Would you like a more powerful GT? Would you sacrfice the V8 engine for it?

300bhp/ton

New Member

Apr 4, 2005

530

0

0

England

Jun 21, 2005

#1

• Jun 21, 2005

• #1

With lots of talk that Ford didn't offer enough power with the new GT, here's an option that could well have been a reality (similar options where once considered in the early 1990's).

Would you rather have a:

1. 300bhp/320lb ft 4.6 V8 as per the current lineup

or

2. 2.0 litre 16v Turbo 4 cylinder with 350bhp/360lb ft


Such an engine already exists in the form of the 2.0 Ford ZeeTec which in mild turbo form produced 220bhp for the Focus RS, however this engine also appears destined for the forthcoming Cosworth Focus with 330-350bhp.

 

S

SpazHairlip

New Member

Jun 13, 2005

44

0

0

Jun 21, 2005

#2

• Jun 21, 2005

• #2

4 cylinders are not cars, they are lawn mowers.

 

Q

QCStang

Founding Member

Mar 28, 2002

813

1

18

Aylmer, Quebec, Canada

Jun 21, 2005

#3

• Jun 21, 2005

• #3

Low end Torque. Nothing better.

The V8 has FAR more potential. Add a KB twinscrew.

 

B

bigaloz

New Member

Nov 11, 2004

50

0

0

New Jersey

Jun 21, 2005

#4

• Jun 21, 2005

• #4

V8 only

 

J

JST4FN

New Member

Apr 4, 2005

12

0

0

Jun 21, 2005

#5

• Jun 21, 2005

• #5

I 've owned two SVO's and they are fun as hell, but I believe the Mustang should have a V8 and keep it. A speciality car however would not bother me, but I think a 6 cylinder(w/turbo) would be a better choice because of the cars weight.

Thanks Mike

 

Mossberg

Active Member

Jul 21, 2003

0

1

36

ATL, Shawty

Jun 21, 2005

#6

• Jun 21, 2005

• #6

V8 or nothing. The sound alone is worth it even if it sacrifices horsepower.

 

Mickey21

New Member

May 10, 2002

43

0

0

Austin, TX

Jun 21, 2005

#7

• Jun 21, 2005

• #7

I would easily give up 50HP to get 4 more cylinders... Heck I would EASILY take a 250HP V12!! Sign me up...

 

0

05Stangster

New Member

Mar 31, 2005

113

1

0

Austin, Texas

Jun 21, 2005

#8

• Jun 21, 2005

• #8

Nothing like the rumble of a V8. Nough said.

 

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

May 1, 2005

3,015

1

79

7200 feet

Jun 21, 2005

#9

• Jun 21, 2005

• #9

V8, no rice burners

 

crewwolfy

Member

May 26, 2005

108

0

16

Chicago, IL

Jun 21, 2005

#10

• Jun 21, 2005

• #10

I'd love to see a RWD 4banger come out of ford, similar to Nissan's older 240SX. But don't do it to the Mustang.

 

199

New Member

Apr 22, 2005

101

0

0

Jun 21, 2005

#11

• Jun 21, 2005

• #11

V8 = Muscle


So i will go with the V8 mucle anytime its not just hp numbers its the felling of the V8 rumbling.

 

W

whiteboyslo

New Member

Apr 6, 2005

11

0

0

San Diego (RB)

Jun 21, 2005

#12

• Jun 21, 2005

• #12

not in the mustang, but as a focus owner i have to say the idea of a ford turbo 4 making that much HP gives me wood.

they should bring it over either in a SE focus or in some other model like the Aussie Falcon. God that car is sexy!

oh, and 4 cyl does not equal rice. fartcans, bodykits installed bot not painted, excessive neon (or any neon for that matter), or mods that make for no performance but look like they should equal rice. please get it right.

Mike

 

D

delurker

New Member

Apr 15, 2005

169

0

0

Jun 21, 2005

#13

• Jun 21, 2005

• #13

V8, mang. Otherwise, it may as well be front-wheel driive.

 

crewwolfy

Member

May 26, 2005

108

0

16

Chicago, IL

Jun 21, 2005

#14

• Jun 21, 2005

• #14

whiteboyslo said:

oh, and 4 cyl does not equal rice. fartcans, bodykits installed bot not painted, excessive neon (or any neon for that matter), or mods that make for no performance but look like they should equal rice. please get it right.

Mike

Click to expand...

I agree, but what about these 3/4 scoops for the stang? Is this ricing it out? Scoops there generally cool the rear brakes when functional, but all you're doing with a stang is taping on some shaped urethane. Just curious what you guys think.

 

NVERL8

Member

Mar 31, 2005

72

3

9

Cincinnati

Jun 21, 2005

#15

• Jun 21, 2005

• #15

Go big or go home. V8

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#16

• Jun 21, 2005

• #16

Horsepower is one thing but what really moves the car is torque, and that 4 banger has none to speak of. Sure it'll move a 1500-2000 lb car smartly, but stick it in a 3000 lb car, and you ain't going nowhere fast.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#17

• Jun 21, 2005

• #17

if I had my druthers, I'd much rather prefer my 331-sixpack under the hood of my new Stang.

 

C

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

20+ Year Stangneter

Feb 5, 2002

4,379

1

68

Maryland

Jun 21, 2005

#18

• Jun 21, 2005

• #18

Didn't they already try a Turbo I-4 for Stangs, weren't they more pricey and didn't sell that much back then, why would they now? The modular V8s are much cheaper to produce and use in Mustangs (the whole point of the Modular engine family line) then building a limited highly tuned high HP turbo 4 banger. If they're gonna stop making a high horsepower Mustang that is not a V8 they should just build something else which they tried with the Ford Probe back in the late 80's to mid 90's, which was supposed to be the Mustang replacement, everyone cried out and we all know what eventually happened with that car. Afterall the Mustangs main selling point is not power, it's only part of the equation. Mustangs are cars for everyone.

 

S

svtash

New Member

Sep 30, 2004

29

0

0

Vista, CA

Jun 21, 2005

#19

• Jun 21, 2005

• #19

i have a svt focus right now (06 GT on order) and a 350hp turbo motor would be awesome in the foci. One of the main reasons i am switching back to the stang though is cause i miss my V8. There is nothing like the growl of a nice V8. I ..miss...*sniffle*...it. But will have it again soon.

 

Pliskin

New Member

Jul 27, 2004

109

0

0

Jun 21, 2005

#20

• Jun 21, 2005

• #20

Trying to go up a hill in a 4cyl.....Priceless.


A turbo 4cyl seems more like a ricer engine than an American muscle car engine.