The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[jrc1122]

I think Tiger Woods would be a great next topic, since we talk about everything else in this thread lol

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by fazm

fixed for you

Insert foot in mouth....
That's what I get for typing too fast and not proofreading...

Thanks.

[BlackieRay]

Just read a review in the local newspaper by a reporter who was at the road test and he said the 2011 Mustang beat the Camaro because of a much better transmission, not the engine. He said the Camaro's tough shifting transmission holds it back.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by BlackieRay

Just read a review in the local newspaper by a reporter who was at the road test and he said the 2011 Mustang beat the Camaro because of a much better transmission, not the engine. He said the Camaro's tough shifting transmission holds it back.

Auto vs Auto I have to believe the Ford tranny to be the better one. I mean they went with AFM and the L99 so they could still get by without the gaz guzzler tax.

Ford uses the same engines as the manual and were still able to get nearly identical MPG numbers from the auto compared to manual.

And this new auto is a baby of Ford and Gertrag working together. That auto is basically a in house Ford tranny.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Auto vs Auto I have to believe the Ford tranny to be the better one. I mean they went with AFM and the L99 so they could still get by without the gaz guzzler tax.

Actually...they used AFM because it was an inexpensive way to quickly increase the highway efficiency of the V8. Something they had planned on doing since the concept car. However, they cannot pair AFM to a manual transmission because of the NVH issues. Had they not used this feature, the auto SS would have probably scored 23mpg on the highway, "nearly identical" to the manual SS, and not subject to the gas-guzzler tax.

I would say GM has some of the best automatics out there, so much so that foreign competitors have been known to buy units for their vehicles. Much, if not all of the Mustangs fuel economy benefits come from the new (finally-efficient-enough-to-justify-DOHC) engine and other fuel-saving changes like the EPSA. Not the transmission.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Actually...they used AFM because it was an inexpensive way to quickly increase the highway efficiency of the V8. Something they had planned on doing since the concept car. However, they cannot pair AFM to a manual transmission because of the NVH issues. Had they not used this feature, the auto SS would have probably scored 23mpg on the highway, "nearly identical" to the manual SS, and not subject to the gas-guzzler tax.

I would say GM has some of the best automatics out there, so much so that foreign competitors have been known to buy units for their vehicles. Much, if not all of the Mustangs fuel economy benefits come from the new (finally-efficient-enough-to-justify-DOHC) engine and other fuel-saving changes like the EPSA. Not the transmission.

Fair point.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Actually ULTA the stock internals in the 5.0 are about hand and hand with the stock internals in the LS3.

Both have the hyper-exploditis pistons. Although that is an easy fix for both motors.

Hypereutectic just means they are made of an aluminum with a high silicon content. We won't know the strength of the internals until people put them to the test. For now, it's all speculation.

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

Hypereutectic just means they are made of an aluminum with a high silicon content. We won't know the strength of the internals until people put them to the test. For now, it's all speculation.

Yep.

Someone is going to have to take a stock internal 5.0 to the limit..and then past it.

Then we'll know what the limit is!

[syr74]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

So you are saying top fuel could be even faster if they went to OHC? Explain.
Id like to know how all those complex internal moving parts would work and hold up under 5000+ horsepower

Are you serious? The valvetrain in an OHV design, by it's very nature, is vastly more covoluted than an OHC setup needs to be. In an OHC setup all I have to have is a couple of sprockets, a chain., the camshafts themselves, and a direct acting cam bucket to actuate the valve and the spring underneath.

On an OHV design I still have the sprockets, chain, and a cam, although I do have fewer of them, but then for every valve in the engine I have to have a relatively long and thin pushrod reaching up to a rocker arms that reaches across the head to actuate the valve. Those parts do their job, but they are relatively fragile and absolutely create a weak link.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

What is the fastest time any ohc design has ever went in the 1/4? No car under any class has ever gone faster than pushrod (except for the rocket propelled cars of the 70's) Surely someone has pushed OHC to the limit.

Why would somebody build the OHC counterpart to a Top Fuel motor when they would know they can't use it? Several folks have petitioned to able to use the same in the past, but the projects never got very far because the NHRA and IHRA like their Hemi's as they are. As for the good old days, SOHC Ford big blocks did absolutely rule Top Fuel for a time several decades ago, before they were banned from competition.

Here is some food for thought for you. If OHC engines aren't a threat then why aren't they allowed?

