 4 valve heads?
QUOTE]
...what leads you to believe that 3v heads with VCT are cheaper to manufacture than the 4v heads? i would think VCT would be more expensive than the extra valve/cyl but i'm just guessing.
wouldn't it be cool if the put VCT on the current 4v mach1....can you say power under the curve?
-steve
sleeper89 said:351CJ said:I also believe that the 4 valve heads will pretty much fade away. If you look at the 3V #'s on 87 octane gas 300 HP / 315 lb ft and then add about 5% if the compression ratio was raised to 10.5:1 for 91 Octane you have 315 HP & 330 lb ft which is essentially the same as the 2004 Mach 1 4 valve engine. Now throw into the mix that the 3 valve engine is lower cost to manufacture, smaller in size and lighter in weight, where does that leave the 4 valve heads?
QUOTE]
...what leads you to believe that 3v heads with VCT are cheaper to manufacture than the 4v heads? i would think VCT would be more expensive than the extra valve/cyl but i'm just guessing.
wouldn't it be cool if the put VCT on the current 4v mach1....can you say power under the curve?
-steve
I have it on pretty good authority that VCT costs about $200 / engine (Ford V type), but should come down as volume goes up. The problem with the 4V is that it has 2 more cams, 8 more valves, 8 more valve springs, 8 more valve seals, 8 more valve retainers, 50 more lb, of aluminum, more oil passages to machine, more cam journals to machine, more cam retainer blocks and on and on and on. The 4V, 4 cam engines are considerable more expensive to manufacture than the 2 cam engines.
The 3V heads breath just about as good as the 4V heads do and they are physically smaller and lighter. The ONLY real advantage of the DOHC heads are that they could be implimented with more sophisticated VCT that allows separate cam timing variations between the intake and exhuast cams.
If Ford's future was in the 4V / 4 CAM engines, wouldn't they have come out with VCT on the 4 CAM / 4.6L engine first? Belive me, in the future you will only see the 4 CAM engines on Premium vehicles and special performance models.
kirkyg said:And it looks like an assy import...
Were talking about affordable rwd v8 cars...not 50k caddy's that are comparable to mercedes and bmw's.
Quotes from GM please? Never seen or read it.
Yes i stated above its the "wagon" if you will. Looks like crap its heavier than most SUV's will be and is far from a true performance vehicle.
quotes please...again certainly not in the sports car category but if its true thats a start...
I don't think the 4 valve weighs 50 lbsmore than the 3 valve. That's just too much weight to believe. I think there is a future for the 4 valve. After all the 3 valve is replacing the 2 valve. So effectively for at least the mustang and f-150 the 2 valve is dead. Besides that would be going backwards. While the 4 valve has more potential with vct and winds higher than the 2 valve and possibly the 3 valve. Not neccessarily would they develope the vct 4V first. Remember ford has not exactly had a banner year as far as profitability. And to spend the money on a premium engine instead of a large scale production engine just doesn't make sound finiancial sense. For example no smart company is going spend $1 million todevelope an engine they may sell 75k units versus the same amount on an engine they'll sell 200k+ of.351CJ said:I have it on pretty good authority that VCT costs about $200 / engine (Ford V type), but should come down as volume goes up. The problem with the 4V is that it has 2 more cams, 8 more valves, 8 more valve springs, 8 more valve seals, 8 more valve retainers, 50 more lb, of aluminum, more oil passages to machine, more cam journals to machine, more cam retainer blocks and on and on and on. The 4V, 4 cam engines are considerable more expensive to manufacture than the 2 cam engines.
If Ford's future was in the 4V / 4 CAM engines, wouldn't they have come out with VCT on the 4 CAM / 4.6L engine first? Belive me, in the future you will only see the 4 CAM engines on Premium vehicles and special performance models.
SVTdriver said:I don't think the 4 valve weighs 50 lbsmore than the 3 valve. That's just too much weight to believe. I think there is a future for the 4 valve. After all the 3 valve is replacing the 2 valve. So effectively for at least the mustang and f-150 the 2 valve is dead. Besides that would be going backwards. While the 4 valve has more potential with vct and winds higher than the 2 valve and possibly the 3 valve. Not neccessarily would they develope the vct 4V first. Remember ford has not exactly had a banner year as far as profitability. And to spend the money on a premium engine instead of a large scale production engine just doesn't make sound finiancial sense. For example no smart company is going spend $1 million todevelope an engine they may sell 75k units versus the same amount on an engine they'll sell 200k+ of.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?