2018 Mustang can get 32 MPG

[akirby]

I found the discussion. The torque converter will double the engine torque at stall speed, however that is far below the engine's peak torque. As you move past the stall speed it quickly drops from 2:1 to 1:1 but it's not linear. By the time the engine reaches peak torque it's at or close to 1:1. That's why the input shaft will never see double peak engine torque so 550 lb/ft is more than enough for a 400 lb/ft engine.

[rperez817]

Did Ford fix the engine calibration issues with Mustang Ecoboost for 2018? Motor Trend found that the Ecoboost Mustangs they tested between 2014 and 2016 kept getting slower. http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecoboost-mustangs-getting-slower/

[RPF]

Did Ford fix the engine calibration issues with Mustang Ecoboost for 2018? Motor Trend found that the Ecoboost Mustangs they tested between 2014 and 2016 kept getting slower. http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecoboost-mustangs-getting-slower/

 

 

In that article, all of the examples have a quarter mile trap speed in a band of about 1MPH, and the "slowest" one had the highest trap speed. So it certainly isn't that they are producing less power. Even though their egos won't want to admit it, the variation is probably in the drivers seat.

[brucelinc]

Based on discussions I have had with ecoboost Mustang owners at the track, the cars are very difficult to launch. They tend to bog unless you launch them like you stole them. If you launch too hard, you get too much wheelspin. Driver skill and experience is needed for best results.

[akirby]

Based on discussions I have had with ecoboost Mustang owners at the track, the cars are very difficult to launch. They tend to bog unless you launch them like you stole them. If you launch too hard, you get too much wheelspin. Driver skill and experience is needed for best results.

 

Manual, automatic or both?

[brucelinc]

 

Manual, automatic or both?

Manual.

[jpd80]

 

I think the confusion came from the fact that the tranny torque rating has to take into account the multiplication of the torque converter. An engine that puts out 400 lb/ft at the flywheel ends up with way more than that on the input shaft of the transmission at lower RPM due to the torque converter.

 

Some people assumed it was N/M because the math was a lot closer to the engine output.

 

SoonerLS - keep me straight here. I know we discussed this with Mark K years ago.

That may be so but the gearboxes are usually rated by the power applied by the engine not after the torque converter,

that is usually taken into account in the design of the gear box. So the 6F55 is limited to 550 nm input (407 lb ft).

[SoonerLS]

That may be so but the gearboxes are usually rated by the power applied by the engine not after the torque converter,

that is usually taken into account in the design of the gear box. So the 6F55 is limited to 550 nm input (407 lb ft).

Considering the fact that the guy who told us that it was tens of ft-lbs was a Ford transmission engineer, I think I'll stick with tens of ft-lbs.

[akirby]

Considering the fact that the guy who told us that it was tens of ft-lbs was a Ford transmission engineer, I think I'll stick with tens of ft-lbs.

THIS!!!!!

[silvrsvt]

Not to mention better to have more head room in the transmission vs its expected input...

[jpd80]

Ok I believe you guys, the converter flashes to around 2000 to 2500 when max multiplication is occurring but as the car starts moving that 2 to 1 factor drops quickly so yeah 550 lb ft limit is more than believable
It also makes sense when considering the baby 6F15 used on 1.0 EB would be nominally rated at 150 lb ft....

 

Gosh, now I know it was the 6Rs, the 6R80 is rated at 590 lbs (800 nm )..LINK

Agree and happy to move on.....

Edited October 19, 2017 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

Gosh, now I know it was the 6Rs, the 6R80 is rated at 590 lbs (800 nm )..LINK

 

Interestingly enough, the 10 Speed is rated the same...guess no expectations to get close to that in the next 5-10 years

[jpd80]

 

Interestingly enough, the 10 Speed is rated the same...guess no expectations to get close to that in the next 5-10 years

More gears also means less use of torque multiplication of converter and more lock up in gears.

 

While there's a 10R 80 now I wouldn't rule out a 10R 140 for the 6.7 powerstroke

[SoonerLS]

Gosh, now I know it was the 6Rs, the 6R80 is rated at 590 lbs (800 nm )..LINK

That's not exactly an authoritative source, and it doesn't state its sources.

[akirby]

Ok I believe you guys, the converter flashes to around 2000 to 2500 when max multiplication is occurring but as the car starts moving that 2 to 1 factor drops quickly so yeah 550 lb ft limit is more than believable

It also makes sense when considering the baby 6F15 used on 1.0 EB would be nominally rated at 150 lb ft....

 

Gosh, now I know it was the 6Rs, the 6R80 is rated at 590 lbs (800 nm )..LINK

 

Agree and happy to move on.....

 

That link is not correct.

 

The tranny engineer that SoonerLS and I were referring to is someone that fordmantpw and several others know well from the F150 forums - Mark Kovalsky. Here is his direct answer on the question from earlier this year.

 

<drops mic>

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1432837-10-speed-transmission-in-the-super-duty-7.html#post16861590

 

[fordmantpw]

 

That link is not correct.

 

The tranny engineer that SoonerLS and I were referring to is someone that fordmantpw and several others know well from the F150 forums - Mark Kovalsky. Here is his direct answer on the question from earlier this year.

 

<drops mic>

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1432837-10-speed-transmission-in-the-super-duty-7.html#post16861590

 

Capture.JPG

 

I was going to mention that I had seen a post from him on ford-trucks recently mentioning that, but hadn't had the time to search for the exact post yet, so thanks for locating it. Mark still posts over there on occasion.

 

BTW, I'm sad you didn't grab my comment and Mark's reply from that post (not that it pertains to the question at hand, but still).

[akirby]

BTW, I'm sad you didn't grab my comment and Mark's reply from that post (not that it pertains to the question at hand, but still).

 

Sorry, I didn't include it because it wasn't relevant. But feel free to post it yourself.....

 

I knew Mark from the alt.autos.ford usenet newsgroup (that should tell you how long I've known him) before he joined the Lincoln LS owner's club in the early 2000s. Great guy and a wealth of transmission knowledge.

[RPF]

More gears also means less use of torque multiplication of converter and more lock up in gears.

 

While there's a 10R 80 now I wouldn't rule out a 10R 140 for the 6.7 powerstroke

 

 

10R140 has been confirmed to start production August 2019

Edited October 19, 2017 by RPF

[jpd80]

 

 

10R140 has been confirmed to start production August 2019

Thanks for the news RPF, I couldn't Imagine Ford not dong the hevay Duty version

and that will be a great shot in the arm for Super Duty and the 6.2

but maybe signals the arrival of the new large V8 (7.0 liters)?

 

Could this also be the timing for the Heavy Duty E series replacement?

Edited October 20, 2017 by jpd80

[jpd80]

 

That link is not correct.

 

The tranny engineer that SoonerLS and I were referring to is someone that fordmantpw and several others know well from the F150 forums - Mark Kovalsky. Here is his direct answer on the question from earlier this year.

 

<drops mic>

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1432837-10-speed-transmission-in-the-super-duty-7.html#post16861590

 

Capture.JPG

 

So every thing is in lb ft.. Got it

 

That actually makes sense because the 6.7 Diesel torque is right up there now and 1400 nm figure

would be completely inadequate for durability in Super Duty or Medium Duty, so 1400 lb ft it is.

Edited October 20, 2017 by jpd80

[RPF]

Thanks for the news RPF, I couldn't Imagine Ford not dong the hevay Duty version

and that will be a great shot in the arm for Super Duty and the 6.2

but maybe signals the arrival of the new large V8 (7.0 liters)?

 

Could this also be the timing for the Heavy Duty E series replacement?

 

 

I imagine MY2020 will be pretty big for the top end of Ford's truck line.

 

It is probably when we are going to see the first major MCE of the current SuperDuty line

It is probably when we are going to get the 7X gas engine

I wouldn't be surprised if the PSD has a 4 digit torque rating to go with the 10R trans

If they bring 7X/10R140 to the E-series cutaway/stripped chassis class it would bring game changing performance to that sector. The RV industry would certainly be ecstatic about this, especially if they reintroduce an 550 class GVWR along with it.

 

Something surprising about that link regarding the 10R140, it seems to be a derivative of the 10R80, not the 6R140. This makes Ford's current 6-speed RWD transmissions "orphans". The 6R80 is a derivative of the ZF 6HP, and it appears with the 10R80 they are done being willing to give ZF royalties on that high volume trans line. The 6R140 was an all-new unit, sharing nothing with the 5R110W which was the ultimate derivative of the C6 family. It is very highly regarded and is certainly capable of giving "more" with some updates. But it appears that synergies with the -80 version outweigh the cost and time advantages of retaining the existing architecture.

[rperez817]

Did Ford fix the engine calibration issues with Mustang Ecoboost for 2018? Motor Trend found that the Ecoboost Mustangs they tested between 2014 and 2016 kept getting slower. http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecoboost-mustangs-getting-slower/

 

Ford seems to have fixed the problems with the Mustang Ecoboost engine. Motor Trend recently tested a 2018 Mustang Ecoboost with 10-speed automatic transmission. It ran 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.9. It's a full second faster in 0-60 and 0.6 seconds faster in the quarter than the 2016 Mustang Ecoboost 6-speed manual they tested a couple years back. The numbers are now competitive with Camaro 2.0T. http://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/mustang/2018/2018-ford-mustang-ecoboost-first-test-chip-shoulder/

[silvrsvt]

 

 

I imagine MY2020 will be pretty big for the top end of Ford's truck line.

 

It is probably when we are going to see the first major MCE of the current SuperDuty line

It is probably when we are going to get the 7X gas engine

I wouldn't be surprised if the PSD has a 4 digit torque rating to go with the 10R trans

If they bring 7X/10R140 to the E-series cutaway/stripped chassis class it would bring game changing performance to that sector. The RV industry would certainly be ecstatic about this, especially if they reintroduce an 550 class GVWR along with it.

 

Something surprising about that link regarding the 10R140, it seems to be a derivative of the 10R80, not the 6R140. This makes Ford's current 6-speed RWD transmissions "orphans". The 6R80 is a derivative of the ZF 6HP, and it appears with the 10R80 they are done being willing to give ZF royalties on that high volume trans line. The 6R140 was an all-new unit, sharing nothing with the 5R110W which was the ultimate derivative of the C6 family. It is very highly regarded and is certainly capable of giving "more" with some updates. But it appears that synergies with the -80 version outweigh the cost and time advantages of retaining the existing architecture.

 

 

Actually that is happening in 2019, according to the press release from the new Ford product review-I guess Ford is on 24-36 month refresh cycle with the F-series/Super Duty.