fordmantpw Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 plev72 Thanks for your service to our country. I know I speak for all here. +10000000 Sorry that got lost in the discussion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) did you glue on 5.0 emblems and weld on an additional tailpipe?.... Doing that paid for my first mig welder. Edited August 11, 2009 by atomaro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joihan777 Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 did you glue on 5.0 emblems and weld on an additional tailpipe?.... NO, but the aerodynamic flourescent pink spoilers added 50 mph! LOL! (I am considering take-off GT sway bars however) It was mentioned earlier that a future Mustang engine could be a 2.0 EB I-4. I never considered that because my experience with Ford I-4s are limited to my old Escort and a couple of Rangers I've driven. I think an EB I-4 will be thrashiest thing on the road. Anyone know if this engine can be made to idle smoothly but still give decent power? With the focus on building safer cars, I don't think any future Mustangs will be a whole lot lighter. I think Ford would be better off putting a more robust 3.7L in the base engine and leave the EB I-4's for the smaller vehicles. (An I-5 EB would even be better IMO) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 NO, but the aerodynamic flourescent pink spoilers added 50 mph! LOL! (I am considering take-off GT sway bars however) It was mentioned earlier that a future Mustang engine could be a 2.0 EB I-4. I never considered that because my experience with Ford I-4s are limited to my old Escort and a couple of Rangers I've driven. I think an EB I-4 will be thrashiest thing on the road. Anyone know if this engine can be made to idle smoothly but still give decent power? With the focus on building safer cars, I don't think any future Mustangs will be a whole lot lighter. I think Ford would be better off putting a more robust 3.7L in the base engine and leave the EB I-4's for the smaller vehicles. (An I-5 EB would even be better IMO) don't forget carbon fibre side mirrors.......LMAO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 hmmm, and yet NO-one has mentioned INSURANCE! My Insurance was cheaper on my 06 Mustang GT then my 4 year old 02 Focus SVT when I got it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 My Insurance was cheaper on my 06 Mustang GT then my 4 year old 02 Focus SVT when I got it! any points, age? driving record Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bifs66 Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 As an actual Mustang buyer (since 1965), I really wouldn't want anything other than a V8 car (most V6's exhaust sound should not be heard). FYI, the Bullitt's insurance runs about $700 a year. Of course, my last violation was 45 yrs. ago "unnecessarily squealing tires" in a new 65 Mustang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bravestar Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 As an actual Mustang buyer (since 1965), I really wouldn't want anything other than a V8 car (most V6's exhaust sound should not be heard). FYI, the Bullitt's insurance runs about $700 a year. Of course, my last violation was 45 yrs. ago "unnecessarily squealing tires" in a new 65 Mustang. No V-6 for me either...I don't care if the v-6 is faster or turbo 4. Mustang GT V-8 is only what interests me. I would not be against the others in any way, that just is not a "Mustang" for me. By the way, what color is your 85? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plev72 Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 As an actual Mustang buyer (since 1965), I really wouldn't want anything other than a V8 car (most V6's exhaust sound should not be heard). FYI, the Bullitt's insurance runs about $700 a year. Of course, my last violation was 45 yrs. ago "unnecessarily squealing tires" in a new 65 Mustang. [/quote 85 was the last year of the carburated Mustang V8, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joihan777 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I just saw this, excuse me if ya'll already seen it: AUtoblog article A Coyote 5.0L & an EB V6? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcman Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Get over it ! The I6 is dead.Incorrect :burnout: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I just saw this, excuse me if ya'll already seen it: AUtoblog article A Coyote 5.0L & an EB V6? love it...tellin ya, I think we WILL see the 6 cyl eco in the Stang,,,,and WITH approx 400 hp....after all, the engine IS avail already per Flex and Taurus...AND its dialed DOWN due to FWD underpinnings and a trans that cannot handle its potential....all issues that RWD can aparently cure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bifs66 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 In answer to the couple of questions.....My 85 GT is black