Leaked email from Ford Employee

66Satellite · Dec 4, 2003

GNN60GT500 said:
I work for Magnaflow Performance Exhaust

nuff said.

foghorn67 · Dec 4, 2003

I still don't know why all the stables like had the 05's on dynos. what does that have to do with appearance.

351CJ · Dec 4, 2003

93 teal terror said:
Still no one has adressed my point....how can you have a computer that goes into failure mode if the torque is changed, when every engine produces slightly different outputs. I doubt that Ford is going to program each computer induvidually for every car.

If something to this effect is implemented, the trip point would be set at some level above the nominal output torque.

Eg. let's assume that the nominal torque output of the 2005 GT is 320 lb. ft. The failure mode would probably set around 340 -350 lb. ft. to accomodate engine to engine variation and sensor tolerance.

Another thing that many of you have to come to grips with is, future Ford engines come from the factory with higher HP, but it will be much harder to get incremental power through home garage bolt ons.

You can't have it both ways. Most of you seem to like the idea that you can bolt an exhaust system on a current GT (mid pipe & cat back) and gain an easy 15 HP. However, most of you seem to have a big problem with the thought that future Mustangs may have OEM exhuast systems that are so much better than the current ones, that no matter what you do to the exhust system you couldn't get more than 5 additional HP out of it (The 350Z syndrome). You can't have it both ways. If the powertrain comes from the factory in a higher state of tune, there is going to be less HP gains to be had afterwards with aftermarket bolt ons.

66Satellite · Dec 4, 2003

351CJ said:
If something to this effect is implemented, the trip point would be set at some level above the nominal output torque.

Eg. let's assume that the nominal torque output of the 2005 GT is 320 lb. ft. The failure mode would probably set around 340 -350 lb. ft. to accomodate engine to engine variation and sensor tolerance.

Another thing that many of you have to come to grips with is, future Ford engines come from the factory with higher HP, but it will be much harder to get incremental power through home garage bolt ons.

You can't have it both ways. Most of you seem to like the idea that you can bolt an exhaust system on a current GT (mid pipe & cat back) and gain an easy 15 HP. However, most of you seem to have a big problem with the thought that future Mustangs may have OEM exhuast systems that are so much better than the current ones, that no matter what you do to the exhust system you couldn't get more than 5 additional HP out of it (The 350Z syndrome). You can't have it both ways. If the powertrain comes from the factory in a higher state of tune, there is going to be less HP gains to be had afterwards with aftermarket bolt ons.

Great post.

Yeah, I'm thinking the best way to mod these cars is simply going to be to remove as much weight as possible. Grassroots Motorsports somehow managed to remove 800 pounds from their project 1990 5.0 Mustang. That's one easy and fairly cheap way to get a major bump in performance. So if you could get a 300+ HP car down to 3000 pounds or so it would be pretty fast.

hamonkeiser · Dec 4, 2003

I wouldn't put alot of stock in the orginal eamil for this post. I don't honestly belive the writer of the orignal "email" is with Ford. My sister & brother-in-law are Ford engineers. I just spoek to my brother-in-law this weekend about the '05 Stang. The Production model of the mustang has not even been completed yet. I know the interior will be completly different from the concept cars, It will be a 2+2 (no real back seat). The body will remain fairly similar to the concept (glass roof is gone from the concept, won't meet federal crush test standards). I highly doubt it will be as heavy as this guy is predicting. Heavier weight = less fuel economy. Federal fuel ecomnomy standards are getting stricter so lowering the weight on cars & trucks is a big issue (alot of the body panels on the F-150'2 are Aluminum & composit now). Expect to pay 20's for the V6 & 30's for the GT. I wouldn't get too worked up about it until the car is released, then we'll know the truth. But from the information I got from the people I know at Ford, the orginal post is

66Satellite · Dec 5, 2003

hamonkeiser said:
Heavier weight = less fuel economy. Federal fuel ecomnomy standards are getting stricter so lowering the weight on cars & trucks is a big issue (alot of the body panels on the F-150'2 are Aluminum & composit now).QUOTE]

Yeah, but vehicle weights keep going up, not down. The new F150 is considerably bigger and heavier than the one it replaced.

Boomer v3.8 · Dec 5, 2003

hamonkeiser · Dec 5, 2003

66Satellite said:
Yeah, but vehicle weights keep going up, not down. The new F150 is considerably bigger and heavier than the one it replaced.

Actually, it only looks heavier...If you pull the specs & compare base F-150's, the curb weight of the 2004 F-150 is 80 lbs lighter than the 2003. (2003 Curb weight is 4285 lbs, 2004 is 4205 lbs).

66Satellite · Dec 5, 2003

hamonkeiser said:
Actually, it only looks heavier...If you pull the specs & compare base F-150's, the curb weight of the 2004 F-150 is 80 lbs lighter than the 2003. (2003 Curb weight is 4285 lbs, 2004 is 4205 lbs).

Ok, just went to Edmunds. 2003 vs 2004 for your basic 2wd XLT pickup is 3990 lbs vs. 4788 lbs. It's possible they have their specs wrong or we're not comparing apples to apples. I made my original post just off what I could remember from an article I read on 'em. I'm no truck or Ford expert by any means...

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2003/for...dmunds.n.researchlanding.leftsidenav..8.Ford*

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2004/for...dmunds.n.researchlanding.leftsidenav..8.Ford*

hamonkeiser · Dec 5, 2003

Yeah, the weight difference your seeing could be on different models & options. I just google searched F-150 vehicle weight & looked at a sight www.intellichoice.com. If you keep the models & trim pacakges close it's not too much difference in weight between the 2 years. I think the concept was to make the '04 F-150 look alot more heavy duty than the previous models.

Phatty2004 · Dec 6, 2003

hamonkeiser said:
30's for the GT.

DAMN! You just killed my joy with that one.. I was looking at around 31-32 for the lowest model GT vert. Oh well....

(&) · Dec 6, 2003

hamonkeiser said:
Actually, it only looks heavier...If you pull the specs & compare base F-150's, the curb weight of the 2004 F-150 is 80 lbs lighter than the 2003. (2003 Curb weight is 4285 lbs, 2004 is 4205 lbs).

My father works at the F-150 plant in Claycomo, MO. I believe it is the highest volume Ford plant in the world. He said they had to get a lot of new equipment for the model change, due to the new truck being much heaver.

But it's not even a valid point, comparing cars to trucks. Heavy trucks aren't a bad thing, but heavy cars usually are. It makes more sense to compare the new Mustang to similar cars already on the market.

Leaked email from Ford Employee

66Satellite

Banned

foghorn67

I'll save you the time and choke myself

351CJ

New Member

66Satellite

Banned

hamonkeiser

New Member

66Satellite

Banned

Boomer v3.8

New Member

hamonkeiser

New Member

66Satellite

Banned

hamonkeiser

New Member

Phatty2004

New Member

(&)

Similar threads

Leaked email from Ford Employee

Banned

I'll save you the time and choke myself

New Member

Banned

New Member

Banned

New Member

New Member

Banned

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency