• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-

Fusion POWER!

  • Thread starter Thread starter lethaljay
  • Start date Start date Sep 15, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

eric n

Founding Member
Jul 14, 2001
875
2
19
Bakersfield, CA
Sep 22, 2005
#21
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #21
351CJ said:
To complete your sentance....

The Fusion's 3.0L Duratec will produce 205 ft/lbs of torque @ 4750 RPM while the 4.0L Mustang engine has 240 lb ft of TQ @ only 3500 RPM.

Similarly the Duratec 3.0L's 221 HP comes at 6250 RPM while the 4.0L makes its 210 HP at 5300 RPM.

On the other hand, the Fusion with its lighter weight and 6 speed ATX might beat a Mustang V6 in 0-60.
Click to expand...

That said, it would seem to me like similar (to the duratec 3.0) technology could be used to create a more efficient 4.0 liter engine producing somewhere around 240+ HP and pretty damn good torque as well. It's a shame that Accords, Altimas, Avalons.... all have more powerful and smoother V6 engines. The v6 mustang is getting a sexier look and better handling, now it needs a bit more punch.
 
C

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet
20+ Year Stangneter
Feb 5, 2002
4,379
1
68
Maryland
Sep 22, 2005
#22
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #22
How much does the Fusion's V8 make? Most performance minded Stangers opt for at least a GT. Nice car but apples to oranges in this case. On a side note I really like them, I think I wanna get one in a couple years (especially if they offer a trubo SVT version) when I start a family if they're still around.
 
Q

QCStang

Founding Member
Mar 28, 2002
813
1
18
Aylmer, Quebec, Canada
Sep 22, 2005
#23
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #23
eric n said:
That said, it would seem to me like similar (to the duratec 3.0) technology could be used to create a more efficient 4.0 liter engine producing somewhere around 240+ HP and pretty damn good torque as well. It's a shame that Accords, Altimas, Avalons.... all have more powerful and smoother V6 engines. The v6 mustang is getting a sexier look and better handling, now it needs a bit more punch.
Click to expand...


You are comparing V6 engined cars that cost the same - or more - than a new Mustang GT, let alone the V6.
 
T

tjm73

Founding Member
Aug 3, 2000
2,418
2
48
Rush, NY
Sep 22, 2005
#24
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #24
To the milage question I submit Fords MPG ratings

4.0 V6 Mustang - 19/28 manual & 19/25 automatic
3.0 V6 Fusion - well Ford hasn't released MPG ratings yet looks like.

Sooooo, we'll look at the Mazda 6 since they are kissing cousins.

3.0 V6 Mazda 6 - 20/27 manual or automatic (per kbb.com)

So no meaningful advantage there. Sur eyou have 2 more doors, butthe Mustang still looks wayyyy better. And it's rear wheel drive.





CatmanJJ said:
How much does the Fusion's V8 make?
Click to expand...

No such option exists.
 
T

tjredgt2000

Founding Member
Jan 29, 2001
94
0
0
Sep 22, 2005
#25
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #25
The Lincoln version of the Fusion (Zephyr) will have an optional 3.5 liter V6 of approx. 250 hp in 2007. That motor might be a replacement candidate for the 4.0 in the Mustang but there are always considerations we don't think about. If the Explorer is still using the 4.0 we will probably see it used in the Mustang for manufacturing efficiencies.
 
T

tjm73

Founding Member
Aug 3, 2000
2,418
2
48
Rush, NY
Sep 22, 2005
#26
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #26
tjredgt2000 said:
The Lincoln version of the Fusion (Zephyr) will have an optional 3.5 liter V6 of approx. 250 hp in 2007. That motor might be a replacement candidate for the 4.0 in the Mustang but there are always considerations we don't think about. If the Explorer is still using the 4.0 we will probably see it used in the Mustang for manufacturing efficiencies.
Click to expand...

Teh 3.0/3.5 might not be sutible as a rear drive power plant by Ford standards. Maybe the block doesn't have the strength or the power delivery isn't what they want or maybe it's too expensive to produce or maybe it just won't fit due to interference with other chassis components.
 
C

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet
20+ Year Stangneter
Feb 5, 2002
4,379
1
68
Maryland
Sep 22, 2005
#27
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #27
tjm73 said:
No such option exists.
Click to expand...

That's the point.
 

eric n

Founding Member
Jul 14, 2001
875
2
19
Bakersfield, CA
Sep 22, 2005
#28
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #28
QCStang said:
You are comparing V6 engined cars that cost the same - or more - than a new Mustang GT, let alone the V6.
Click to expand...

That's a perfectly valid point.
 