with grey interior; and yes, 1985 GTs with 5spds were the last Mustangs with carburetion. It remains all original with only the oil and filter having been changed. I ordered the car without undercoating so I could keep the undercarriage areas clean; and although long since dead, I kept the original battery too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Wow...did I hear another post regarding the importance of sound???? :poke: The real story will be when the power curves and weight of the 2 new engines will be made public. I just can't imagine why Ford would rush this to the Mustang when there are other models that could gobble up demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackintire Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 I suppose I could stand on my head and shout, but It not worth the time. Mustang 2011-2013 5.0 V8 3.7 Liter 2014+ 5.0 V8 2.5 Ecoboost with a very small possibility of 2.0 Ecoboost if needed or demanded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devodev Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 I suppose I could stand on my head and shout, but It not worth the time. Mustang 2011-2013 5.0 V8 3.7 Liter 2014+ 5.0 V8 2.5 Ecoboost with a very small possibility of 2.0 Ecoboost if needed or demanded. I agree with your assessment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Regarding the argument about GTs needing V8s, they do, but there's no reason you couldn't call a 3.5 EB Mustang an LX is there? Or do LXs need to have V8s too? LX was a value GT so maybe it's not a good option Ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Regarding the argument about GTs needing V8s, they do, but there's no reason you couldn't call a 3.5 EB Mustang an LX is there? Or do LXs need to have V8s too? LX was a value GT so maybe it's not a good option Ideas? 3 letters....SVO. V8 should be the GT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 I still believe that an SVO should be a four-pot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 (edited) I still believe that an SVO should be a four-pot nah...bring on the eco six...I beleive the market would be bigger...a 4 cyl eco would be an excellent alternative to the regular ( LX ) 3.5 or 3.7 V6. Not to mention it would be embarrising for the Mustang to be embarrased by an eco Flex or SHO..... Edited August 14, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 As long as I'll be able to get an affordable (under $25K) mustang with ~300HP V6 and sub 5.5 second 0-60 performance in a few years I'll be happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 As long as I'll be able to get an affordable (under $25K) mustang with ~300HP V6 and sub 5.5 second 0-60 performance in a few years I'll be happy not asking too much are we?...please don't forget to add in sub 3000lbs....LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 not asking too much are we?...please don't forget to add in sub 3000lbs....LOL! That might be asking a little much. I guess enjoy the S197 while we can, because the Mustang's going to get HEAVY when they change over to GRWD platform in '15, but the good news is that the Camaro and Challenger won't be around then. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calypsocoral Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 That might be asking a little much. I guess enjoy the S197 while we can, because the Mustang's going to get HEAVY when they change over to GRWD platform in '15, but the good news is that the Camaro and Challenger won't be around then. LOL Can't they downsize GRWD a bit? Hyundai's Genesis sedan and coupe are built on the same platform. With a 4" cut in wheelbase, and a 13" cut in length, the Genesis coupe is about 350 lbs lighter than the sedan. I'm sure Ford will be able to save enough weight to keep the Mustang from becoming too much of a porker, especially now that fuel economy, smaller engines, and lighter weight will all be crucial for meeting the federal mandate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 Can't they downsize GRWD a bit? Hyundai's Genesis sedan and coupe are built on the same platform. With a 4" cut in wheelbase, and a 13" cut in length, the Genesis coupe is about 350 lbs lighter than the sedan. I'm sure Ford will be able to save enough weight to keep the Mustang from becoming too much of a porker, especially now that fuel economy, smaller engines, and lighter weight will all be crucial for meeting the federal mandate. I just hope they don't cut too much weight and have the whiners talking about chassis flex. Weight increase is inevitable in any next generation model especially one gaining IRS, but hopefully it'll stay under 3500. Maybe they need to make a more drastic cut in wheelbase and length and get the vehicle smaller. They talked about the new '10 style making the vehicle smaller, perhaps that's to warm us up for when the vehicle shrinks? 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.