And now... a completely hypothetical question...

351CJ · Jul 6, 2004

TomServo92 said:
I don't believe that is correct. I currently drive a 2004 Mazda 6 with the 3.0 V6. Everything I've read about this engine states it's developed from the Ford Duratech block with the intake and heads being Mazda designed pieces. To the best of my knowledge there is no relationship between the old Mazda V6s (like the ones that powered the Probe GT, Millenium, and 929) and the current Ford Duratech family.

You are correct, that is the Mazda 3.0 V6 is based off of the Ford Duratec. It uses modified heads and variable cam timing to get 220 HP.

The Duratec block really gets around. Here are its variants:

1. Original Duratec 3.0 V6 as used in Taurus / Sable.
2. 2.5L Duratec V6 used in last Cougar, Contour & Mystique.
3. 3.0 AJ V6 Jaguar engine, special heads and VVT give it 235 HP
4. Lincoln LS 3.0L V6, higher compression & VVT give it 232 HP
5. Aston Martin 6.0L V12, is essentially 2 Duratec 3.0 V6's stacked end to end rated 444 HP.
6. As mentioned above, 3.0L Mazda 6 V6, 220 HP.

ElCid2006 · Jul 7, 2004

Boss 302 using the 302 Cammer, shaker, lowered and tightened suspension, retro interior like the Bullitt and Mach 1's, and a stripe package similar to the '69 Boss. I would place the performance and price between the GT model and the SVT.

351CJ · Jul 7, 2004

ElCid2006 said:
Boss 302 using the 302 Cammer,

Except the 5.0 Cammer is actually 305 CID (304.7834 CID to be exact)

calypsocoral302 · Jul 10, 2004

351CJ said:
Are you on drugs?

Doing an all new inline 6 would probably cost more than the whole 05 Mustang development budget. No way would it fit inside the S197 stang either.

Actually, Ford Australia uses a turbo-charged 4.0L 6-banger in their Falcon. See this article from Car and Driver http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=26&article_id=8210

Merely dropping it into the new Mustang would be an improvement, but it could probably use a bit of a design revision, seeing as how our emissions standards are pretty strict.

Ever since I drove an Altezza, and an M3, I've been hooked on inlines.

SVTdriver · Jul 10, 2004

calypsocoral302 said:
Actually, Ford Australia uses a turbo-charged 4.0L 6-banger in their Falcon. See this article from Car and Driver http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=26&article_id=8210

Merely dropping it into the new Mustang would be an improvement, but it could probably use a bit of a design revision, seeing as how our emissions standards are pretty strict.

Ever since I drove an Altezza, and an M3, I've been hooked on inlines.

So we should do the reverse of the GTO? An american car with an australian engine.

calypsocoral302 · Jul 10, 2004

SVTdriver said:
So we should do the reverse of the GTO? An american car with an australian engine.

LOL! Yeah, I see what you mean. Though I think Ford would be able to give it a good, clean overhaul without too much trouble. Most of Global Ford's engine designs are pretty modular. If ya boost the power up to around 260-270hp, it might make a formidable powertrain for just about anything based on the DEW 98 (Lincoln LS, Ford Thunderbird, 2005 Mustang). If you strap a turbocharger onto it, as per the Falcon, it'll give you 320hp on regular unleaded...

Also, SVTdriver, you pointed out that using the "Cougar" name might not be the greatest of ideas for a Mercury sportscar... so, what do you think of the "Cyclone" (reference: Mercury musclecar based on the old Montego)?

SVTdriver · Jul 10, 2004

Couple small problems. Mustang is not DEW 98 anymore. It was too expensive. And after many attempts to get it cheaper. They redesigned it from the ground up. The real question about increasing the hp on the V6 is. How much would you pay for it then? Just looking at cars with that amount of power. Many are $26k and up. And with the lighter weight of the V6. You might end up competing with the gt. This was tried before and failed. So I don't think we are ever going to see that again. Now if you were to drop that into a limited edition focus or something small. That would be a tuner killer.

Cyclone would be another cool name. But might be a little too aggressive sounding. I mean look at what car names are anymore. G35/M3/IS300/LS/. None of those names really has any history as a name so to speak. The M3 is the only one with real history.

351CJ · Jul 10, 2004

SVTdriver said:
I have heard rumor that the 4.0 is going away.

This subject came up over on Brad's site. Brad got an e-mail from a Ford engineer in Cologne Germany where the 4.0 - V6 is made. Here is a summary of what the Ford engineer said:

1. The 4.0 V6 puts out a lot more HP than the 202 HP in the specs (or is it 208, or is it 210, it keeps changing). IIRC the # he threw out was >220 HP.

