Mustangs................

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by syr74

I've seen that, and all that accomplishes is to further cloud the issue of whether DI is beneficial enough on a pushrod V8 to even be bothered with. GM knows, but we don't and the info provided does nothing to help us. Why do I say that? Simple, DI by itself provides nowhere near that percentage of power improvement on any engine with the exception of forced induction pieces. That means that vast the majority of the power gain cited in that article is from a change other than DI, which in turn means that we have no idea how much of the power gain cited...if any of it....is actually from DI.

As I said before, if the DI versions of the LS series V8 engines were as magical as was claimed, it would already be here shoring up sales of full size trucks and improving fuel economy averages in the process. You aren't hearing much about them now for a reason, and my guess is that reason is disappointing performance in producable trim. Ford already figureD this out and they were thinking of implementing the system on a DOHC platform with three stage VVT on the intake and achaust sides of the valvetrain, meaning they should have been able to realize far more benefit than GM can plausibly hope for given the more limited valvetrain articulation the cam in block, pushrod V8 design is saddled with.

In naturally aspirated applications DI is a very, very expensive way to get a ten percent improvement in power on a very good day, and an even lesser improvement in economy (if any meaningful improvement in fuel economy is realized at all) at the expense of increased nox emissions. It isn't worth it.

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.

[Rock36]

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. Mustang was the only game in town (pretty much) for affordable V8 coupes since 2003. They enjoyed good sales throughout that time, obviously. They had 3 variants, v6, GT, and GT500. 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.

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 you have some valid concerns. As recently as 2003/2004 there was an additional level of Mustang. Back then, Ford had the base V6, the 4.6L 2V Mustang GT, the 4.6L 4V Mustang Mach 1, and the S/C 4.6L 4V Mustang Cobra, and I don't think the appearance of the Mach 1 really cut into the sales of either the GT or the Cobra.

Perhaps more relevant, back in the 80s, Ford used to offer a turbocharged inline-4 Mustang from 1979 to 1981 and then again from 84-86. From 84-86 the turboed Mustang was called the Mustang SVO, and through all model years the turbo I4 version produced nearly as much power as the V8 Mustangs (only about a 25 bhp difference). Ford may be trying to recreate this concept with the EcoBoost.

However, the conditions of the market today are far different than they were back in the mid 80s and early 2000s, and an extra trim level for the Mustang may not make financial sense for Ford in the next few years.

[Bails]

I can see 4 trims for the Mustang again. They'll probably just wait a year after the 5.0 comes out to bring in the ecoboost as a special edition.

[syr74]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[comiskeybum]

it makes no sense to NOT put the ecoboost in the mustang

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by syr74

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.



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.



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.



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.

shaddap you! your making too much sense!

[Zeus]

Originally Posted by syr74

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.



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.



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.



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.

This is why your my source for all things Ford.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

it makes no sense to NOT put the ecoboost in the mustang

I would like to hear your reasoning for the same. I can find very few circumstances where offering the EB V6 alongside the 5.0L in the Mustang makes very much sense, and even fewer where doing so bodes well for the average enthusiast.

One of the first stumbling blocks is production line complexity. Adding another engine altogether to the Mustang production line brings more part numbers, greater complexity, greater opportunity for problems, and is likely to lengthen the average time required for production.

Those aren't necessarily a bad thing, if the changes they engender bring greater desirability and ease of sales to the lineup. I don't really see that happening here. Do I think some folks who would otherwise walk right on by a 5.0L powered Mustang GT would consider the same with a GTDi V6 under the hood? Certainly. But the question is would that number be great enough to justify the costs associated with offering that mill in the first place. Given the other things Ford could do with that money...opportunity costs... and the likelihood that the 5.0L will go over like ice cubes in Hell, I doubt it.

Some argue Ford will do this to improve their CAFE numbers. If the Mustang sold more than 200k units on a very good year I might agree. The reality is that, yet again, you will have a difficult time making a serious case for the notion that splitting potential GT sales between the 5.0L V8 and the 3.5L GTDi V6 will improve CAFE numbers enough to justify the costs involved right now. We are running into opportunity costs yet again, and the reality is that if Ford is that determined to imprvoe fuel economy numbers there are still preferable alternatives to the above which haven't been done and aren't soon planned.

Also worth mentioning. Some folks have drawn a comparison between the F-150, which will offer both engines, and the Mustang which likely wont. The problem is that there is no comparison between these two. If the motive is to improve CAFE numbers the difference in production numbers make the comparison pointless. F-150 moves more than half a million units on a terrible year, while Mustang might move 200k units in a really good year.

