jpd80 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 (edited) Why would M care about the Mustang, isn't he a VW Jetta fanboy? A non-buyers opinion is as empty as his influence on product designers..... Edit, As Austin has told us previously, the original proposed IRS for the Mustang would have been similar to FoA's version of the CB IRS but with different pick up points and possibly no weight penalty over the SRA. That said, the SRA does a good Job and can be refined even further by possibly tuning or conversion to Watts linkage for better roll center control. Either way, the reduced complexity means an easier, less complicated build process that is welcomed by people who generally fit the Mustang's demographic - KISS works. Edited October 1, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Not sure who jalopnik is sourcing, but mine tells me this article is entirely BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 My source tells me that the EB V8 was cancelled roughly 2 years ago, about the same time that the 6.2 Boss was resurrected. :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 My source tells me that the EB V8 was cancelled roughly 2 years ago, about the same time that the 6.2 Boss was resurrected. :shrug: Jalopnik is scrounging for money evidently... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 My source tells me that the EB V8 was cancelled roughly 2 years ago, about the same time that the 6.2 Boss was resurrected. :shrug: Just because it has Turbos on it doesn't automatically mean its going to be an Ecoboost engine either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 6.2 TT & 5.0 TT (no DI) are real. Nothing in stone though. Short memories are real though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 6.2 TT & 5.0 TT (no DI) are real. Nothing in stone though. Short memories are real though. Is there any credibility to an F150 Harley with a 5.0 TT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonL Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 6.2 TT & 5.0 TT (no DI) are real. Nothing in stone though. Short memories are real though. A person " in the know" supposedly says that the "Road Runner" is not a 5.0 sized engine. Any idea what that might be and its application? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 6.2 TT & 5.0 TT (no DI) are real. Nothing in stone though. Short memories are real though. DI (either NA or boosted) was canceled on all V8 gasoline engines about 2 or 3 years ago. Rumor is "not cost effective" compared to non-DI. I'm surprised that Ford is going back to turbocharging when recent years they have been in love with supercharging (except for diesels and EcoBoost). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Is there any credibility to an F150 Harley with a 5.0 TT? Definite possibility ! From what I have heard, all boosted versions of both the 5.0L and 6.2L (regardless of vehicle) will be "limited production" through 3rd party (Shelby, Roush, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Our friend that doesnt post here often because Ford monitors this site well has said for the past few weeks that the 5.0 TT is on. I got those hp and torque figures from someone on MT who has an engineer friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Testers with the 5.0 EB have been making 600 hp and 620 torque. GM: " " That'd be sweeeeeeet in a SD! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 DI (either NA or boosted) was canceled on all V8 gasoline engines about 2 or 3 years ago. Rumor is "not cost effective" compared to non-DI. I'm surprised that Ford is going back to turbocharging when recent years they have been in love with supercharging (except for diesels and EcoBoost). superior emissions and fuel economy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 (edited) Turbocharging seems to have finally caught up with supercharging in terms of fluid power delivery. Back in, what? '89? when Ford first got on the SC kick, there was a huge difference between the two..... I would expect that institutional inertia has kept Ford supercharging engines ever since. Edited October 1, 2009 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Turbocharging seems to have finally caught up with supercharging in terms of fluid power delivery. Back in, what? '89? when Ford first got on the SC kick, there was a huge difference between the two..... I would expect that institutional inertia has kept Ford supercharging engines ever since. one only has to drive the SHO to relize what you just stated....flashback to the Turbo T-birds where the engine had to be in the upper rev range to hit the power on button, only to have the surge last for 2000 rpms, power band was like an on off switch.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Is it not correct that the truck version of the Boss or Premium V8 or whatever they are calling it these days has an iron block and aluminum heads? If so, is there an aluminum block version? How about 4v heads? If not, I don't see that as a viable option for the GT500. Although having said that one still has to consider the fact that the Raptor R race truck uses a slightly tweaked 6.2L that makes around 500 hp naturally aspirated. If it can make that kind of power without the weight penalty of a supercharger or twin turbos it might still be light enough for the GT500, but I doubt it. So that leaves the Coyote as the logical successor to the 5.4L 4V. I would think (hope) it would also be TT rather than supercharged due to the higher efficiency of using exhaust gases to spin the turbo vs a power robbing belt driven supercharger. Anyone have any idea how the Coyote compares weightwise to the 5.4 4V? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 psst: turbochargers rob power too--they don't exactly have free flowing tuned exhaust, you know.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 psst: turbochargers rob power too--they don't exactly have free flowing tuned exhaust, you know.... I always thought the power was free, but regardless, parasitic losses are paled in comparison with the Blower.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I always thought the power was free, but regardless, parasitic losses are paled in comparison with the Blower.... Nothing's ever free---well, except maybe cabin heat from the coolant. And I don't know that the cost/benefit for turbocharging vs. super charging is as clear cut as here asserted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Nothing's ever free---well, except maybe cabin heat from the coolant. And I don't know that the cost/benefit for turbocharging vs. super charging is as clear cut as here asserted. I would say Turbos would be more spendy...hell of a lot more plumbing and measures taken to lower the additional heat...but in terms of pure power I would say Turbos win, their bug bear was always a narrow power curve and lack of low end torque...items which seem to have been adressed of late, and i would assume the newer engine will have improved emissions and a noteable increase in fuel economy thus lowering the gas tax penalty....someone raised a question I am curious about....weight comparo of the speculated 5.0 TT and the alum block 5.4..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 (edited) Back a few years ago when I had a 98 Mustang Cobra with built engine and Supercharger, and car made a little over 550 RWHP, I always figured I needed a fuel system capable of fueling about 650-700 HP. I still had to fuel the power it took to spin the blower. With a turbo charger, my fueling requirements would have been a tad simpler (maybe one size smaller injectors, FP, etc), but installation and plumbing a lot more complicated. With the advent of modern electronic engine controls, you can do about anything you want with these power adders....along with excellent drivability. Something nearly impossible about 10 or more years ago. I think adding a power adder to an existing engine, or exhisting engine bay layout, is much simpler with a supercharger. However....if you can design the whole car around the idea of some of them being turbo charged, with how you will contain and disapate the heat built into the design, I prefer the turbo charger. I believe Ford is going more the "design in" route these days and I would expect the top Mustang model to be turbo charged eventually. Edited October 1, 2009 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 (edited) I think we all agree that the upper series Mustangs will get engines GM fans would die for. Edited October 1, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I think we all agree that the upper series Mustangs all Fords will get engines GM fans would die for. Fixed it for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I think we all agree that the upper series Mustangs will get engines just about every manufacturer fans would die for. fixed again...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Correction welcome, my view was a bit narrow.... 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.