falcman Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 http://www.crank-scrapers.com/coyote.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therealmrmustang Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 http://www.crank-scrapers.com/coyote.html Very interesting... :reading: Thanks for posting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Meh. I don't buy these numbers. The 315hp from the 3.7L seems especially far-fetched. I would, however, expect 400hp from a 3.5L EB V6--given that it seems obvious the engine is being throttled back for the sake of the transaxle in the D3s. Subaru manages to get 305 hp from a 2.5 liter turbo charged boxer 4 cylinder. Porsche manages to get 345 hp from a 3.6 liter normally aspirated six cylinder engine. Mitsubishi gets 291 hp from a 2.0 liter turbo charged inline 4 cylinder. But for some reason you and several others around here are just certain that Ford can't get 315 hp from a 3.7 liter engine. An engine that already achieves 273 hp in another vehicle at that. I'm not sure if that's a great credit to Subaru, Mitsubishi and Porsche, a big knock against Ford or just the normal bunch of posters around here that are wrong a whole lot more often than you are right. I'm leaning towards option number 3 which by the way is also one of the main reasons I post so rarely on this board anymore. I don't know for sure what the hp rating on the new 3.7 liter will be but I have seen the 315 hp number referenced on a number of automotive websites. I trust them a lot more than you. If Koenigsegg can take the 4.6 motor and manage to more than double its hp over the Mustang GT I don't see any reason why Ford couldn't squeeze another 42 horses from the 3.7 motor. But that's just me, we'll see how it turns out. In the meantime, best of luck with that 4 door performance sedan on a Mustang chassis that's somehow going to be less than 35 grand and let's not forget the new Bronco that was going to take over the small SUV market. lol Personally I'm looking forward to a 315 hp V6 Mustang. As long as Ford can keep the price competitive I think it will be a great car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 (edited) Subaru manages to get 305 hp from a 2.5 liter turbo charged boxer 4 cylinder. Porsche manages to get 345 hp from a 3.6 liter normally aspirated six cylinder engine. Mitsubishi gets 291 hp from a 2.0 liter turbo charged inline 4 cylinder. But for some reason you and several others around here are just certain that Ford can't get 315 hp from a 3.7 liter engine. An engine that already achieves 273 hp in another vehicle at that. I'm not sure if that's a great credit to Subaru, Mitsubishi and Porsche, a big knock against Ford or just the normal bunch of posters around here that are wrong a whole lot more often than you are right. I'm leaning towards option number 3 which by the way is also one of the main reasons I post so rarely on this board anymore. I don't know for sure what the hp rating on the new 3.7 liter will be but I have seen the 315 hp number referenced on a number of automotive websites. I trust them a lot more than you. If Koenigsegg can take the 4.6 motor and manage to more than double its hp over the Mustang GT I don't see any reason why Ford couldn't squeeze another 42 horses from the 3.7 motor. But that's just me, we'll see how it turns out. In the meantime, best of luck with that 4 door performance sedan on a Mustang chassis that's somehow going to be less than 35 grand and let's not forget the new Bronco that was going to take over the small SUV market. lol Personally I'm looking forward to a 315 hp V6 Mustang. As long as Ford can keep the price competitive I think it will be a great car. You're missing several things: 1) Porsche is in a different league than Ford. You can't compare the two. 2) The other engines you mentioned are not NA 3) Ford has a history of showing lower power numbers, which is why many are skeptical. 4) Ford has a more stringent set of durability rules that engines have to comform to than many others. With an attitude like you convey in your post, we don't mind you not posting much any more. Edited September 5, 2009 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 You're missing several things: 1) Porsche is in a different league than Ford. You can't compare the two. LOL, You have no idea how many times I've seen guys on this very forum compare the Mustang and a Porsche. 2) The other engines you mentioned are not NA Yes, but they also have fewer cylinders and less displacement. In the case of the Porsche engine, it is NA. 3) Ford has a history of showing lower power numbers, which is why many are skeptical. I thought this was the new and improved Ford? 4) Ford has a more stringent set of durability rules that engines have to comform to than many others. LOL, Yeah, because Subaru and Porsche have a history of crappy standards and poor reliability. With an attitude like you convey in your post, we don't mind you not posting much any more. Picked it up around here somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The MKS 3.7L was just a stroked 3.5L Bored, not stroked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 LOL, You have no idea how many times I've seen guys on this very forum compare the Mustang and a Porsche. So that makes it true? Hmmm, didn't know that. Yes, but they also have fewer cylinders and less displacement. In the case of the Porsche engine, it is NA. Apples to oranges. I thought this was the new and improved Ford? Maybe so? We shall see. LOL, Yeah, because Subaru and Porsche have a history of crappy standards and poor reliability. I didn't say they were bad. I said Ford's is typically more stringent. Picked it up around here somewhere. You must be a very impressionable person then...maybe you should quit hanging around internet forums so you don't pick up any more bad habits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 (edited) You're missing several things: 1) Porsche is in a different league than Ford. You can't compare the two. 2) The other engines you mentioned are not NA 3) Ford has a history of showing lower power numbers, which is why many are skeptical. 4) Ford has a more stringent set of durability rules that engines have to comform to than many others. With an attitude like you convey in your post, we don't mind you not posting much any more. OK Lets compare these 2009 models: Infiniti G37 3.7L/328 hp Lexus GS 350 3.5L/303 Acura RL 3.7L/300 Nissan Maxima 3.5L/290 hp Lexus ES 350 3.5L/272 hp Why would 315 from a 3.7 be so hard to believe? 2010 Camaro 3.6L/304hp Ford's recent history has been to understate hp numbers on engines in development. Edited September 5, 2009 by Mark B. Morrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 OK Lets compare these 2009 models: Infiniti G37 3.7L/328 hp Lexus GS 350 3.5L/303 Acura RL 3.7L/300 Nissan Maxima 3.5L/290 hp Lexus ES 350 3.5L/272 hp Why would 315 from a 3.7 be so hard to believe? 2010 Camaro 3.6L/304hp Ford's recent history has been to understate hp numbers on engines in development. Because Ford's HP numbers have been very conservative in the past. At least, that's my opinion. I hope 315 is true...that tells me Ford really has changed in this regard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Because Ford's HP numbers have been very conservative in the past. At least, that's my opinion. I hope 315 is true...that tells me Ford really has changed in this regard! I hope it is correct as well. It would be fun to watch secretaries in V-6 Mustangs kicking those fat assed Camaros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005GTP Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 If Ford cannot get those kind of power numbers from a 3.7 as do most of its competitors, then its got a serious problem. I however think that since they were late to the game with a 3.5L motor, they built it with the ability to get some serious power out of it. I believe the took their time and did it right. The only question is, will the motor be reliable at higher power numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefstang Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Cue Versa Tech in 5...4...3...2... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200MPHCOBRA Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 http://www.crank-scrapers.com/coyote.html Beefy looking. Might just be an illusion but journals look wider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Cue Versa Tech in 5...4...3...2... Now that's just creepy, I haven't been on in days. Did someone forward you my email? If so, it's a small world. As far as I've heard the 3.7 is capable of producing (and has been dynoed at) over 315hp on pump gas in it's latest iterations. No Direct Injection... Period. Heads, intake package and exhaust are all different from those currently used in the MKS. Redline is a bit higher. I wouldn't expect anything over 305hp/ 280lb.ft. though. Anything higher is overkill marketwise, and fuel economy is considered a higher priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcman Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 The level of work going into this car is amazing, the difference between the GT and the Bullit is nothing compared to the Boss, the engine doesn't receive a CAI and a tune it is getting a overhaul even before the 5.0 is out, the suspension is getting parts swapped everywhere and is being tuned to a level where IRS and LRA argument will be history. I am not pulling numbers or information out of no where, the numbers I gave came from sources in the project 46k is a good approximation given to me by them on a fully equipped Boss. Your stated 40k is good start price really. I said it before it is not just a fully loaded GT it is much more than that. It will receive a little more than 50hp for sure and the guys working on it are asking to push it more, accounting just has to make sense. The car is not meant to win any horsepower wars though this is a track oriented machine. ...Also off bradbarnett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 QUOTE (ahddm)The level of work going into this car is amazing, the difference between the GT and the Bullit is nothing compared to the Boss, the engine doesn't receive a CAI and a tune it is getting a overhaul even before the 5.0 is out, the suspension is getting parts swapped everywhere and is being tuned to a level where IRS and LRA argument will be history. QUOTE (ahddm) I am not pulling numbers or information out of no where, the numbers I gave came from sources in the project 46k is