Ford announces the 265 HP, 3.5L Duratec 35

351CJ

New Member

Dec 11, 2002

1,732

1

0

Apr 12, 2006

#1

• Apr 12, 2006

• #1

http://media.ford.com/newsroom/release_display.cfm?release=23109

3.5L, 265 HP and 250 lb ft on regular 87 octane gas.
Sounds like a winner.

Should Ford dump the 4.0L V6 as soon as possible and put the 265 HP D35 in the 2008 Mustang?

 

eric n

Founding Member

Jul 14, 2001

875

2

19

Bakersfield, CA

Apr 12, 2006

#2

• Apr 12, 2006

• #2

More HP is almost always good. Go with the new 3.5

 

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

May 1, 2005

3,015

1

79

7200 feet

Apr 12, 2006

#3

• Apr 12, 2006

• #3

if the V6 gets rated at 265 hp, then the GT will need a big boost in power to make up the price difference. yes, the GT gets better brakes and suspension, but it will need the extra power. think of a forced induction 3.5

 

T

The Fang

Member

Sep 11, 2005

602

0

16

Tallahassee Fl

Apr 12, 2006

#4

• Apr 12, 2006

• #4

Now what is interesting tho is the 3.5 only produces 9 more ft. lb of torque over the 4.0. and keep in mind that the stats for this 3.5 are also based on a much higher rpm and a FWD set up.
3.5 =249 lb-ft @ 4,500 rpm
4.0=240 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm

 

T

tjredgt2000

Founding Member

Jan 29, 2001

94

0

0

Apr 13, 2006

#5

• Apr 13, 2006

• #5

Ford's gonna have a lot of demand for this motor in the 500, Montego, Freestyle, Edge, Mk X, Zephyr (or whatever they're gonna call it). Hopefully, they'll save some for the Mustang.

 

merlinsteele

New Member

Nov 21, 2004

68

0

0

Oklahoma

Apr 13, 2006

#6

• Apr 13, 2006

• #6

Would this change the gas mileage? And would it be for the better or worse, I wonder?

 

351CJ

New Member

Dec 11, 2002

1,732

1

0

Apr 13, 2006

#7

• Apr 13, 2006

• #7

Gas mileage should be better because the displacement is smaller and it has VVT.

Even though it has "only" 10 lb ft more torque than the 4.0, the D35 appears to have a much wider useable RPM range. Neither torque only no HP only matter. It is the balance between HP & TQ and the "area under the curve. I'm sure the D35 will out perform the 4.0 in a Mustang.

 

merlinsteele

New Member

Nov 21, 2004

68

0

0

Oklahoma

Apr 14, 2006

#8

• Apr 14, 2006

• #8

If the gas mileage IS better, then it sure seems like the stock would rise in the V6's! That would make them so much more appealing, since at the moment, taking a V6 instead of the GT doesn't really seem to help much in that department. I know it would make 'me' think twice anyway!

 

351CJ

New Member

Dec 11, 2002

1,732

1

0

Apr 14, 2006

#9

• Apr 14, 2006

• #9

Given that the 4.0L V6 is only 13% smaller in displacement than the 4.6, the V6 Stang has the same axle ratio, wind resistance and weight, then logically a V6 would have at best 13% better gas mileage (Highway constant speed). (Basic physics, an engine is an air pump, displacement determines how much air is pumped, how much air is pumped determines how much gas is needed to maintain the proper A/F ratio).

But since the same HP is needed to move the Stang down the road the V6 has to work a bit harder so the full 13% fuel mileage improvement may not be obtained. In addition when accleration you still have to get the same amount of mass moving. So, I'd expect the V6 to have 10% better gas mileage than the V6 (auto tranny with same 3.31 axle). But the EPA combined mileage is only 7.3% better.

My guess is that the D35 would double the differential, that is it would get about 15% better overall mileage than the 4.0. Which as you say would be very important to many potential Mustang V6 customers.

 

hotmustang331

Active Member

Apr 29, 2004

2,967

3

48

Bastrop,TX

Apr 19, 2006

#10

• Apr 19, 2006

• #10

Yea then we would have these guys in 6 bangers running down 99-04 GTs lol. Thats the last thing I want to hear "Hey your car sucks, my V6 can beat you". Me "Not all mustangs are stock buddy" .

 

351CJ

New Member

Dec 11, 2002

1,732

1

0

Apr 19, 2006

#11

• Apr 19, 2006

• #11

hotmustang331 said:

Yea then we would have these guys in 6 bangers running down 99-04 GTs lol. Thats the last thing I want to hear "Hey your car sucks, my V6 can beat you". Me "Not all mustangs are stock buddy" .

Click to expand...

Time keeps moving and things keep a changing.

How many big block 1960s Mustang owners are all upset because those puny little 281 CID new Mustangs are faster?

Its about time that Ford came out with a V6 Stang that will run down a 99-04 GT.