Quote:
Originally Posted by rayhawk
I don't know if I missed the part that says for sure what engines are coming on the 2011 mustangs, but one thing just doesn't add up to me.
|
At this point we do know that the 5.0L is coming for 2011MY for the Mustang primarily because we know the motor will be production ready by then and the Mustang is one of only two vehicles which will offer this engine initially. In other words, it has to go into something and as there isn't much it will be going into, Mustang more or less has to be on that list.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rayhawk
With what are sure to be significantly reduced sales for the next few years, is Ford really going to have an updated v6 for the base car, a TTV6 for a middle ground car, a 5.0L V8 for a GT, and a GT500? IMO the TTv6 would be way to close in cost and performance to the 5.0L to justify offering it. It is not as if the 5.0L DOHC motor or the ecoboost V6 will be cheap engines by any stretch.
|
I agree with you wholeheartedly here. First, no real information of any kind has ever leaked from Ford regarding the possibility of the 3.5L Ecoboost making it under the hood of any Mustangin the near future. Even the go to insiders unanimously state they haven't heard a thing....not a peep.
In fact, the last time Ford even made mention of the possibility was in a survey asking folks if they would rather have a 3.5L GTDi V6 or a 5.0L V8 circulated several years ago. And we know the answer given to that question and the result of the same, because if the enthusiast community had primarily checked the V6 GTDi box the 5.0L almost certainly would have been axed given the fact that only the Mustang and BOF trucks will be utilizing the 5.0L.
As for both a 3.5L EB V6 and a 5.0L V8 in the Mustang, again I agree. The only way this makes any sense at all is if Ford plans on charging a significant premium for the 5.0L V8. Given the fact that this engine will be a high volume, mainstream piece I just don't see that happening. Further consider the reality that the 3.5L EB will bring significant complexity to the Mustang assembly line without really adding anything the 5.0L wont bring to the table and it just doesn't seem overly likely. I'm not saying Ford wouldn't offer both charging significantly more for the V8 simply because they can, particualy since the Big Three wont let anything stand in the way of their plans, not even common sense. But I do hope they are smart enough not to make that error.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rayhawk
Based on the historical significance of the 5.0L motor (i know-its not the same) I think this is far more likely than the ecoboost setup. Should be interesting to see if the Mustang can keep the weight off, my guess is the cost is going to go up considerably if they build a 400hp 5.0L motor and move to 6 speed transmissions.
|
I think we have already seen a good portion pf the price increase the 5.0L will warrant with the 2010. It would be logical for Ford to ratchet up the price a bit now to soften the blow so to speak, and I think that is exactly what they have done. I' am also not entirely certain the 5.0L will be significantly more expensive to build if it is more expensive to build at all. The new 3.5L is purportedly a much less expensive engine to than the old 3.0L due largely to more advanced and refined manufacturing techniques. The Coyote will certainly take those lessons a step further, and perhaps even far enough to offse the additional costs of DOHC heads and 3 stage VVT.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rayhawk
What do pushrods have to do with the benefits of DI? I will agree the cost and complexity of DI is high but I haven't seen anything that tells me the performance and efficiency gains are not worthwhile. Remember that every manufacturer knows how to make a bigger/more powerful motor when they first release a particular vehicle, but they almost always detune the motor first, then two years later bump the displacement or the hp to help sales. I don't think GM is done improving the LS engine series.
|
As for the value of DI. Eventually, as prices come down and the system becomes more sorted DI will certainly become more commonplace on n/a engines. At the moment, DI still brings enough questions and costs to the table, for what is honestly minimal benefit, to make the use of the same questionable. If were talking about the improvement DI brings to efficiency, I have yet to see DI by itself manage a ten percent improvement in both power and fuel efficiency over a PFI engine. In fact, when I have seen power improvements in the ten percent range more often than not there is no increase in fuel economy.
A Ten percent increase in power is nothing to sneeze at, but DI is still a very expensive addition to an engine, Ford even suggested that they could very nearly develop and build GTDi engines for what it costs to develop and build simple n/a DI engines. Hence why they took a pass on the idea. If the economy were better and CAFE standards weren't looming like the reaper then things might be different. However, given the current state of the economy, the looming CAFE question, and the financial state of GM, I find it difficult to believe that GM is overly eager to spend a whole lotta cash on a DI pushrod engine that seems likely r minimal gains in power or economy at best.
As for the problems with DI on a pushrod design.
DI still has issues with fuel atomization in the mid range, and in some cases in the low range, of engine performance. On a DOHC design VVT is used to combat this, but even then the situation isn't typically fully solved. Provijng that this is indeed still the case, Lexus even resorted to a hybrid PFI/DI setup to get rid of the problem on their most recent V8 design.
A pushrod design is hadicapped here for two reasons. First, pushrod designs can't really employ VVT on the same scale that DOHC designs can for obvious reasons. Something like the three stage VVT on both the intake and exhaust side of the engine like we are seeing on the new 5.0L Ford are probalby all but impossible to implement on a pushrod engine, they certainly couldn't be done for a reasonable amount of money. In other words, the more complex VVT systems companies like Ford are using to reduce the nox gas emissions problem and alleviate the atomization issues don't apply so neatly to pushrod designs.
GM could utilize a hybrid setup like Lexus does, but then you have to solve the problem of where you put both injectors in a combustion chamber which doesn't make the solution as easy as the stypical DOHC combustion chamber does. Placement of the same is easy in a nice, rounded DOHC combustion chamber with plenty of room in the middle for whatever you might want to throw in there. But, by the time you have made room for the pushrods to pass through, placed the PFI injection nozzle in the optimum spot and thrown a sparkplug somewhere in the vicinity of the same in a typicaly pushrod combustion chamber you really aren't left with a lot of good choices for DI nozzle positioning.
I just don't see it being worth the effort.