a good approximation given to me by them on a fully equipped Boss. Your stated 40k is good start price really. I said it before it is not just a fully loaded GT it is much more than that. It will receive a little more than 50hp for sure and the guys working on it are asking to push it more, accounting just has to make sense. The car is not meant to win any horsepower wars though this is a track oriented machine. There are so many things that scream bullshit here. Lack of specifics... Check. Overzealous rationalization... Check Anonomous name drop... Check Defensive nature... Check Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcman Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 How specific do you need him to be? Reading between the lines - and ignoring your psycho analysis - it appears there's something quite impressive brewing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I don't think folks are suggesting Ford doesn't have the ability to make class leading HP from it's engines, or the ability to make class leading "advertised" HP from it's engines. I personally think Ford is more into designing and tuning the engines properly for their intended use. What good does it do to put a 315-330 HP 3.7 engine @ 7000 RPMin a Mustang? Would it be any faster than one designed with an engine that makes a lot more TQ at lower RPM, is more durable over many years, even if max RPM HP is a little less. HP ratings are more about bragging rights than anything else. A 290 HP 3.7 might be a lot faster than a 315 HP 3.7 in the real world. After all, due to fuel economy standards, NVH standards, durability standards, Ford won't put an extremely low gear in a production car to take advantage of hi HP, HI reving engines. And....Ford and GM both achieve their class leading MPG numbers across the lines by turning the engines slowly when cruising. That's the key to good MPG numbers. The engine has to be designed around vehicle weights, what gear ratios and tire diameters you will use also...for best performance. That's why vehicles are "engineered" for their intended use. Ford won't put a 7000 RPM screamer with 4.30's in a Mustang for mass production use. To my way of thinking, designing the 3.5 or 3.7 to make hi TQ at lower RPM, even if resulting in less "advertised" HP, will result in a faster production vehicle, with class leading fuel economy. Advertised HP numbers tell you very little about how a car will perform. That's why Ford has to decide which is more important, high advertised HP numbers, real world performance with low RPM TQ, real world economy, or a combination of all of these. No matter which way they go, some will be disappointed in those low "advertised" numbers. I don't think a MKS with a 330 HP Nissan engine, would be very fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 So that makes it true? Hmmm, didn't know that. Apples to oranges. Maybe so? We shall see. I didn't say they were bad. I said Ford's is typically more stringent. You must be a very impressionable person then...maybe you should quit hanging around internet forums so you don't pick up any more bad habits. The 3.7 will do 315 HP. Do you think it would be a good choice for the Mustang base engine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AM2 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 (edited) Why would 315 from a 3.7 be so hard to believe? 2010 Camaro 3.6L/304hp Here's something interesting. The Fusion's 3.0 liter V6 makes 240hp, thats 80hp/L. If the 3.7 liter V6 was tuned to produce the same 80hp/L as the 3.0 liter V6, it would be making 296hp. 296hp is so close to 300hp, I think getting 300+ horsepower is very possible for the 3.7 liter V6. Besides, 315hp might just be a target number, but anything over than the standard 3.7's 273hp should be good enough since the Mustang isn't that heavy anyway. Edited September 6, 2009 by AM2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 The 3.7 will do 315 HP. Do you think it would be a good choice for the Mustang base engine? :happy feet: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 The 3.7 will do 315 HP. Do you think it would be a good choice for the Mustang base engine? No. Why? Insurance. IMHO, a sub-300 hp engine should be available as the base model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Meh. I don't buy these numbers. The 315hp from the 3.7L seems especially far-fetched. Those number do seem a bit optimistic even on 91 or 93 octane. When the original 1.6L Escort engine showed up many, many years ago, folks were excited because it was the first US built, production, naturally aspirated engine to make 1 HP/cubic inch (1.6L = 97.6 cid). Now we are talking about 1.4 HP/cid (315/225.7) or in metric terms 85.1 HP/L. This would be awesome if correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 No. Why? Insurance. IMHO, a sub-300 hp engine should be available as the base model. Leaves the door wide open for a Ecoboost I4 that could get 32 MPG in a Mustang and yet perform like a V6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joihan777 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 No. Why? Insurance. IMHO, a sub-300 hp engine should be available as the base model. 295 hp without a CAI..... 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.