All new 2015 Mustang beginning production in just 4 days (July 14)

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

If that was a boss for a DI injector, it looks like the injector would be vertical in the head.

I could be wrong. I just read a few places it wasn't what people thought.

True, if they were restricted to only machine in one direction. My assumption is that the current bosses seen in the 2011+ heads are cut the way they are to serve two roles.

1. To be a place holder for the eventual use of DI injectors.

2. Since, DI wasn't to be initially utilized they were cast to not deter a proper burn of gases pre-DI.

So yes, in their current form they would not hold a properly aligned injector, as all DI injectors go in from the "side" of the head and not the "top" as bosses of this shape would force. However, the recess cast into the combustion chamber means that much less to redesign when DI comes along. It seems that redesigning a combustion chamber would take much more effort redesigning the grooves for the injectors on the outside of the head.

[Bhobbs]

If it is supposed to be a placeholder for a DI injector, I don't understand the purpose of designing it in a way that would not function.

[crysalis_01]

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my previous post, my fault.

Prefaced with, I'm no mechanical engineer:

Perhaps the design cast without an actual injector inhibited a proper/full burn of gases. So casting the recess needed for an injector, but retaining all the characteristics needed for a proper burn, without an injector present, necessitated the design we see there.

So now that the recess in the chamber is present, that's one major step they can skip when reworking the heads for DI. Did that make any more sense?

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my previous post, my fault.

Prefaced with, I'm no mechanical engineer:

Perhaps the design cast without an actual injector inhibited a proper/full burn of gases. So casting the recess needed for an injector, but retaining all the characteristics needed for a proper burn, without an injector present, necessitated the design we see there.

So now that the recess in the chamber is present, that's one major step they can skip when reworking the heads for DI. Did that make any more sense?

Oh ok. I get you now. I happen to be studying engineering but haven't taken any fluids classes yet.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Oh ok. I get you now. I happen to be studying engineering but haven't taken any fluids classes yet.

I graduated in 05 with a 3.71 GPA and fluid mechanics and thermodynamics were amongst my best class. Nothing learned there would help with what was present here.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

I graduated in 05 with a 3.71 GPA and fluid mechanics and thermodynamics were amongst my best class. Nothing learned there would help with what was present here.

So you don't think the boss sticking into the combustion chamber has any impact on the swirl characteristics of the air/fuel charge?

[HEMI DAVE]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

So you don't think the boss sticking into the combustion chamber has any impact on the swirl characteristics of the air/fuel charge?

Not only that....

But I also feel the Zygotic podium reflux from the centrifugal force resulting in the vacuum, is inherent to the fluid reticular cycle.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by HEMI DAVE

Not only that....

But I also feel the Zygotic podium reflux from the centrifugal force resulting in the vacuum, is inherent to the fluid reticular cycle.

What he said...

[Cobra_Commander]

They finally released the specs.... wow!

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/show...tang-2501.html

Pretty much what I expected.

[crysalis_01]

Yep, right inline with what anyone with common sense should have been expecting.

[Bhobbs]

That's what I expected. Hopefull GM doesn't nerf the LT1 too much because you know Ford isn't going to keep those numbers long.

[Camaro_Corvette]

I would certainly hope that is underrated... That's very surprising to me, but I'm perfectly fine with being wrong on this one. I was hoping for more of a competitive number forcing a HP bump for the 2016 camaro.

[Obzen]

Ok, now that the HP numbers for the smaller engines are out. I'm still confused. Why do they sell both? Seems close enough in performance that you could just go ahead a offer either one? Options are great and all, I just don't know how you would choose one over the other.

[Camaro_Corvette]

Originally Posted by Obzen

Ok, now that the HP numbers for the smaller engines are out. I'm still confused. Why do they sell both? Seems close enough in performance that you could just go ahead a offer either one? Options are great and all, I just don't know how you would choose one over the other.

I would assume that since the performance numbers are soo close that the MPG's would be completely different. Or it's a testing the waters kind of thing. See if people will bite for the smaller engine.