I don't think Ford was ever known for their strong transmissions; mostly the rears, I think.
The 05 and up had the 3650, I don't know what the previous years used. I think t45 but I'm sure I'm wrong I just pulled that one out of the air. All I can say is if we're getting 400 HP and TQ soon then we're gonna need a transmission to hold up. The 6 spd Tremec in the '03 Cobra would suffice unless their's something better nowadays.
360 FTLB Tq is Crankshaft Rated BTW..
A friend of mine put heads and Cams on his 2007 GT and put 391 RWHP and 358 RWTQ thats more than 400 Crank Tq and he destroyed his 3650 in 5000 miles and 10 passes at the 1320. He is converting over to a 6060 this week. Here is the link to Dyno sheets and here is a link to his build
I finally killed my 5R55S with 320RWHP and 330 RWTQ so these are weak too.
The 05 and up had the 3650, I don't know what the previous years used. I think t45 but I'm sure I'm wrong I just pulled that one out of the air. All I can say is if we're getting 400 HP and TQ soon then we're gonna need a transmission to hold up. The 6 spd Tremec in the '03 Cobra would suffice unless their's something better nowadays.
I don't think Ford was ever known for their strong transmissions; mostly the rears, I think.
What do the Roush cars use? Their 427R is making much more than 360 hp.
Based on the acclaimed ROUSH Stage 3 Mustang, this version is slightly less in content but includes 100 percent of the fun factor. The 427R horsepower package is highlighted by the intercooled ROUSHcharger* system which adds 115 horsepower and 65 lb-ft of torque to the base Ford 4.6L, 3-valve V8 powertrain system. The additional power upgrade comes via a ROUSH-engineered ECM calibration which has been specially-tuned to work in harmony with the different exhaust system used on the vehicle.
The mustang needs it's very own platform instead of borrowing one from a family sedan.
The car is just too big to began with. Owning both an sn95 and a s197 I can tell you I would much rather have the sn95's dimensions and weight. I don't need better ride quality and handleing if I have to add weight to get it.
Once you start adding larger motors, brakes, FI, intercoolers, etc, to an already fat ass car you end up with a REALLY fat ass car. I'll bet a DOHC 5.0 '11 will go right around 3700 lbs. Too heavy. The termi cobras weighed 3600 + but they had a supercharger/intercooler and beefier brakes,etc.
I love the retro s197 design and the 3v 4.6 but I would have rather had it on the sn95 platform. Maybe that's just me.
And what Ford would say is that it's not cost-effective to have a new platform for a single vehicle.
If I recall, Ford has a habit of keeping the Mustang on outdated platforms. It wasn't until 2005 that they replaced the Fairmont's platform. By that time, that platform was probably nearly 25 years old. The platform in use now is off of that Lincoln MKS or whatever it was called, and it's "only" about 13 years old.
I don't know what the problem is. The import cars pick up slight weight gains, but for some reason, every domestic gains 300 lbs with every generation. The Nissan 370Z actually lost 200 lbs, while picking up updated safety equipment and better all-around performance. I'm stumped as to why the domestics can't do the same.
The S197 platform is loosely based off Ford's DEW98 platform used in the Lincoln LS, and was originally designed to ride on the DEW Lite platform, however, production would have been more expensive. The DEW98 platform consists of 4 wheel independent double wishbone suspension whereas the S197 platform consists of macpherson struts and a solid axle = less money to build. The Mustang is the only car that rides on the S197 platform, and it is technically "new" since 2005, because the DEW platform was modified so heavily that there are few carry-over parts.
The SN95 platform was first used in the Mustang in 1979, so yes it was 25 years old, and this platform was shared with over 10 different cars, but after 1992, the Mustang was the only car still used on this platform, and as we all know 2004 was the last year for the Fox platform.
Honestly, having owned both, the S197 rides and handles much better than the SN95. And the 2010 really didn't have any significant weight gain over the 2005-09 Mustang, so when the drivetrain and brakes are upgraded that will be where any extra weight comes from. The 370Z is a great vehicle, but it's more of a niche vehicle being that it only has 2 seats and doesn't have a price range from 22k to 48k. And being that the 370Z is only a 2 seater with a V6, I'd say even it is heavy for its size tipping the scales at over 3,200 lbs, but it's lighter and smaller therefore more nimble.
Then it can be argued that Porsche 911s are only "niche vehicles" also, and they're 2-seaters. The 997 Turbo weighs in at 35xx lbs. The Lamborghini Gallardo weighs in at 35xx lbs. The Lamborghini Murcielago weighs in at 3900-4100 lbs. The Bugatti Veyron weighs 4400 lbs!
They should keep the 4.6l instead of going with a 6cyl with 315hp and add the 5.0 to the lineup. Otherwise its going to be expensive to own a 8cyl mustang.
Well then I'll sleep better knowing my Mustang isn't the only fat girl in the club
Isn't the 4.6L aluminum?
2011 Ford Mustang specs hit the Web
This link states the 2011 mustang kept up with the BMW M3, despite having a 200lb weight DISAdvantage. The BMW weighs 3704Lbs....Yikes..the Mustang may tip 3900Lbs !!
BMW M3 Specs
2010 BMW M3 Coupe - Specifications, Pictures, Prices
The 5.0 may very well be lighter, I have heard speculation of being 25-50 lbs lighter but can't remember where i read that info. It can be lighter simply because it is a whole new design. Using current finite element analysis on computers designs, material can be shaved off the block where not needed to save weight without sacrificing strength. However, i expect it to gain 50-100 lbs total on the new car. Still 3600lbs with 400 hp, I could live with that
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?