Sizzler

And I was right about Ford needing to just bring back the FE, and lo and behold, we have a 4.2" bore by 3.97" stroke pushrod engine. And all of the 'experts' here are labeling it as 'heavy'. With aluminum heads, intake (not composite like the new 7.3), an FE comes in at 500 lbs, even with an iron block. How does that compare with the smaller Ford engines? What are the official specs on the new 7.3? Anyone actually know? Deck height Bore Spacing Weight

I thought the point of the separate injectors outside the cylinder was to prevent the crud buildup on the back of the intake valves. All the detergent in the world added to your gas, of whatever brand, won't do any good if it doesn't hit the problem area. So, detergent sprayed from the intake side keeps the valves crud-free. Sort of a take off on the oil-squirters pointed at the bottom of pistons. Isn't the GT already coming with this dual injector setup?

"Taurus" doesn't start with an "F"...its days are numbered. Of course, neither does "Ranger"...soon to be the new F-100? Ford has a long history of gyrating decisions regarding which models to keep or end production of. Never liked the Taurus myself, so I'd not be too sad to see it go, of course, if Fusion is the planned replacement for it, I'll probably go away from Ford entirely.

Lot of Kia in that design. The vent-with-spear detail on the front fenders brings to mind the Optima; ^<YAWN>^

Is it ok to ever disagree with you or does that bring down the wrath of wan on me? I don't see any resemblance to the jag or Bentley other than in a general all-are-car-shaped way. The jag and b are both proportionately longer for one thing. Malibu, 3-series, little-audi, optima, Mazda sedan (not the Miata), fusion, ... I'm bored...it looks like any number of mis-sized sedans out there. To my eye, anyway.

Really, ***yawn*** Do like the paint job though. Is that going to be available on any other Ford products? Grill has an incipient kidney shape, overall looks like a dozen other designs already on the road. just curious, why isn't this thread under the "Lincoln" vehicles forum?

And why would that be? According to the graph on the right, above, as near as I can tell, that regular old V8 with the regular crank, is making 500HP at only 5,000 rpm. Who wants to be driving around at 7,000 rpm all day? Power lower in the register, especially when it's the same amount of power, does the job just as well.

I am, and I think I'll take another 6 year sabbatical from this site if no one else wonders WHY all the contortions were made to get a flat plane crank installed in a Mustang when all that could be negated and surpassed by old-school head, intake, and cam changes.

So what exactly does the flatplane crank bring to the table other than sound-effects?

Sheesh!, who annointed you emperor of Ford marketing? The POINT was, that aside from you, a LOT of potential buyers ARE looking for FWD performance and the vehicle characteristics it allows for. And, just because YOU don't 'think' it's hard to find the trim levels desired from dealers inventories, doesn't make it so. God complex much?

Cadillac ATS coupe and CTS 4-door sport sedan... Is that what Lincoln should copy? Bring back the Pantera.

I'd discount anecdocal reports of relatively few coupe from Honda and others. Unlike Ford, it is very difficult to order what you want from those manufacturers, and you're basically left with a choice of what the dealer thought he could sell easiest, usually 4 doors and bland color schemes, inside and out. Personally, I'm a fan of FWD, if the interior designers avail themselves of the extra space and don't just fill up the insides with space-robbing blobs of plastic. I like FWD not just for its (potentially) better space utilization, but also for its better handling in snowy conditions. A RWD Mustang is NOT the equivalent of a 2-door Fusion.

What Lincoln got the Mod motor? And wasn't GM's Northstar engine a OHC?

Look up the Ford GAA engine, 18 liters, 1100 cubic inches, flatplane crank. http://www.fordgaaengine.com/

All new cars seem to have higher sides, consquencially more slit-like Windows due to all the occupant-safety structure in the doors. I had to buy a spacer kit for my Kia Cadenza to raise the passenger side seat up...no power height adjustment. This is why MANY manufacturers are coming out with the 360° camera systems. I think if you are sitting in any unfamiliar car and haven't spent some quality time adjusting and getting used to the vehicle, that you would have issues.