0

03 SVT VERT

New Member
Jun 7, 2004
154
0
0
Sep 22, 2005
#29
  • Sep 22, 2005
  • #29
Pliskin said:
And whats the deal with the Explorer having 300hp?! Its the GT engine in an SUV. Thats not right....
Click to expand...


Look back in time. Both cars and trucks had the 351 in it or the 302 and there was one I6 used in everything. Or in the case of Chevy the 350 was used in everything. Personally I think they should have 3 maybe 4 gas engines and use them in everything with different tuning. It would save them money so they could make the cars cheaper, it would make parts cheaper and easier to find, and it would make it easier for the aftermarket tuners to keep up with products for the motors.

Right now Ford has:
2.0L I4
2.3L I4
3.0L V6
4.0L V6
4.2L V6
3.9L V8
4.6L V8
5.4L V8
6.8L V10
Many of them in SOHC, DOHC, 4v, 3v, 2v, ect.
That's way too many. Keep the V10, one or maybe 2 of the V8's, one 6, and one 4. Then Supercharge them, change the number of valves, ect for the increase in hp or torque if you need it.
 

351CJ

New Member
Dec 11, 2002
1,732
1
0
Sep 23, 2005
#30
  • Sep 23, 2005
  • #30
tjm73 said:
To the milage question I submit Fords MPG ratings


3.0 V6 Fusion - well Ford hasn't released MPG ratings yet looks like.
Click to expand...

The car info. web site like Edmunds have these mileages listed for the Fusion:

I4 23 city - 31 Highway
V6 21 city - 29 Highway

However I have not seen Ford's official announcement of the mileage ratings.
 

351CJ

New Member
Dec 11, 2002
1,732
1
0
Sep 23, 2005
#31
  • Sep 23, 2005
  • #31
03 SVT VERT said:
Look back in time. Both cars and trucks had the 351 in it or the 302 and there was one I6 used in everything. Or in the case of Chevy the 350 was used in everything. Personally I think they should have 3 maybe 4 gas engines and use them in everything with different tuning. It would save them money so they could make the cars cheaper, it would make parts cheaper and easier to find, and it would make it easier for the aftermarket tuners to keep up with products for the motors.

Right now Ford has:
2.0L I4
2.3L I4
3.0L V6
4.0L V6
4.2L V6
3.9L V8
4.6L V8
5.4L V8
6.8L V10
Many of them in SOHC, DOHC, 4v, 3v, 2v, ect.
That's way too many. Keep the V10, one or maybe 2 of the V8's, one 6, and one 4. Then Supercharge them, change the number of valves, ect for the increase in hp or torque if you need it.
Click to expand...

You forgot that there are both the Duratec 3.0 and the Vulcan 3.0. I'd guess the Vulcan 3.0 goes away when the Taurus ceases production.

The 3.9L V8 goes away in July 2006.

The pushrod 4.2L V6 is also supposed to go away, but I don't remember the particulars.

On the other hand the Duratec 35 will be introduced during 2006. Reportedly the Duratec 35 can grow as large as 4.2L and several different displacement versions of the Duratec 35 are planned.

You also seem to be overlooking that the 4.6 and 5.4 share many parts and are really one engine family.
 

351CJ

New Member
Dec 11, 2002
1,732
1
0
Sep 23, 2005
#32
  • Sep 23, 2005
  • #32
tjredgt2000 said:
The Lincoln version of the Fusion (Zephyr) will have an optional 3.5 liter V6 of approx. 250 hp in 2007. That motor might be a replacement candidate for the 4.0 in the Mustang but there are always considerations we don't think about. If the Explorer is still using the 4.0 we will probably see it used in the Mustang for manufacturing efficiencies.
Click to expand...

Unless something has changed in the last few months, there are NO plans to put either the Duratec 30 or the Duratec 35 in the Mustang.

On the other hand, the 4.0L V6 is supposed to get up graded for the 2007 model year, getting both more HP and better gas mileage.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Buy new 2011+ mustang vs supercharged fox / newedge ?
  • Trickflo
  • Jul 28, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
14K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 9, 2020
Mustang5L5
J
351w swap in 2004 questions (set up like a 95 Cobra)
  • jonathansw1601
  • Mar 24, 2018
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
4
Views
3K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2018
jonathansw1601
J
R
  • Locked
SOLD 1964 Weber Carbureted 289 Hipo $10k Firm
  • Robert Campbell
  • Sep 5, 2016
  • Engine and Power Adder
Replies
1
Views
7K
Engine and Power Adder Sep 17, 2016
Robert Campbell
R
  • Locked
Just Some Suggestion's For Foxes
  • Detroiit
  • Jul 24, 2014
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 25, 2014
Noobz347
Extremely Low Fuel Mileage Issue
  • stangr5oh
  • Jul 21, 2014
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
7K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Aug 23, 2014
stangr5oh
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?