2. He has heard nothing about the 4.0 -V6 going away. In fact there are active engineering projects to upgrade and improve the 4.0 V6.

3. There is a HP increase in the works for the 4.0 - V6 as used in the Mustang for either 2006 or 2007.

Cosworth · Jul 10, 2004

for those of you who want a SIX banger.

for went about it all the wrong way with the cologn 4.0 liter. they should have brought in the AUSSIE inline six 24 valve! it would pass emissions and uses the same tremec tranny as the GT V8. this engine also come in turbo charged variant down under.

just a thought

SVTdriver · Jul 10, 2004

Cosworth said:
for those of you who want a SIX banger.

for went about it all the wrong way with the cologn 4.0 liter. they should have brought in the AUSSIE inline six 24 valve! it would pass emissions and uses the same tremec tranny as the GT V8. this engine also come in turbo charged variant down under.

just a thought

Do you by any chance know if there is a difference in price between the I6 and the 4.0? That could have played a part in the decision.

brandon_lawson7 · Jul 10, 2004

SVTdriver said:
Do you by any chance know if there is a difference in price between the I6 and the 4.0? That could have played a part in the decision.

Considering that the I6 is built Down Under it would take a few more $$$ to import it here. Not sure how much more it be to put it into the 05's but actually id like it (for a six banger ).

SVTdriver · Jul 11, 2004

But would you buy it over the gt?

351CJ · Jul 11, 2004

Cosworth said:
for those of you who want a SIX banger.

for went about it all the wrong way with the cologn 4.0 liter. they should have brought in the AUSSIE inline six 24 valve!

Considering the length of the I6, it is doubtful that the 05 stang could meet the US crash requirements with it. A Ford engineer told me that V6s were preferred over I6s in RWD cars because the cars could be made shorter and still pass the crash / crumple zone requirements.

And don't tell us to just make the stang longer, we already went through 5 threads of people bitching about how the 05 stang is already too long.

The bottom like is that Ford really doesn't need a high performance 6 in the Stang, because it has a 300 HP V8 available and will have higher HP V8's in the future.

brandon_lawson7 · Jul 11, 2004

SVTdriver said:
But would you buy it over the gt?

No id have the GT over the V6 anyday of course.

SVTdriver · Jul 11, 2004

brandon_lawson7 said:
No id have the GT over the V6 anyday of course.

No I mean the I6 that you were talking about. Would you buy that over the gt. Because if you wouldn't. Then you are on a list of many people who would rather have the gt then a mroe powerful 6 cylinder. Which means there is no real market for a more powerful 6.

NewPony'05 · Jul 12, 2004

And a "Drag Pak" with 4.10s, beefed-up rear, rear-seat delete, drag radials, 6-sp... did I miss anything

ram air hood would be nice, and look tight

brandon_lawson7 · Jul 12, 2004

SVTdriver said:
No I mean the I6 that you were talking about. Would you buy that over the gt. Because if you wouldn't. Then you are on a list of many people who would rather have the gt then a mroe powerful 6 cylinder. Which means there is no real market for a more powerful 6.

Oh i see. Yeah i would buy the GT over a more powerful 6 cylinder. Your right there really isnt a market for a better 6 i really never thought of that. After all the 6 is more of a base model for the stang. Glad you cleared that up for me.

SVTdriver · Jul 12, 2004

I had to think about it myself. I think the 6 might have even bteter weight distribution. But I realized that I just can't see myself with a 6cylinder.

351CJ · Jul 12, 2004

A while back someone posted an interview with John Coletti (head of SVT). The subject of a high performance 6 cyl. Mustang came up. Coletti said the market for a hi-po 6 cyl Mustang was so small that it made absolutely no sense do make and try to sell one.

Again, if the Mustang didn't have a V8 then it would need a hi-po V6, but since you can get plenty of V8 HP in your Stang, there is no need for a performance V6,

brandon_lawson7 · Jul 12, 2004

SVTdriver said:
I had to think about it myself. I think the 6 might have even bteter weight distribution. But I realized that I just can't see myself with a 6cylinder.

Me either

And now... a completely hypothetical question...

351CJ

New Member

ElCid2006

Member

351CJ

New Member

calypsocoral302

New Member

SVTdriver

calypsocoral302

New Member

SVTdriver

351CJ

New Member

Cosworth

New Member

SVTdriver

brandon_lawson7

New Member

SVTdriver

351CJ

New Member

brandon_lawson7

New Member

SVTdriver

NewPony'05

New Member

brandon_lawson7

New Member

SVTdriver

351CJ

New Member

brandon_lawson7

New Member

Similar threads

And now... a completely hypothetical question...

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency