Test drove a V6 this weekend...

kruzn · Oct 25, 2004

The local dealer got in one GT (sold) and one V6. We took the V6 for a test drive and I was quite impressed overall, even with the power of the V6. VERY, very nice car. They were pretty anxious to make us a deal on the V6. However, I think I would definitely want the GT. My wife wants to see the GT convert when it comes out.

I have always liked the 67-68 'stangs and the '05 reminds me a lot of those years, yet it is very modern and not too "retro." Would you believe out of the 40+ cars we've owned over the last 35 years, we've never owned a Mustang? Maybe we will in the future!

We've looked at the Hemi Magnum (way cool wagon and pretty fast for a relatively big car) and just this evening we looked at a Chevy SSR. The dealer really wants to sell the SSR, but even with sharp negotiating it would probably be around $40K (he quoted me $42K). I figure the '05 GT convert will be in the $28K range, so it makes much more sense to me.

Since we really don't need another wagon-type vehicle (already have a custom '01 PT Cruiser and a custom '64 Tempest Safari Wagon), the Magnum is probably out of the picture and the SSR is too much $$$, so we think the new Mustang might just be in our future to replace the old derelict minivan!

Stangar · Oct 25, 2004

I would very quickly forget the Chevy SSR. Terribly overweight, bad handling, way overweight, under powered, PIG. Friend of mine has one and I don't think he even likes it anymore. He would never say that. Alot of style and little substance.

kruzn · Oct 25, 2004

Yep, we've pretty much ruled out the SSR. The wife likes the styling a LOT, but for less money we could probably buy a really nice '47-54 Chevy PU street rod, which is kinda what the SSR is styled after anyway.

Fortunately, she really likes the new 'stang also!

oatmealr · Oct 25, 2004

**** for the price of the SSR you can prolly get a good deal on a corvette. I hate to say it to all you ford guys, and as much as I love my 05 mustang, I would love to have a corvette=) Just sitting in one of those things makes me go "Mmmmm."

'03 6-Speed · Oct 25, 2004

oatmealr said:
**** for the price of the SSR you can prolly get a good deal on a corvette. I hate to say it to all you ford guys, and as much as I love my 05 mustang, I would love to have a corvette=) Just sitting in one of those things makes me go "Mmmmm."

But spending all the money you saved on a new mustang compared to a new corvette would make you say "Mmmmm" when you light him up at any track.

Brian68GT · Oct 26, 2004

Whats the deal with American engines? My father had a Nissan 300ZX, non turbo. It was a 3.0 V6 and it produced 200bhp, the turbo version produces 300bhp.

The new mustang V6 is a 4.0 and only produces 200bhp. Now the nissan is a big car but it may well be lighter than the mustang, i dont know. But a smaller engine with the same bhp?

So i suppose my question is this, why do American V6's and V8's produce less power than Japanese ones? It seems like Ford and others just make thier engiens bigger, rather than better. Becuase they have fuel emmsion taxes in Japan, and most of europe, engines seems to be much more efficent in terms of power to size.

As someone who lives in Europe (Ireland) the only drawback about the mustang is the engine size. My 1968 302 is tax exempt because its over 25 years but a new 4.6 V8 will cost me around $2200 to tax, and anywhere from $3000-4000 to insure. Thats purely because of the engine size. If it had a 3.0 V6 it would be half that and i could buy one immediately.

By the way, i'm not throwing digs at American cars, i love them, i just wish the engines were more efficient.

351CJ · Oct 26, 2004

The answer is simple. Nissian and most other Japanese cars DO NOT have V8 engine options. In the North American market (where the '05 Stang is sold) there is little need for a high performance V6, because most customers who want performance are going to buy the V8.

Also, the correct ratings for the '05 Stang V6 are:

210 HP @ 5,250 RPM
240 lb ft @ 3,500 RPM

We have been told by a Ford engineer that the V6 ratings are very conservative, HP is really over 220.

QCStang · Oct 26, 2004

Brian68GT said:
Whats the deal with American engines? My father had a Nissan 300ZX, non turbo. It was a 3.0 V6 and it produced 200bhp, the turbo version produces 300bhp.

