Bigger V8 from Ford

Scot_94GT · May 29, 2004

If the 4.6L 3v doesn't outperform LS1 f-cars (which it probbably won't) then there are going to be a LOT of gloating GM guys, and even more dissapointed Mustang loyalists. A Camaro SS is a mid to low 13 second car, and in some rare cases, they even break into the 12's. I would fall out of chair if I saw a stock Mustang break into the 12's. Modding is usually not an option for people if they want to keep their warranty, other than mild bolt on's like exhaust, pullies, K&N etc.

Don't get me wrong, 300hp in a stock Mustang GT would be a quantum leap for me (with my 215hp 5.0L ) but a 281 V8 just seems puny. I don't know...I guess I'm just a low-end-torque kind of guy....and that only seems to come form bigger engines, or roots-supercharged cars.

Bragging rights come in more forms than just timeslips. Engine size is big deal for alot of people too. Remember back when GM had the Cyclone, and the SS454? The Cyclone, with its turbo 4.3 V6 was faster, but IMHO, the big block SS454 was cooler

01MachGT · May 29, 2004

Scot_94GT said:
If the 4.6L 3v doesn't outperform LS1 f-cars (which it probbably won't) then there are going to be a LOT of gloating GM guys, and even more dissapointed Mustang loyalists. A Camaro SS is a mid to low 13 second car, and in some rare cases, they even break into the 12's. I would fall out of chair if I saw a stock Mustang break into the 12's. cooler

03/04 cobras are breaking into 12s consistently. You can't compare a Camaro SS to a Mustang GT.

SS compares to Cobra
Z28 compares to GT

Silentst2000 · May 29, 2004

I could see a 5.4L 3 valve that puts down 375 hp in a shelby mustang model and then slap a supercharger on it and call it a cobra for about 450-500hp for the mustang. They could just take the ford GT engine and drop it in the cobra. Take the supercharger off it and put it on the shelby mustangs and leave the 300hp gt alone.

Would a supercharged 5.4L even fit in a mustang? I'd think clearances would be extremely tight and not even possible.

SVTdriver · May 29, 2004

Z28x said:
That is correct, the Ford GT was built to be a Halo car, and a damn good one it is. High end Mustangs like the Cobra and Mach 1 do the same thing for the Mustang line.

Even if the Camaro SS was the most profitable car in the auto industry, GM would have stopped making them because of 2003 crash standard. The current Mustang doesn't pass 2005 crash standard but Ford is on the ball and has a replacement ready, GM doesn't have it's new lower cost RWD platform ready (CTS plataform is too costly for a V6 Camaro). Zeta RWD cars will start to come out in 2006.

Back to the Mustang.... The new 4.6L will be a great engine.... as long as 300HP is all you want. A 375HP aluminum 3v 5.4L Mustang for $29K-$30K would be great and that is what I would buy if avalible.

One problem with the Ford V8s that you brought up is that they are too big and heavy, a 5.4L DOHC is as big and heavy as a big block V8. This is one area were pushrod V8s have a hugh advantage. There is a pic floating around the net of a Ford 5.0 and a DOHC 4.6L, the size difference is crazy.

So why couldn't GM have redesigned the camaro? Much like Ford did with the stang. Could it have been they didn't sell enough to make it worthwhile? The biggest engine is not the way to have the best car. You have to have it sell in good numbers.
Why can't I upgrade the 300hp gt mustang? To me it's a great starting number. At a good price.
As for them being bigger and heavier. Yes the 4.6 DOHC is only 1 inch thinner than the boss 429. But now I have to ask. What is your point? Are you trying to say Ford should go back to pushrods? Or what are you trying to discuss. I don't understand.

blazinsteed · May 29, 2004

have you checked out mach-1 times lately. there are verified 12 second bone stock (including tire) times.

Z28x · May 30, 2004

SVTdriver said:
So why couldn't GM have redesigned the camaro? Much like Ford did with the stang. Could it have been they didn't sell enough to make it worthwhile? The biggest engine is not the way to have the best car. You have to have it sell in good numbers.
Why can't I upgrade the 300hp gt mustang? To me it's a great starting number. At a good price.