HP per displacement doesn't really mean a lot in the real world when, in the real world, others have MORE displacement. You aren't pulling or accelerating with a ratio, it's the answer to the overall equation that moves things along. And it's not in the rpm stratosphere that the numbers matter, just talk to Honda folk about how well-received (in the real world, by real people) their high-revving S2000 was. Seriously, I'm starting to think you have a mod motor snuggle pillow. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but by the same token, I should be entitled to mine. Could someone do the math for me please? 237HP from 2L. I eyeball that to be almost 120HP per liter. Is that any good? That's what the Honda S2000 was making in the 100,000 engines sold under warranty...they had a redline of over 8,000.

Looking at the copy of my original post, it seems I offered a lot of specific issues ('proof'if you will). As you yourself state, the plasma coating is a low-volume procedure. The high-specific whatever engine is a very-low-volume engine. It seems to me that the comparison is being made between a relatively high-production, everyday engine, and a purpose-built race engine. What are the plans for installation of the Voodoo in other Ford vehicles? And the idea of a large displacement, flat plane Ford V8 is not new, I've had a set of flat plane headers for a 427 Tunnelport pass through my hands. Key phrase being those "who wish to invest" in an extremely low-demand service. In reality, there is little chance of finding someone to repair such a block...just ask BMW service managers. It's "throwaway and replace". I'm sorry if I hurt someone's feelings.

I was pretty harsh back then, and apparently knew a lot of intimate details about its inner failings. But sorry, without the new Coyote block casting, the Modular was at, or very near its apex. And no matter what desperate project managers have managed to wring and cajole out of it, I still, PERSONALLY, don't like it. Is that OK, or must one pledge allegiance to the Mod in order to keep the tweeny girl populace from pulling my hair and saying mean things about me? And, please note that the Voodoo is an extremely limited production engine, with no real world history of longevity, made possible only by removing the block's cylinder liners and spraying a bore liner in there, rendering the block a throwaway in case of any nicks or cuts to the bores of this RACE-purposed engine (which will never, of course happen). I applaud Ford's yeoman efforts to keep the engine alive, like I would applaud any team of medical professionals able to keep a patient alive. All hail the Mod team! Where exactly in the Ford universe is this engine still actually being installed, and for how much longer? I don't know because I haven't seen it offered in any vehicles I've shopped. Same arguments can be had about Harley vs Ducati. Whatever. I do believe that the dyno curves posted above show the Ford engine down throughout, except at race-only rpm levels, and only 5% of cars sold nowadays ever see a track. Seriously, I hurt your feelings that much, that you nurse a grudge 6 years later?

I really really,don't remember what this could be about. The 7l reference above makes me think it had something to do with the Hurricane engine, a FORD engine. You all have a problem with me liking a FORD engine?!

"Blown versions"... and it's been long enough are you sure I was talking about the Coyote and not the Modular? And seriously, are you really so bent about this?

I have no idea, and I don't care enough to track it down. Let him give us the details. Has to be several years old though. Is he still upset about hanging chads?

Chicago promo shot, means it'll be shown first at the Chicago auto show? Any idea of the pricing structure? Actually don't really care about AWD, the 3.7 in the current edition is more than enough power, unless the AWD is a major power-robber; 400HP might be needed to offset drivetrain losses and the extra weight involved. Finally, KNOBS!!!

Enlighten me about past predictions. And remember that predictions are not the same as observations.

There seems to be a lot of apples vs oranges comparisons in this thread; comparing outward visability of the 2015 Camaro instead of the 2016's version, GT350 and GT500 versions which, based on pricing and intended use might better be compared to a Corvette, missing tonneau cover in the Mustang convertible, missing CD player, aging styling. As for weight savings, how about dropping 3 camshafts and the hundred pounds they and the related valvetrain bits represent? Then start in on the overbite front overhang, push the wheelbase out to the front, bettering handling and weight distribution. I thought Ford and GM were working on new transmissions as part of a joint partnership...why does only GM seem to have gotten the advanced transmissions into real life use?

Peak measurements are focused on way too much. I'd be wondering what the overall HP and Torque curves looked like, before and after. Usually, blowers increase torque, especially in the lower rpm area, which, in real life, is a better thing than boosting HP numbers in upper ranges. Much better thing. Especially in heavy vehicles like trucks and Mustangs. Stupid numbers, peak HP are.