Offering both engines in the F-150 gives a real measure of production flexibility allowing the F-150 to give or take production in either line should one of the engines prove extremly popular, or not so popular, in another model. Tha volume also means that the F-150 can make a serious impact on CAFE ratings.

Offering both engines in the Mustang only makes sense to me if....

a: Ford is actively pushing the 3.5L GTDi V6 in the hopes of phasing out the 5.0L V8 engine line. Possible? Yes. But it seems unlikely that Ford would try to phase out a brand new engine immediately following introduction of the same

b: the 5.0L V8 is to be a premium engine offering notably above the 3.5L V6. Again, I don't see this happening, This would leave Ford having to explain away the rather stiff pricing on the Taurus SHO and every EB powered Lincoln. Further, the 5.0L is going to be a mainstream, high volume piece produced at Essex on a line with a lot of capacity. It would almost certainly cost Ford money to artificially limit the appeal of this engine through artifically higher costs.

c: the 3.5L EB V6 is a lot more fuel efficient and is truly meant to be a less thirsty, and slightly less powerful, alternative to the 5.0L V8. This one arguably makes the most sense, but seems unlikely as well given my guess that the EB V6 might be worth another two mpg or so compared to the new Coyote V8. Even if we figure three mpg difference in both city and highway driving, so long as gas prices stay below 3.00 a gallon nobody is going to care.

Originally Posted by Zues

This is why your my source for all things Ford.

I am just a messenger, but I am glad to spread the message.

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TWIN

shaddap you! your making too much sense!

Here is hoping simple logic continues to make sense at Ford.

[comiskeybum]

Originally Posted by syr74

I would like to hear your reasoning for the same. I can find very few circumstances where offering the EB V6 alongside the 5.0L in the Mustang makes very much sense, and even fewer where doing so bodes well for the average enthusiast.

One of the first stumbling blocks is production line complexity. Adding another engine altogether to the Mustang production line brings more part numbers, greater complexity, greater opportunity for problems, and is likely to lengthen the average time required for production.

Those aren't necessarily a bad thing, if the changes they engender bring greater desirability and ease of sales to the lineup. I don't really see that happening here. Do I think some folks who would otherwise walk right on by a 5.0L powered Mustang GT would consider the same with a GTDi V6 under the hood? Certainly. But the question is would that number be great enough to justify the costs associated with offering that mill in the first place. Given the other things Ford could do with that money...opportunity costs... and the likelihood that the 5.0L will go over like ice cubes in Hell, I doubt it.

Some argue Ford will do this to improve their CAFE numbers. If the Mustang sold more than 200k units on a very good year I might agree. The reality is that, yet again, you will have a difficult time making a serious case for the notion that splitting potential GT sales between the 5.0L V8 and the 3.5L GTDi V6 will improve CAFE numbers enough to justify the costs involved right now. We are running into opportunity costs yet again, and the reality is that if Ford is that determined to imprvoe fuel economy numbers there are still preferable alternatives to the above which haven't been done and aren't soon planned.

Also worth mentioning. Some folks have drawn a comparison between the F-150, which will offer both engines, and the Mustang which likely wont. The problem is that there is no comparison between these two. If the motive is to improve CAFE numbers the difference in production numbers make the comparison pointless. F-150 moves more than half a million units on a terrible year, while Mustang might move 200k units in a really good year.

Offering both engines in the F-150 gives a real measure of production flexibility allowing the F-150 to give or take production in either line should one of the engines prove extremly popular, or not so popular, in another model. Tha volume also means that the F-150 can make a serious impact on CAFE ratings.

Offering both engines in the Mustang only makes sense to me if....

a: Ford is actively pushing the 3.5L GTDi V6 in the hopes of phasing out the 5.0L V8 engine line. Possible? Yes. But it seems unlikely that Ford would try to phase out a brand new engine immediately following introduction of the same

b: the 5.0L V8 is to be a premium engine offering notably above the 3.5L V6. Again, I don't see this happening, This would leave Ford having to explain away the rather stiff pricing on the Taurus SHO and every EB powered Lincoln. Further, the 5.0L is going to be a mainstream, high volume piece produced at Essex on a line with a lot of capacity. It would almost certainly cost Ford money to artificially limit the appeal of this engine through artifically higher costs.

c: the 3.5L EB V6 is a lot more fuel efficient and is truly meant to be a less thirsty, and slightly less powerful, alternative to the 5.0L V8. This one arguably makes the most sense, but seems unlikely as well given my guess that the EB V6 might be worth another two mpg or so compared to the new Coyote V8. Even if we figure three mpg difference in both city and highway driving, so long as gas prices stay below 3.00 a gallon nobody is going to care.



I am just a messenger, but I am glad to spread the message.



Here is hoping simple logic continues to make sense at Ford.

yanno what i really dont care now that 5.0 is back. as long as they boost the reg v6 to 250 hp or more

[syr74]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

yanno what i really dont care now that 5.0 is back. as long as they boost the reg v6 to 250 hp or more

The base Mustang engine absolutely must be switched to a newer mill very soon. Why? 4.0L Cologne production is already phased out with Ford currently drawing from a stockpile of engines they built to hold them over until a new mill is ready.

That scenario leaves two plausible near term alternatives to replace the venerable 4.0L Cologne. The first is the naturally aspirated, 3.5L DOHC V6 and the second is an Ecoboost I4, and in the latter scenario the Ecoboost four used would certainly be the 2.5L version four Ford is eyeballing for the base F-150. Given what I have seen and heard, I seriously doubt that the big EB four will be ready for production by the time Mustang is ready to switch to a new base mill. I say this because 2.5L production seems to have been delayed somewhat, although this does not appear to be due to production or supply issues. In fact, there isn't much in the way of good information on why the delays are happening with this particular engine right now, but my guess is that Ford is funneling supplies elsewhere because this particular take on the Ecoboost concept is primarily intended for RWD applications and the 3.5L V6 can hold any vehicles this engine is intended to be used in quite nicely while some of the other EB engines in the pipeline are needed more immediately to meet Ford's goals near term.

Given this, the 3.5L V6 seems like the most likely candidate to immediately supplant the 4.0L Cologne even if some folks, including me, suspect that the 2.5L EB will in turn supplant the 3.5L in this application. That means at least 265hp in a car which probably will weigh at least 100lb less than the current 4.0L powered V6 model even if it sprouts the 6-speed manual transmission Ford says they want to give it. (no secret here, Ford wants all of their cars to sport at least six forward gars in the very near future) I for one would love to see that. In fact, if the 3.5L gets any power updates at all and a base, V6 Mustang equipped with this mill weighs the 32xx or so pounds that I believe it will I think we could be talking about a solid, high 13 second V6 Mustang.

[Speed74SS]

Here is what I found from Motor Trend on May 20th 2009, coming from Fords opening of the Cleveland engine plant and Fords manufacturing producers.

"EcoBoost is key to Ford's overall commitment to deliver affordable fuel efficiency for millions. By 2013, 90 percent of its North American nameplates will be available with the engine technologies in V-6 and I-4 applications. Next year, a V-6 EcoBoost engine will be available for the Ford F-150."

I would think the Mustang will be one of the 90%, maybe.

[Bocephus]

Holy crap syr74 is one smart mofo!

However, I'm thinking the 3.5EB will debut in the Mustang in an SE, for now. Later on I'm thinking that it will be an optional engine for the GT because I think that's the direction Ford wants to go: smaller, more efficient engines. It won't replace the 5.0 right away because that would piss off the Mustang faithful. I think Ford wants to slowly gain acceptance for a V6 GT because of the new CAFE standards that are coming. After 2016 V8s are going to be an endangered species unfortunately. So get 'em while you can folks! 2015 is going to be the new 1970.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Speed74SS

Here is what I found from Motor Trend on May 20th 2009, coming from Fords opening of the Cleveland engine plant and Fords manufacturing producers.

"EcoBoost is key to Ford's overall commitment to deliver affordable fuel efficiency for millions. By 2013, 90 percent of its North American nameplates will be available with the engine technologies in V-6 and I-4 applications. Next year, a V-6 EcoBoost engine will be available for the Ford F-150."

I would think the Mustang will be one of the 90%, maybe.

I would just about bet my last dollar Mustang will get an Ecoboost engine, I just don't see that engine being the 3.5L Ecoboost V6. My guess? When ready the 2.5L EB four will replace the naturally aspirated 3.5L V6 which itself is almost certainly going to supplant the current 4.0L V6 within the next year or so. And that would be no bad thing. Relative to the naturally aspirated 3.5L V5 A 2.5L Ecoboost four would probably produce about the same horsepower, similar torque with a much better torque curve, and provide at least slightly better fuel economy while likely costing less to build...even with a turbo...than the relatively complex V6 engine does.

By the 2012MY my money says the Mustang engine lineup will look like this.....

Base: 265-275hp 3.5L V6
GT: 405-425hp 5.0L V8
GT500: 585-625hp 5.4L V8

By the time the next new Mustang debuts, which will be around 2014, my guess says

Base: 265-285hp 2.5L EB I4
GT: 405-425hp 5.0L V8
GT500: 5.0L GTDi V8 with more power than the law should allow.

[comiskeybum]

[/QUOTE]GT500: 5.0L GTDi V8 with more power than the law should allow.[/QUOTE]


LOL, i like the sound of that