[Sax1031]

syr it is a lot like when the bikes run at the top level. Harley must have a lot of damn bargaining power as they are able to run their latest tech in their racing engines while the sanctioning body is telling their jap counterparts they can't run DOHC designs like the bike that are sold to the public. Now this might have changed in the last 4 years as that was the last time I paid much attention to the bike racing.

I always get a laugh out of that.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by syr74

Are you serious? The valvetrain in an OHV design, by it's very nature, is vastly more covoluted than an OHC setup needs to be. In an OHC setup all I have to have is a couple of sprockets, a chain., the camshafts themselves, and a direct acting cam bucket to actuate the valve and the spring underneath.

On an OHV design I still have the sprockets, chain, and a cam, although I do have fewer of them, but then for every valve in the engine I have to have a relatively long and thin pushrod reaching up to a rocker arms that reaches across the head to actuate the valve. Those parts do their job, but they are relatively fragile and absolutely create a weak link.



Why would somebody build the OHC counterpart to a Top Fuel motor when they would know they can't use it? Several folks have petitioned to able to use the same in the past, but the projects never got very far because the NHRA and IHRA like their Hemi's as they are. As for the good old days, SOHC Ford big blocks did absolutely rule Top Fuel for a time several decades ago, before they were banned from competition.

Here is some food for thought for you. If OHC engines aren't a threat then why aren't they allowed?

Exactly. There are far better ways to make power than roots blowers on top of OHV hemi's, just like there are far better ways to make power than with carbs like in NASCAR. If rules didn't specifically rule out certain designs and parts, you would see OHC multi-turbo top fuelers and OHC direct injected engines in nascar.

[alrox]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Actually...they used AFM because it was an inexpensive way to quickly increase the highway efficiency of the V8. Something they had planned on doing since the concept car. However, they cannot pair AFM to a manual transmission because of the NVH issues. Had they not used this feature, the auto SS would have probably scored 23mpg on the highway, "nearly identical" to the manual SS, and not subject to the gas-guzzler tax.

I would say GM has some of the best automatics out there, so much so that foreign competitors have been known to buy units for their vehicles. Much, if not all of the Mustangs fuel economy benefits come from the new (finally-efficient-enough-to-justify-DOHC) engine and other fuel-saving changes like the EPSA. Not the transmission.

I disagree. They had to use AFM or else be subject to the gas guzzler tax on the automatic V8's. There is no point in having AFM at all if they could do it without beating that tax.

[mrray13]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Auto vs Auto I have to believe the Ford tranny to be the better one. I mean they went with AFM and the L99 so they could still get by without the gaz guzzler tax.

Ford uses the same engines as the manual and were still able to get nearly identical MPG numbers from the auto compared to manual.

And this new auto is a baby of Ford and Gertrag working together. That auto is basically a in house Ford tranny.

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Actually...they used AFM because it was an inexpensive way to quickly increase the highway efficiency of the V8. Something they had planned on doing since the concept car. However, they cannot pair AFM to a manual transmission because of the NVH issues. Had they not used this feature, the auto SS would have probably scored 23mpg on the highway, "nearly identical" to the manual SS, and not subject to the gas-guzzler tax.

I would say GM has some of the best automatics out there, so much so that foreign competitors have been known to buy units for their vehicles. Much, if not all of the Mustangs fuel economy benefits come from the new (finally-efficient-enough-to-justify-DOHC) engine and other fuel-saving changes like the EPSA. Not the transmission.

To further the tranny issue, although I don't know if the L99 gets it, but the v6 auto has a ton of torque management in the tranny to soften the shifts. It has been shown that if the tranny gets tuned, ie; remove the torque management, the auto is quicker and the shifts firmer. Even in Sport mode, the factory tranny tune is a grandmother, lol.

Now, again, I don't know if the L99 uses torque management in the tranny like the v6 does, but if it does, a quick tune of the tranny would make the L99 a quicker car without touching anything else.

[Napper]

Is it really a drivers race?.. Stock for stock.

I mean Joe blow can't even buy one yet,( i think) yet i see you tube matchups.....

Having a Mustang ,as a rental, while my car is being repaired i can say as a car guy that its not bad (slow) but if your a pony car guy, you have to give the other ponies some respect.

i've had Ford mustang Gt, Dodge whatever, and one you mod all bets are off.

but i am perterbered by this mustang fanboy club we have here. Anyone have verifiable data? either way. The king never stays king for too long. a fact in history...there is always someone trying to be King of the hill.