The Camaro was set to be killed in 2000, but there was a good amount of demand for it so they kept building them until 2002 (the last possible year). The pre-Lutz GM management seamed to be all about trucks and FWD cars. There was also a lot of political BS with the Quebec gov't and within GM (too much to list hear, search chearsandgears.com for the article). GM also has a deal with the Quebec gov't that says any car named Camaro needs to be built in Quebec until 2005-2006. It was better for GM just to stop building the car until after that period than to pay the fines for breaking the deal or to build a new plant in Quebec. 94-95 and maybe 96? the Camaro out sold the Mustang. In the last years of the F-body they still sold 70,000 cars, that is more than the Solstice, Vette, and GTO combined will sell in 2006. The F-body was also the second best selling coupe after the Mustang even after years of neglect and no advertising. The Camaro out sold the Miata, 350z, CTS, RX8, MR2, Celica, S2000, Thunder bird, and many others. Basically what I'm saying is that cars don't needs to sell 100,000 a year to stay around, there are many low volume profitable cars out there.

SVTdriver said:
As for them being bigger and heavier. Yes the 4.6 DOHC is only 1 inch thinner than the boss 429. But now I have to ask. What is your point? Are you trying to say Ford should go back to pushrods? Or what are you trying to discuss. I don't understand.

A new modern pushrod from Ford would be cool. GM and DC have made excelant modern pushrod engines and proven the tech to be just as good, and in some cases like weight, better than OHC. I don't ever think that will happen at Ford, but what I would like to see at Ford with the next gen of ohc mod engine is the ability to keep the smaller 4.6L size, but be able to bore and stroke it out to say 6.0L instead of 5.0L like we have now.

SVTdriver · May 30, 2004

Z28x said:
The Camaro was set to be killed in 2000, but there was a good amount of demand for it so they kept building them until 2002 (the last possible year). The pre-Lutz GM management seamed to be all about trucks and FWD cars. There was also a lot of political BS with the Quebec gov't and within GM (too much to list hear, search chearsandgears.com for the article). GM also has a deal with the Quebec gov't that says any car named Camaro needs to be built in Quebec until 2005-2006. It was better for GM just to stop building the car until after that period than to pay the fines for breaking the deal or to build a new plant in Quebec. 94-95 and maybe 96? the Camaro out sold the Mustang. In the last years of the F-body they still sold 70,000 cars, that is more than the Solstice, Vette, and GTO combined will sell in 2006. The F-body was also the second best selling coupe after the Mustang even after years of neglect and no advertising. The Camaro out sold the Miata, 350z, CTS, RX8, MR2, Celica, S2000, Thunder bird, and many others. Basically what I'm saying is that cars don't needs to sell 100,000 a year to stay around, there are many low volume profitable cars out there.

A new modern pushrod from Ford would be cool. GM and DC have made excelant modern pushrod engines and proven the tech to be just as good, and in some cases like weight, better than OHC. I don't ever think that will happen at Ford, but what I would like to see at Ford with the next gen of ohc mod engine is the ability to keep the smaller 4.6L size, but be able to bore and stroke it out to say 6.0L instead of 5.0L like we have now.

Not that I believe you are wrong. But everytime I do a search the production numbers I am seeing say different. For 1994 http://groups.msn.com/CaMaRoChiC/1994chevycamarohistory.msnw
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/94-98/94/index.htm
I know there have been about 7 years in it's history. When the camaro has outsold the mustang. But I'm not sure of the dates. As for it selling 70k units and that being more than all those other GM cars combines. To me just shows how little GM thinks of RWD cars. And then when you consider how poorly the GTO is selling. There is apparently a 168 day supply of them. Which is well above the desired 60 day supply. I would also wonder if the comparision between sales of the camaro and those other cars. Since the industry has changed. The Thunderbird was a failure. The 350z just barely out. The RX-8 not quite out. And I'm not sure if the CTS was out at that time Camaro was stilling being built. All of which are cars that at least on this forum. Have been debated as competition for sales. So the camaro's sales could have gone down evern further.

As far as weight of the engine. Ford is addressing that issue. If you look at the 05 the engine block is going to be aluminum. I'm not going to argue the pros and cons of pushrod vs OHC. But simply ask. If you are so concerned with weight. Why would you want a motor to be able to be bored out to a 6.0? I would think that would mean thicker walls. Which means more metal. Which means more weight. But I could be wrong. Since I don't need to have a stroked engine or the most hp on the street to feel good about myself or my car.

spectravp · May 30, 2004

SVTdriver said:
Since I don't need to have a stroked engine or the most hp on the street to feel good about myself or my car.

I couldn't agree more. Why need a bigger block when you can get plenty of additional HP with Superchargers, Ram Air, Chips, etc. etc.

Z28x · May 30, 2004

spectravp said:
I couldn't agree more. Why need a bigger block when you can get plenty of additional HP with Superchargers, Ram Air, Chips, etc. etc.

Than get a Civic The Mustang has always been about big engine big power.

spectravp · May 30, 2004

Z28x said:
Than get a Civic The Mustang has always been about big engine big power.

Really? That's why my Mustang has a 4.6L? Because it's so big?

I agree the Mustang has been about power though... and, you don't need a big engine for big power. Look at Lotus.

SVTdriver · May 30, 2004

Z28x said:
Than get a Civic The Mustang has always been about big engine big power.

Since when has it been about big engine big power? You are the one complaining about it having a small displacement motor. And not enough hp. Are you trying to be confusing? Or just not reading your own posts.
How bout this scenario. Since what is realisticly going into a mustang. Since you don't like it. But a hemi and stop complaining about mustangs.

awalbert88 · May 30, 2004

My next vehicle (if gas prices stabilize no higher than 2.50/gal for premium) will either be a 2005 Mustang GT Convertible, or a 2005 Dodge Magnum R/T. The Mustang is only in the running because I dearly miss driving a 5-speed droptop, and of course Mustangs will always have a special place in my heart. But the Magnum is so much more practical, and has genuine muscle car character. Ideally, I'd own the Magnum R/T as a daily driver, a late model Fox Mustang as a project drag car, and a 1986 Toyota Corolla GT as a project drift car. All RWD, all unique, all fun .

Now, as for this 6.2L... it's going in the trucks first. We might see it in the car-formerly-known-as-Futura eventually, because Ford and GM both need something to compete head-on with the Magnum/300 (which is the most impressive thing to come out of DCX since the Viper).

RiceEating5.0 · May 30, 2004

Z28x said:
One problem with the Ford V8s that you brought up is that they are too big and heavy, a 5.4L DOHC is as big and heavy as a big block V8. This is one area were pushrod V8s have a hugh advantage. There is a pic floating around the net of a Ford 5.0 and a DOHC 4.6L, the size difference is crazy.

PlatinumDevil · May 30, 2004

ya theres a good reason why my 3.4 DOHC's engine bay is bigger and more tightly packed then my 86 5.0's engine bay was. Its sad when a 5.0 V8 AMG engine will fit better then a 3.4 V6 Chevy. (~ 4 inches from the radiator in the v8, ~2 with the V6)

Theres also a good reason why the 5.0 stang couldn't compare in track times.

Its called technology .

The mustang needs a 302 or 351... the 4.6's just dont sound right to me.

3.4 DOHC = 280hp, 285 torque.... 5.0 = 200hp, not sure on the torque.. 250?

and guess which one gets 330 miles to a tank, ill give u a hint, its not the mustang.

DOHC's are better, more valves = more power... thats why hemis were such a big deal back in the day.

mustang sallad · May 30, 2004

awalbert88 said:
Now, as for this 6.2L... it's going in the trucks first. We might see it in the car-formerly-known-as-Futura eventually, because Ford and GM both need something to compete head-on with the Magnum/300 (which is the most impressive thing to come out of DCX since the Viper).

you mean the Five Hundred right? the futura's slotted below the taurus in size, the 500 somewhere between the taurus and the crown vic. Man, i hope they don't REPLACE the panther cars with the 500 and the mondeo or whatever the merc one is called. I just got back from fondeling a Marauder at the ford dealer. That things so cool, although a little odd in the front end and it definitely needs a bit more power, like more around 350 or something.
Anyways, they gotta keep a full size RWD sedan for the cops. and then stick that 6.2 liter in it. I'm still waiting for that V10 crown vic interceptor i read about in popular mechanics.

