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

BLK_ROUSH · Jun 22, 2005

66 BLAKE 96 said:
Seems like this would be a retread of the 80's SVO. My experience with those cars is that:

a) boost is really fun.
b) there's only so much you can squeeze out of small displacement engines before stuff starts breaking.

In stock (or nearly stock) form, an SVO is a heckuva fun car. But if I'm trying to make (and keep) serious power, give me the V8. I can always add boost to it later.

My thoughts and sentiments exactly.

Been there. Done that.

gtvertsoon · Jun 22, 2005

Maybe a turbo V6, but def. not a turbo 4 cyl. The Evo is a 2.0L turbo and although it doesn't take a whole lot to give it 350 hp, it is way easier to make tons of power and torque on a V8. The mustang is too heavy for a 2.0L and there would be immense turbo lag on a 2.0L turbo engine to get that kind of power. If it was a 3.5L twin turbo V6 (a la Greddy 350Z/G35), that would be a different story. It would easily make 450 hp on low boost.

sunil6784 · Jun 22, 2005

"There's no replacement for displacement"

Far more potential with the V8

05Stangster · Jun 22, 2005

I really just need to hear the "rumble" Now I just need a set of twin turbo's for our little ole 4.6

CdnNavybob · Jun 22, 2005

I'm more than happy to stick with the V8. I just wish they'd get more power out of it in stock form. There are a lot of V6's out there making close to 300hp. Ford needs to do another "PI" and push another 20-30hp out of this engine.

CatmanJJ · Jun 22, 2005

CdnNavybob said:
Ford needs to do another "PI" and push another 20-30hp out of this engine.

Seems like with the tech transfer program they really left the extra 20-30 hp up to the aftermarket (A la CAI, Tune and exhaust etc) especially with the conservative factory tune on 87 octane.

CdnNavybob · Jun 22, 2005

CatmanJJ said:
Seems like with the tech transfer program they really left the extra 20-30 hp up to the aftermarket (A la CAI, Tune and exhaust etc) especially with the conservative factory tune on 87 octane.

That doesn't make sense to me unless they're using it as a buffer so that they can up the power to stay competitive over the next couple of years. Why let Superchips or whoever make the money off that extra 30hp? Why not advertise the car as 330hp and up the price $500? It's money in their pocket that way.

CatmanJJ · Jun 22, 2005

CdnNavybob said:
That doesn't make sense to me unless they're using it as a buffer so that they can up the power to stay competitive over the next couple of years. Why let Superchips or whoever make the money off that extra 30hp? Why not advertise the car as 330hp and up the price $500? It's money in their pocket that way.

I agree with the fact that in part it's a buffer to increase HP numbers over the next couple of years. But also, the way I see it at least for the GT, I'm willing to be that they've done the research and realized how large the aftermarket is for the Mustang and maybe they left room figuring that the core enthusiasts that buy GTs will want to mod the car in one form or another. Plus weren't they in cahoots with the likes of Saleen, Roush and Steeda which offer more powerful versions of the Mustang. They also could of just not rated it higher or produced more power because of insurance purposes or CAFE standards, but that's just an edjumacated guess.

Plus it's already a 40 hp jump over the '04s, with '04s still on the lots while '05s were arriving, just think if they were rated at say 330, that would have made it really difficult to get rid any remaining '04s with that large of a performance gap.

TR03Mach1 · Jun 22, 2005

For some of us older guys, the thought of a 4 cylinder in a Mustang conjures up nightmares of the '74 Mustang II. That's one piece of automotive history I would hate to see repeat itself!

Asha'man · Jun 22, 2005

And for others of us, the thought of a 4 cylinder turbo in a Mustang conjures up the days when it was the highest-performance car of the lineup.

I wouldn't mind seeing a V8 for the GT/Cobra, and a turbo 4, maybe the Duratech 2.3/2.5, in the base car instead of the V6.

Brian

Maza4ever14 · Jun 22, 2005

only if they made a smaller stang

70lightning · Jun 22, 2005

V-8 for life bishes/

D.Hearne · Jun 22, 2005

reddrgn01gt said:
Two liters is a bottle of coke not an engine displacement.

This is THE best one liner of this whole thread.

Dr_EluSivE · Jun 23, 2005

I agree with some of the things in this thread, V8s have better low end Tq, and they do Sound better. I do believe though that with the gas situation elevating that you will start to see and end to big v8s and see Forced induction smaller motors gain popularity. My car if driven normally gets 28mpg, but if you stomp on it, it still goes. I love the V8, i have a 64 comet with a 5.0 in it, but i do believe that V8s wont totally disappear, but will become less common in favor of smaller more hi tech motors.
As for all the close minded V8 only people.... Open your eyes and mind up to something different.. dont be haters.

Dr.

Klay · Jun 23, 2005

Well considering muscle cars are known for having v8's you would really be changing the whole essence of the mustang
Why change something that has already proven to work?
Plus, if ford actually did put a turbo 4 cylinder in a mustang what would they do with their sport compacts? That's all a mustang would be...

D.Hearne · Jun 23, 2005

Dr_EluSivE said:
I agree with some of the things in this thread, V8s have better low end Tq, and they do Sound better. I do believe though that with the gas situation elevating that you will start to see and end to big v8s and see Forced induction smaller motors gain popularity. My car if driven normally gets 28mpg, but if you stomp on it, it still goes. I love the V8, i have a 64 comet with a 5.0 in it, but i do believe that V8s wont totally disappear, but will become less common in favor of smaller more hi tech motors.
As for all the close minded V8 only people.... Open your eyes and mind up to something different.. dont be haters.

Dr.

Big V8's? The 4.6 is hardly what I'd call a "big" V8. Unless you're just referring to it's physical size. In displacement, it's a small V8. As for the "don't be haters" comment, get a life.

triggz · Jun 23, 2005

Why go backwards? Go FORWARDS!
Lets rip that eaton off the cobra and have a 500HP TURBO V8!!

DCBigpimpin · Jun 23, 2005

V8 > I4 anyday ! No 4 banger rice stang. Who in their right mind wants to ride in a car that sounds like something used for lawn care (ie weed eater) . Keep V8 muscle cars alive

AvalancheSVT · Jun 23, 2005

i'm here for the explicit purpose of replacing my 2.4L 4 banger that i could easily turbo and get more power than i want with a 302.

NA V8 power owns, the end.

vacooley · Jun 23, 2005

I would prefer to have the perf components that are required to get 350hp from a 2.0 in my 4.6. (or maybe a pressurized 5.4......)

All things being equal there is still no replacement for displacement.

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

Prefferred engine:

300bhp 4.6 V8

350bhp 2.0 Turbo 4 cylinder

BLK_ROUSH

gtvertsoon

New Member

sunil6784

Member

05Stangster

New Member

CdnNavybob

New Member

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

CdnNavybob

New Member

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

TR03Mach1

Member

Asha'man

Maza4ever14

New Member

70lightning

New Member

D.Hearne

New Member

Dr_EluSivE

Klay

New Member

D.Hearne

New Member

triggz

DCBigpimpin

New Member

AvalancheSVT

vacooley

New Member

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

Prefferred engine:

300bhp 4.6 V8

350bhp 2.0 Turbo 4 cylinder

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Captain Tangnet

New Member

Captain Tangnet

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency