2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I think that's just referencing the package weight, which I assume probably has 70-100lbs of packing material around it. I've never mail-ordered an engine but I have to imagine it comes in a big wooden crate with the engine saddled in some metal cradle.

I didn't think about that, but I think the point remains that the ecoboost is not likely to have any significant weight advantage over the V6. It could potentially be heavier in fact.

 

[Slash]

I didn't think about that, but I think the point remains that the ecoboost is not likely to have any significant weight advantage over the V6. It could potentially be heavier in fact.

Yeah but if it was close to or heavier than the V6, then any performance difference would be minimal and pointless.

 

[Joey D]

I didn't think about that, but I think the point remains that the ecoboost is not likely to have any significant weight advantage over the V6. It could potentially be heavier in fact.

That's a fair point.

I think Ford will probably drop the 3.7L V6 in a year or two though and move to the 3.5L EcoBoost, which would put the 2.3T at the base level.Also I think the 2.3T is more geared for markets that have tax on engine size.

Now all Ford needs to do is have a twin turbo V8 for the GT500.

 

[Keef]

Now all Ford needs to do is have a twin turbo V8 for the GT500.

Ecoboost 5.0?

 

[White & Nerdy]

That's a fair point.

I think Ford will probably drop the 3.7L V6 in a year or two though and move to the 3.5L EcoBoost, which would put the 2.3T at the base level.Also I think the 2.3T is more geared for markets that have tax on engine size.

Now all Ford needs to do is have a twin turbo V8 for the GT500.

Why would you want to ruin the GT500 by using exhaust gas recyclers?

Also, "eco" anything on the GT500. NO.

 

[Zenith]

Why would you want to ruin the GT500 by using exhaust gas recyclers

Because it would be a better car...

 

[Joey D]

Why would you want to ruin the GT500 by using exhaust gas recyclers?

Also, "eco" anything on the GT500. NO.

Because a twin turbo V8 would produce a ton of horsepower and actually make the car interesting?

I know you hate things for stupid reasons and have no concept, of well anything, but why do you hate turbochargers? They make an engine produce more horsepower, isn't that your thing?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'll volunteer.

I hate lag. Even if it's a 5 liter with smallish twins, the throttle response won't be as good as with the big blower.

 

[Joey D]

Modern turbo setups have reduced lag pretty well, sure it's still there but it's not nearly as bad as cars from the 80's or 90's. Every EcoBoost'ed vehicle I've driven too doesn't really seem to have a major lag problem, so I would assume a EcoBoost V8 would probably be similar. Also since turbos don't use the engine to drive them, they wouldn't rob the power like a supercharger does and, in theory, the engine would produce more power.

I don't mind supercharges, I just think turbos have reached the point now where they make more sense. Ford could use a variable turbo setup which would reduce lag even further and probably work pretty well.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

@Joey D

Or they could just stick to parallel twin turbos, not sure why we aren't talking about that. Also there was that car GM built that was supercharged and developed a system nearly on par with the turbocharger efficiency...what was that car? Oh, yeah the ZR1 and subsequent cars that followed.

 

[MrWednesday]

Modern turbo setups have reduced lag pretty well, sure it's still there but it's not nearly as bad as cars from the 80's or 90's. Every EcoBoost'ed vehicle I've driven too doesn't really seem to have a major lag problem, so I would assume a EcoBoost V8 would probably be similar. Also since turbos don't use the engine to drive them, they wouldn't rob the power like a supercharger does and, in theory, the engine would produce more power.

Ford had lag solved by the late '80's. The 2.3L with the IHI turbo spools quickly and has good torque from 2k RPM all the way to redline.

 

[White & Nerdy]

Because it would be a better car...

Because a twin turbo V8 would produce a ton of horsepower and actually make the car interesting?

I know you hate things for stupid reasons and have no concept, of well anything, but why do you hate turbochargers? They make an engine produce more horsepower, isn't that your thing?

I always prefer an engine-driven supercharger. Less lag, and they sound cool instead of weak.

I get where you're coming from. Twin turbos on whatever V8 the GT500 ends up using would be a fast combination for sure. But twin turbo setups are notorious for lagging like a dial-up connection (epescially when modification enters the picture), and besides, I don't care how effective they are, using turbochargers on a muscle car V8 is just wrong.

 

[Badasp5.0]

I always prefer an engine-driven supercharger. Less lag, and they sound cool instead of weak.

I get where you're coming from. Twin turbos on whatever V8 the GT500 ends up using would be a fast combination for sure. But twin turbo setups are notorious for lagging like a dial-up connection (epescially when modification enters the picture), and besides, I don't care how effective they are, using turbochargers on a muscle car V8 is just wrong.

Have you ever heard a turbo V8 in person?? Lag is not a issue trust me I have rode/driven a ton of turbo mustangs, heck most are medium to big singles.

 

[White & Nerdy]

Have you ever heard a turbo V8 in person?? Lag is not a issue trust me I have rode/driven a ton of turbo mustangs both single and twins.

What were the circustances of those drives? Standing start acceleration doesn't really count, since you can use fancy launch control gadgets to mitigate lag there. Would they deliver fully power the instant the throttle was floored from a roll, or would they act like a Toyota Supra instead?

 

[Badasp5.0]

Street driving, drag strip runs as well. Never road coursed one but our local road course isn't that big anyways. There was no J shaped power curve on those cars. Turbos are the way to go IMHO.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I always prefer an engine-driven supercharger. Less lag, and they sound cool instead of weak.

I get where you're coming from. Twin turbos on whatever V8 the GT500 ends up using would be a fast combination for sure. But twin turbo setups are notorious for lagging like a dial-up connection (epescially when modification enters the picture), and besides, I don't care how effective they are, using turbochargers on a muscle car V8 is just wrong.

The turbo system (which I don't recall being twin) that Joey suggested would easily cut down on lag, and a sequential twin does the same but I never saw them as a true twin turbo set up though one of my all time favorite cars had the best sequential system. You could just go all out and pull a Porsche and do a Twin VGT but that is a lot of development I think, though this shouldn't be a problem for Ford I'd hope since they have experience on the diesel side with it.

 

[Zenith]

I always prefer an engine-driven supercharger. Less lag, and they sound cool instead of weak.

And bad gas mileage which, whether you prefer it or not, is very important to the modern Mustang buyer.

I get where you're coming from. Twin turbos on whatever V8 the GT500 ends up using would be a fast combination for sure. But twin turbo setups are notorious for lagging like a dial-up connection (epescially when modification enters the picture), and besides, I don't care how effective they are, using turbochargers on a muscle car V8 is just wrong.

Another big part of muscle cars is making them easy for the owner to make faster. Turbo charged cars can gain significant horsepower with an ECU flash and some pulley changes. I'd argue being able to make your factory car faster is much more "muscle car" than avoiding new technology.

 

[CodeRedR51]

And bad gas mileage which, whether you prefer it or not, is very important to the modern Mustang buyer.

Another big part of muscle cars is making them easy for the owner to make faster. Turbo charged cars can gain significant horsepower with an ECU flash and some pulley changes. I'd argue being able to make your factory car faster is much more "muscle car" than avoiding new technology.

Pulley changes? That's a supercharger.

Most turbo cars an intake/exhaust/ECU flash will gain significant power.

 

[Keef]

Oh, yeah the ZR1 and subsequent cars that followed.

Nearly isn't "as good as" though. Plus, the ZR1 is considerably lighter with a much smaller frontal area than than the GT500 or CTS-V.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Nearly isn't "as good as" though. Plus, the ZR1 is considerably lighter with a much smaller frontal area than than the GT500 or CTS-V.

Those have nothing to do with the inner working of the supercharging system used and how they pulled out enough efficiency to compete with the turbos. It is as good, GM ran a Turbo system ZR1 in proto testing and they had troubles with it and the data showed that the four lobe ended up being better.

Now this isn't to say it's better than every turbo system but it is a comparable and competitive system.

 

[Keef]

Those have nothing to do with the inner working of the supercharging system used and how they pulled out enough efficiency to compete with the turbos. It is as good, GM ran a Turbo system ZR1 in proto testing and they had troubles with it and the data showed that the four lobe ended up being better.

Now this isn't to say it's better than every turbo system but it is a comparable and competitive system.

What is this "efficiency" you speak of? Power per displacement? Fuel mileage? Emissions? Packaging? Define your terms.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

What is this "efficiency" you speak of? Power per displacement? Fuel mileage? Emissions? Packaging? Define your terms.

Well thermal and power, as well as proclaimed fuel mileage, I'd say packaging too due to the set up the roots has compared to conventional speaking.

 

[Slash]

I'll take any system that increase power but I'm partial to N/A power. That's just me though. A twin-turbo Mustang would be cool, but not the GT500. That car has always been known for big N/A power and to turbo it would ruin the image. A twin-turbo Mach 1 would be badass though. The Cobra Jet (while not street legal) is also TT now as well.

 

[Joey D]

I don't care how effective they are, using turbochargers on a muscle car V8 is just wrong.

The GT500 isn't exactly a muscle car anymore. It's a halo car for Ford and halo cars need features to pull people into the brand.

A twin-turbo Mustang would be cool, but not the GT500. That car has always been known for big N/A power and to turbo it would ruin the image.

The current GT500 is supercharged, as was the one before it, so not exactly something known for N/A power.

 

[Slash]

The current GT500 is supercharged, as was the one before it, so not exactly something known for N/A power.

That's true.

 

[Zenith]

Pulley changes? That's a supercharger.

Most turbo cars an intake/exhaust/ECU flash will gain significant power.

Thanks. I forgot how to car.

 

[Slash]

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Thanks. I forgot how to car.

Should've lied and said you meant to say changing to bigger injectors, I would've backed you up on it

 

[CodeRedR51]

I hope it look a bit better than that. Those renders seem like a designers mess to me.

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

Hate the front end of the renders.