The new mustang V6 is a 4.0 and only produces 200bhp. Now the nissan is a big car but it may well be lighter than the mustang, i dont know. But a smaller engine with the same bhp?

So i suppose my question is this, why do American V6's and V8's produce less power than Japanese ones? It seems like Ford and others just make thier engiens bigger, rather than better. Becuase they have fuel emmsion taxes in Japan, and most of europe, engines seems to be much more efficent in terms of power to size.

As someone who lives in Europe (Ireland) the only drawback about the mustang is the engine size. My 1968 302 is tax exempt because its over 25 years but a new 4.6 V8 will cost me around $2200 to tax, and anywhere from $3000-4000 to insure. Thats purely because of the engine size. If it had a 3.0 V6 it would be half that and i could buy one immediately.

By the way, i'm not throwing digs at American cars, i love them, i just wish the engines were more efficient.

Compare the price of the V6 Mustang Coupe vs Nissan sportscar.
Compare the price of gas (Mustang uses regular fuel, Nissan Premium - reg fuel will cause the engine to grenade)
Compare aftermarket, and horsepower upgrades.
Compare Nissan convertible with Mustang V6.
Compare future repair costs..
Compare TORQUE and TORQUE POWER band..

Most V8 engines are meant for pure pulling power. In North America, any vehicle that does any type of work needs the sheer power and dependability of a V8. Ever pull 10 tons of corn with a non-diesel 6 cyl? It would be expensive to replace engines all the time.

Brian68GT · Oct 26, 2004

Yeh, that all makes sense, the needs in North America differ from Europe and your petrol is way cheaper, for the moment, so it makes no odds to you guys if you have a 3.0 or a 4.0 V6, which is great.

If the car ever came out in Europe i would suspect, but may be wrong, that it would have a smaller engine.

As the chassis is based on the S Type jaguar, it could easily have the 3.0 V6 from this car. Now explain this to me:

The Jaguar 3.0 V6 in the S Type produces 240 bhp at 6800 rpm, which sounds comparable to the 4.0 in the Mustang (i'm no expert on these things), and does an average of 26.4 miles to the gallon. The S Type is probably similar in size to the Mustang. Would this engine not have done the trick instead of the 4.0?

I'm really no expert, i'm just trying to understand the whole thing as i'm planning on buying an 05 within the next year or two. I'd be sickened if i got a 4.0 or 4.6 and then discovered that it comes out in europe with a smaller, more effiencent and equally powerful engine.

'03 6-Speed · Oct 26, 2004

Ok, here's the reason why American V8's and V6's are so "underpowered". Ford doesn't put any kind of heavy cam lobes or durations into the engine so that the engine will have low compression, better reliability, and a smoother feel. Simple as that.

331ci_89gt · Oct 26, 2004

With intake/exhaust/cams (if they have them) the 350Z is not going to gain that much in power. Now do the same thing to an American V8 and watch out. It's great that these import 6 cylinder cars are as powerful as they are but their engines are pretty much maxxed out.

CatmanJJ · Oct 26, 2004

Also many of the high powered V6s and 4 bangers from Japan are the more expensive 4v DOHC design compared to the SOHC American counterparts which also makes a big difference.

351CJ · Oct 26, 2004

Brian68GT said:
The Jaguar 3.0 V6 in the S Type produces 240 bhp at 6800 rpm, which sounds comparable to the 4.0 in the Mustang (i'm no expert on these things), and does an average of 26.4 miles to the gallon. The S Type is probably similar in size to the Mustang. Would this engine not have done the trick instead of the 4.0?

I'm really no expert, i'm just trying to understand the whole thing as i'm planning on buying an 05 within the next year or two. I'd be sickened if i got a 4.0 or 4.6 and then discovered that it comes out in europe with a smaller, more effiencent and equally powerful engine.

A couple things.

1. Doesn't the Jag engine require Premium gas? Here in the states the Jag 3.0, 4.0 and 4.2 all require premium gas. With an engine that requires premium, you have to get 10% to 12% better gas mileage just to break even.

2. That Jag 240 HP # is probably DIN or bhp HP. Here in the US Jag had to lower all its HP ratings because they were using bhp or DIN. In the US we use SAE net. Typically SAE net is 3% - 5% lower than the Euro ratings. So the 210 HP Mustang V6 is really 220 HP in your ratings.

If I'm hearing what you are saying correctly, it sounds like the tax laws in Europe that are based on displacement are out of date. They should be based on gas mileage and whether the car requires regular or premium gas. Premium gas requires more crude old to make it so it sort of defeats the intent of your tax laws which is to reduce crude oil consumption.

QCStang · Oct 27, 2004

351CJ said:
A couple things.

1. Doesn't the Jag engine require Premium gas? Here in the states the Jag 3.0, 4.0 and 4.2 all require premium gas. With an engine that requires premium, you have to get 10% to 12% better gas mileage just to break even.

2. That Jag 240 HP # is probably DIN or bhp HP. Here in the US Jag had to lower all its HP ratings because they were using bhp or DIN. In the US we use SAE net. Typically SAE net is 3% - 5% lower than the Euro ratings. So the 210 HP Mustang V6 is really 220 HP in your ratings.

If I'm hearing what you are saying correctly, it sounds like the tax laws in Europe that are based on displacement are out of date. They should be based on gas mileage and whether the car requires regular or premium gas. Premium gas requires more crude old to make it so it sort of defeats the intent of your tax laws which is to reduce crude oil consumption.

Hey, great info. I learned a couple of things. I might also add that the Jag engine is far more expensive than the 4.0 in the 6 cyl Stang. Putting the Jag engine in would boost the price of the V6 version beyond the V8 version. Why buy the V6 then?

390Fe · Oct 27, 2004

Brian68GT said:
Yeh, that all makes sense, the needs in North America differ from Europe and your petrol is way cheaper, for the moment, so it makes no odds to you guys if you have a 3.0 or a 4.0 V6, which is great.

If the car ever came out in Europe i would suspect, but may be wrong, that it would have a smaller engine.

The Jaguar 3.0 V6 in the S Type produces 240 bhp at 6800 rpm, which sounds comparable to the 4.0 in the Mustang (i'm no expert on these things), and does an average of 26.4 miles to the gallon. The S Type is probably similar in size to the Mustang. Would this engine not have done the trick instead of the 4.0?

The 4.0 produces 210 bhp at around 5400 rpm - that's 1,000+ rpm more you have to rev to generate the 240 bhp- How often do you rev to 6800 rpm in street driving? Also, compare the Torque ratings for the two engines and WHERE they peak at - Big torque #'s at LOW rpms = strong off the line accelleraton. I haven't seem firm figures yet for the mileage on the 4.0 but I would be willing to bet it BETTERS the mileage of the 3.0 by 3 or 4 mpg on the highway.
I'm really no expert, i'm just trying to understand the whole thing as i'm planning on buying an 05 within the next year or two. I'd be sickened if i got a 4.0 or 4.6 and then discovered that it comes out in europe with a smaller, more effiencent and equally powerful engine.

- That costs quite a bit more and works HARDER to generate similar #'s to a larger displacement engine.

120rir · Oct 27, 2004

I had a test-drive in a V-6 the other day (automatic unfortunately, not a stick) and really loved it. I've heard some criticism about various and sundry features of the 05 Mustang but I feel they're largely unwarranted. Some have said the handling is mediocre and the interior is "cheap"....then they go on to make comparisons between the Mustang and cars costing two, three, or five times as much! Let's face it, the Mustang has never been THE last word in performance or quality...it's a "sports" car for the masses. Anyhow, especially coming from yet another Honda Accord, this V-6 is a blast and it handles like a dream. Once the current hype has subsided and you can actually wheel and deal a bit I'll be buying one and lovin' it!

01LightningGal · Oct 27, 2004

Brian68GT said:
Yeh, that all makes sense, the needs in North America differ from Europe and your petrol is way cheaper, for the moment, so it makes no odds to you guys if you have a 3.0 or a 4.0 V6, which is great.

If the car ever came out in Europe i would suspect, but may be wrong, that it would have a smaller engine.

As the chassis is based on the S Type jaguar, it could easily have the 3.0 V6 from this car. Now explain this to me:

The Jaguar 3.0 V6 in the S Type produces 240 bhp at 6800 rpm, which sounds comparable to the 4.0 in the Mustang (i'm no expert on these things), and does an average of 26.4 miles to the gallon. The S Type is probably similar in size to the Mustang. Would this engine not have done the trick instead of the 4.0?

I'm really no expert, i'm just trying to understand the whole thing as i'm planning on buying an 05 within the next year or two. I'd be sickened if i got a 4.0 or 4.6 and then discovered that it comes out in europe with a smaller, more effiencent and equally powerful engine.

The 3.0 in the Jaguar is a massaged version of the Ford Duratec V6. It uses VVT and a different cam, plus aggressive tuning to make more hp. Mazda also uses a version of this engine in their 6 cars, but it doesn't develop quite as much power because it is not as agressively tuned. It does, however, use VVT (variable valve timing). The Ford version makes 200hp and uses regular fuel. This is the same engine that is in my Tribute, and I love it. The Mazda 6 version makes 220hp, but I don't know if it takes premium or regular (can't find it in any of the magazines I have left......... I recently went on a magazine throw away binge). The Jaguar version is the hottest. In my MT it shows it making 235hp, but it does require premium fuel.

In general, American engines are larger dispacement. They have a relaxed way of making their power, instead of the franetic 8000rpm, powerband as wide as your little finger, small displacement engines you see in some other countries. We see those here also, because the cars they are in are just US versions of the cars. You can get very good fuel economy out of them as long as you are not on them all the time. This is because they do not make alot of power when being driven in a leisurely fashion. You will also find that these same small displacement, high hp engines routinely take premium fuel. They run high compression, and at very high rpm's......... so premium fuel is not just suggested, but necessary. Except for a few of the highest performance American V8's, the norm here is lower compression, mild tune, and regular fuel.

I person who spends $19,000 on a Mustang does not want to spend $2.50+ per gallon in fuel.

Its just a different philosophy here. This is a very large country, with large spaces between places. People drive alot of miles per year, and like that drive to be relaxed. Larger displacement, higher torque, lower revving engines supply what we want.

That isn't to say that the higher revving engines don't have their place here, because they do. Just that it is the exception, not the norm.

351CJ · Oct 27, 2004

I'm about 98% sure that the Mazda version of the Duratec runs on 87 Octane.

The Lincoln LS is also available with a VVT version of the 3.0 Duratec. It is similar to, but NOT the same as the Jag version. The Lincoln version also requires 91 Octane. It puts out 232 HP & but only 220 lb ft. of torque, less than the 240 lb st that the 87 Octane 4.0 Mustang engine.

'03 6-Speed · Oct 27, 2004

351CJ said:
I'm about 98% sure that the Mazda version of the Duratec runs on 87 Octane.

The Lincoln LS is also available with a VVT version of the 3.0 Duratec. It is similar to, but NOT the same as the Jag version. The Lincoln version also requires 91 Octane. It puts out 232 HP & but only 220 lb ft. of torque, less than the 240 lb st that the 87 Octane 4.0 Mustang engine.

Don't forget that wonderful 4.0 liter V8 it can pack

01LightningGal · Oct 27, 2004

Sorry, I forgot about the Lincoln version.

The Duratec 3.0 is a very versatile engine that is used in many different configurations. While I really enjoy it in my Tribute, what it really needs in my trucklett is a 6-speed auto trans. The 4-speed really bogs it down.

However, it is still fun........... and thats what counts.

Test drove a V6 this weekend...

kruzn

New Member

Stangar

New Member

kruzn

New Member

oatmealr

New Member

'03 6-Speed

New Member

Brian68GT

New Member

351CJ

New Member

QCStang

Brian68GT

New Member

'03 6-Speed

New Member

331ci_89gt

Member

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

351CJ

New Member

QCStang

390Fe

120rir

New Member

01LightningGal

New Member

351CJ

New Member

'03 6-Speed

New Member

01LightningGal

New Member

Similar threads

Test drove a V6 this weekend...

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Captain Tangnet

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency