silvrsvt Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 but if that 3.7L DI requires premium i doubt it will be the base engine....it could be an upgraded V6 package though Why would a DI engine need premium, though I'm worried that the EB engines will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Given that a N/A PFI D35 makes 265 hp on regular, and the rumor mill has the Ford version of the D37 making 275 or so HP on regular, there's no reason to suspect that a D37 3.7L DOHC GDI v6 will require premium to make 300 hp as GDI is normally viewed as adding about 10% to the performance numbers of a given engine when properly tuned. For comparison, take a look at the powerplant in the Lexus IS350, the Infiniti G37 and the GM 3.6L High Feature V6 in the Cadillac CTS. The D35 is a very efficient engine family. It will make it on regular. A premium tune would have it up with the G37's v6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 A 300 HP DI 3.7 is testing very well. It may be the next base engine. Should make a nice balanced package for fe/performance. The 5.0 425 PFI Mod will be a much more balanced package than a 5.7 Hemi. I doubt that buyers of the Challenger are looking for a fuel economy car. It will be a collector/Barret Jackson car. Last I heard that engine was making 330hp or so on regular gas, so I'm guessing the fuel economy thugs had their way with the engine in the last 6 months. 300hp is quite adequate for a DI V6, especially if the mileage is right. The MKS and MKZ need this engine far more than the Mustang does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Edmonds now has a Challenger SRT vs. Mustang Bullitt test on-line. So there you have it. A 100+ HP advantage doesn't mean too much when you're driving an overweight slug. If that 4.6L had a 90 cid. Eaton blower on it the Challenger would be toast. The GT500 owners won't be loosing any sleep over this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Edmonds now has a Challenger SRT vs. Mustang Bullitt test on-line. The new Challenger is unimpressive to me, it's a huge, fat-ass of a family sedan in pony car duds. If the Camaro is going to be of similar weight to the new Challenger, I can honestly see why Ford moved back 5.0 4V. Let the Camaro and Challenger eat up the headlines in 2010, then steal all of their thunder in 2011. And to top it off, in Edmund's photos I think the Bullitt has a more aggressive road presence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 (edited) The new Challenger is unimpressive to me, it's a huge, fat-ass of a family sedan in pony car duds. If the Camaro is going to be of similar weight to the new Challenger, I can honestly see why Ford moved back 5.0 4V. Let the Camaro and Challenger eat up the headlines in 2010, then steal all of their thunder in 2011. And to top it off, in Edmund's photos I think the Bullitt has a more aggressive road presence. Maybe they'll tune the 4.6 in the GT to the Bullitt specs for 2010? Edited May 1, 2008 by suv_guy_19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 I love how Edmunds awards the victory to the Challenger by "3 points". Because, you know, the Challenger really is THREE POINTS better than the Mustang. Those scoring systems are about as useful as hip pockets on a shirt. ==== Was interesting too that the Bullitt outdid the Challenger in the slalom--modification of that suspension should make the 'Stang quite the tossable little car compared to the Challenger & Camaro. Plus no $2100 gas guzzler penalty on the Bullitt.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 I love how Edmunds awards the victory to the Challenger by "3 points". Because, you know, the Challenger really is THREE POINTS better than the Mustang. Those scoring systems are about as useful as hip pockets on a shirt. ==== Was interesting too that the Bullitt outdid the Challenger in the slalom--modification of that suspension should make the 'Stang quite the tossable little car compared to the Challenger & Camaro. Plus no $2100 gas guzzler penalty on the Bullitt.... my holy grail....power to weight..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Edmonds now has a Challenger SRT vs. Mustang Bullitt test on-line. So there you have it. A 100+ HP advantage doesn't mean too much when you're driving an overweight slug. If that 4.6L had a 90 cid. Eaton blower on it the Challenger would be toast. The GT500 owners won't be loosing any sleep over this. It will be toast with a PFI 5.0 and much worse with the GDI hair blower version. Don't need no stinkin 90 CI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Was interesting too that the Bullitt outdid the Challenger in the slalom--modification of that suspension should make the 'Stang quite the tossable little car compared to the Challenger & Camaro. Plus there's neat stuff like 2007-08 SVT MUSTANG HANDLING PACK to make it even more tossable. http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_...rtKeyField=9924 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68fastback Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Plus no $2100 gas guzzler penalty on the Bullitt.... Why is it that the Bullitt with 3:73s has no GG tax but the same engine in the S-GT with 3:55s does. I recently asked a Ford powertrain engineer and two Ford reps and no one knew. Any insights? Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68fastback Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Plus there's neat stuff like 2007-08 SVT MUSTANG HANDLING PACK to make it even more tossable. http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_...rtKeyField=9924 I heard the Bullitt already has some handling pieces from the FRP bin but dunno if they're from that kit or not. I thought the struts, shocks and bars are essentially the FRP pieces the S-GT gets at SAI but done at AAI, but I'm not certain of that. Anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 my holy grail....power to weight..... Ditto. Im not impressed with the challenger. Too heavy, too expensive, and too thirsty. It wont last but a few years anyway imo. I do think its sexy looking as all get out but no way I would consider one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Why is it that the Bullitt with 3:73s has no GG tax but the same engine in the S-GT with 3:55s does. I recently asked a Ford powertrain engineer and two Ford reps and no one knew. Any insights? Dan Tune maybe? Honestly, I have no clue but thats a good question. I would rather have the bullitt anyday all things considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Tune maybe? Honestly, I have no clue but thats a good question. I would rather have the bullitt anyday all things considered. personally if i was in the market for the Stang its BULLITT all the way.....understated class...green please..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Why is it that the Bullitt with 3:73s has no GG tax but the same engine in the S-GT with 3:55s does. I recently asked a Ford powertrain engineer and two Ford reps and no one knew. Any insights? Dan Gas guzzler tax is when a vehicle fails to meet certain minimum mileage figures. The Bullitt meets them (as does the Shelby GT), the GT500 and Roush beasts do not. I would venture to guess the Bullitt/Shelby GT mileage figures are only a few % lower than the stock GT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 Gas guzzler tax is when a vehicle fails to meet certain minimum mileage figures. The Bullitt meets them (as does the Shelby GT), the GT500 and Roush beasts do not. I would venture to guess the Bullitt/Shelby GT mileage figures are only a few % lower than the stock GT. and that small % could probably be EASILY negated by a good set of JBA headers and cleaning up parasitic losses...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray101988 Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 school? ive been out of school for 25 years...20 years if you consider university degrees...whats so hard about high HP and high MPG?....and why would i buy a ford product with old engines in it...its why i wont consider a new 2009 f150... ... I really hope that by now you've realized that the F150 will get all new engines in about a year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 ... I really hope that by now you've realized that the F150 will get all new engines in about a year... Even with the "old" engines, Ford is expected 1-2 mpg improvement across the line on the '09. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 1, 2008 Share Posted May 1, 2008 ... I really hope that by now you've realized that the F150 will get all new engines in about a year... seems like the "school" hes refering too had crayons and sandpits.....like I said High HP and MPGS don't esactly go hand in hand....performance and MPG's on the other hand can..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 seems like the "school" hes refering too had crayons and sandpits.....like I said High HP and MPGS don't esactly go hand in hand....performance and MPG's on the other hand can..... then my monies will go to the company that can..old way of thinking is gone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 (edited) then my monies will go to the company that can..old way of thinking is gone You may have to wait a long time. This isn't an argument. Go visit some dynomemeter sites. "High" horsepower requires rpm's, and more rpms require more gasoline. You can only lean it out so much, even with VVT and DI. On the other hand, you can design for maximum torque, and take advantage of 6+ speed transmissions, turbos, VVT and DI, and you get the AUDI tacing diesels. No great horsepower, but Godzilla-grade torque. Wins races. That's how you get performance and economy, these days. Think of it as a new way of thinking. Edited May 2, 2008 by Edstock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 You may have to wait a long time. This isn't an argument. Go visit some dynomemeter sites. "High" horsepower requires rpm's, and more rpms require more gasoline. You can only lean it out so much, even with VVT and DI. On the other hand, you can design for maximum torque, and take advantage of 6+ speed transmissions, turbos, VVT and DI, and you get the AUDI tacing diesels. No great horsepower, but Godzilla-grade torque. Wins races. That's how you get performance and economy, these days. Think of it as a new way of thinking. i fully understand the concept..point is ford has to start thinking in new directions..if they do not yoda will steal more % of the american car market from ford...this i do not want to happen......never owned foreign other then my 74 super beetle...sure as hell aint buying yoda....but what really pisses me off is yoda seems to be the techno leader while ford scrapes by on has been technology...i want a fucking techo modern vehicle from ford that the minions buy in droves..nor new models with old fucking engines..i swear the company i love has its head up its ass...rant off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 then my monies will go to the company that can..old way of thinking is gone name one vehicle that fits your :"needs"......price/ performance/ Horsepower and mileage......just one, remeber you have already touted the Challenger....all 14 mpgs of it..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 i fully understand the concept..point is ford has to start thinking in new directions..if they do not yoda will steal more % of the american car market from ford...this i do not want to happen......never owned foreign other then my 74 super beetle...sure as hell aint buying yoda....but what really pisses me off is yoda seems to be the techno leader while ford scrapes by on has been technology...i want a fucking techo modern vehicle from ford that the minions buy in droves..nor new models with old fucking engines..i swear the company i love has its head up its ass...rant off Only one I see with a head up his ass is you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.