• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2010 - 2014 Specific Tech

Info leaked on the 2011 GT from Edmund's

  • Thread starter Thread starter MeanMike
  • Start date Start date Dec 17, 2009
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
First Prev 6 of 6

AvalancheSVT

10 Year Member
Jun 12, 2005
573
37
49
Jan 1, 2010
#101
  • Jan 1, 2010
  • #101
and God only knows what is in store for the cobra with this new engine technology. that'd be nice if they carried over the TT theme from the SHO to the new shelby.

600+hp TT mustang that has just a hint of european sophistication with a crapton of kick butt americanized appeal?

hell yeah, i'll keep dreamin.
 

cougar_68

Founding Member
Jun 6, 2001
849
0
0
46
Garrett, IN
Jan 1, 2010
#102
  • Jan 1, 2010
  • #102
MakotoS13 said:
and God only knows what is in store for the cobra with this new engine technology....
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. I would really like to see a street legal "production" version of the BOSS 302. The version they released is a race only version hence the "R" in BOSS 302R. The production version could have SC or TT. Is the new 5.0L motor direct injected?

All that being said, it is also my understanding that the 5.0L motor is meant to replace the 4.6L and 5.4L so the Shelby will need something other than the 5.4L. Why go down to a 5.0L when you could go up to the 6.2L from the SVT Raptor?
 
T

The Fang

Member
Sep 11, 2005
602
0
16
Tallahassee Fl
Jan 2, 2010
#103
  • Jan 2, 2010
  • #103
I believe the 5.4 is already a 4v motor.
 

AvalancheSVT

10 Year Member
Jun 12, 2005
573
37
49
Jan 2, 2010
#104
  • Jan 2, 2010
  • #104
cougar_68 said:
I was thinking the same thing. I would really like to see a street legal "production" version of the BOSS 302. The version they released is a race only version hence the "R" in BOSS 302R. The production version could have SC or TT. Is the new 5.0L motor direct injected?

All that being said, it is also my understanding that the 5.0L motor is meant to replace the 4.6L and 5.4L so the Shelby will need something other than the 5.4L. Why go down to a 5.0L when you could go up to the 6.2L from the SVT Raptor?
Click to expand...

its about power not size, i have a feeling the raptor has the 6.2 for the obvious torque reasons. if that isn't the case... i have no idea why they wouldn't just let it rock the new 5.0. perhaps they do this because the 6.2 makes the same power as the 5.0 but does it easier so it is less stressed (which is probably a good thing if you're desert racing).

and the shelby has a 4 valve but it also weighs almost 2 tons. if they get the same power out of it and shed 200lbs its gonna be better in every way. weight ruins everything.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jan 3, 2010
#105
  • Jan 3, 2010
  • #105
MakotoS13 said:
its about power not size, i have a feeling the raptor has the 6.2 for the obvious torque reasons. if that isn't the case... i have no idea why they wouldn't just let it rock the new 5.0. perhaps they do this because the 6.2 makes the same power as the 5.0 but does it easier so it is less stressed (which is probably a good thing if you're desert racing).
Click to expand...

Lets also keep in mind here....the new 5.0L makes the power it does with a near 7,000RPM red line. A tach twisting screamer like that has no business in a pick up truck. The 6.2L is going to be a torque monster in comparison to the 5.0L

Lets also keep in mind....although the power levels on paper are very similar between the 5.0L replacing the current 4.6L 3V engine in the Mustang and the new 6.2L engine replacing the current 5.4L 3V in the Raptor, the new 6.2L engine is making these power levels through truck specific cam/intake set up.....not to mention choking it all through a single exhaust and cast iron manifolds. Oh and lets not forget a power robbing drivetrain. My FX4 eats up somewhere in the 25-30% range by the time the power makes its way to the rear wheels!!!

I would imagine this 6.2L moved into a Mustang would have a shorter runner intake, more appropriate cam profiles for a vehicle weight 2,500lbs less and a dedicated true dual exhaust system with similar tubular, tuned length headers in comparison to the Mustang, in order to deal with it all. Expect power levels to go way...way up in that case.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
First Prev 6 of 6
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Crankshaft/Camshaft codes
  • rockinstang11
  • Oct 11, 2025
  • 2010 - 2014 Specific Tech
Replies
1
Views
200
2010 - 2014 Specific Tech Oct 20, 2025
rockinstang11
N
Engine 86 GT no start/stall
  • nweber
  • Jul 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
117
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 29, 2026
AeroCoupe
E
Chasing Vacuum leak 99 GT
  • EBNS_2005
  • May 2, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
169
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- May 3, 2026
X-cam34
X
B
97 GT with 03 explorer Eddie Bauer edition 4.6l
  • basbill73
  • May 10, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
68
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- May 11, 2026
squeak93
Z
Progress Thread zeth194 - New Guy on the Block
  • zeth194
  • Mar 19, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
580
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 26, 2026
LILCBRA
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2010 - 2014 Specific Tech
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?