Yellow99Saleen · May 31, 2004

I hate being an ass, but lay off the crack pipe man. 5.0 stangs had 225hp, ( 87-92), and 300, read it 300 pounds/foot of tourque, in an era when that was unheard of. You may have a fast, rare car, that can beat some 5.0's of the day. But last time i checked my 93 gt got me just over 300 miles on a recent road trip.

Oh yeah what was that comment about the hemis back in the day. The 426 hemi had the same amount of valves as my 5.0 does. Only difference is the MASSIVE hemi combustion chambers. Hell fords boss 429 engine was the same design. So that comment had no relevance in this conversation. Your z34 has more valves...............im done here with the history lesson.

Oh yeah z28x.....you are dead on with almost everyone of your comments.

351CJ · May 31, 2004

RiceEating5.0 said:

I will not argue the point that the 4.6L DOHC is physically huge compared to a 302. However that photo is very deceiving. The 4.6 is positioned closer to the camera which makes it appear larger than it really is. Take a piece of paper and mark the maximum idth of the 2 blocks (block only at the deck, no heads). You will find that the 4.6 block as shown in the photo is much wider than the 302 block. This is NOT the case in reality.

BSRacing · May 31, 2004

351CJ said:
You will find that the 4.6 block as shown in the photo is much wider than the 302 block. This is NOT the case in reality.

Not the case in reality? what reality is that?
Its widely known the 4.6L blocks are much wider than the 302s because of angle of separation between the two banks.

PlatinumDevil · May 31, 2004

sorry ill clarify. the 86 5.0's had 205 hp or 210 or something, 93's had 225 i just guessed at the torque. Im not by any means beaking the 5.0's i think they are the best engines around, easy cheap power possibilities etc.

and ya the Hemi's comment was kinda on crack. dont ask me where that came from... my engines in a penatonic Hemi design, maybe thats why i said that, dont ask haha, just ignore that part.

Neways back to the point, sure DOHC engines are big but so are the gains.

I stand by the mustangs need a 302 or a 351. Thats just my feeling, i dont like the sound of 4.6 mustangs. well i do, but the 5.0's sound better.

shatner saves · May 31, 2004

awalbert88 said:
My next vehicle (if gas prices stabilize no higher than 2.50/gal for premium) will either be a 2005 Mustang GT Convertible, or a 2005 Dodge Magnum R/T. The Mustang is only in the running because I dearly miss driving a 5-speed droptop, and of course Mustangs will always have a special place in my heart. But the Magnum is so much more practical, and has genuine muscle car character. Ideally, I'd own the Magnum R/T as a daily driver, a late model Fox Mustang as a project drag car, and a 1986 Toyota Corolla GT as a project drift car. All RWD, all unique, all fun .

Now, as for this 6.2L... it's going in the trucks first. We might see it in the car-formerly-known-as-Futura eventually, because Ford and GM both need something to compete head-on with the Magnum/300 (which is the most impressive thing to come out of DCX since the Viper).

I think the Magnum is a pretty sweet car (Dodge's reliability not withstanding) but I really can't see the magnum having much of a performance advantage over the mustang. Yes, it has 40 more peak hp and 70 lbs-ft more torque, but it's also hauling 670lbs more bulk around. Looking at power/weight and torque to weight ratio's:

Mustang: 300 hp, 320 lbs-ft, 3450 lbs (est)
10.7825 lbs per lbs-ft
11.5 lbs per hp

Magnum: 340 hp, 390 lbs-ft, 4120 lbs (from www.dodge.com)
10.56 lbs per lbs-ft
12.12 lbs per hp

The hemi Magnum, at a base price of $29,995, starts out about $5000 than an '05 GT. Add 5k worth of performance mod's to the GT, and the magnum would be (you guessed it)

Bigger V8 from Ford

Scot_94GT

01MachGT

New Member

Silentst2000

New Member

SVTdriver

blazinsteed

New Member

Z28x

New Member

SVTdriver

spectravp

New Member

Z28x

New Member

spectravp

New Member

SVTdriver

awalbert88

RiceEating5.0

Attachments

PlatinumDevil

Member

mustang sallad

New Member

Yellow99Saleen

New Member

351CJ

New Member

Attachments

BSRacing

PlatinumDevil

Member

shatner saves

New Member

Similar threads

Bigger V8 from Ford

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Attachments

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Attachments

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency