Ford Unveils Next-Generation V-6 Engine
11/9/05, 11:19 AM
#21
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets be honest guys! Most of us are viewing this motor, and have thoughts of the 1/4mile.. Lets lay out all the cards on the table for once..
Looking at the specs of the engine, isnt it safe to assume, that a future V6 Mustang owner can purchase his new 3.5L Mustang, and with the utmost of confidence, can go ahead and install a 200Shot of nitrous without pretty much any fear of the consequences..?
I mean, you all can see the interanls for yourself.. Cant we deduce by the design and internals used, that a 200shot of nitrous off the showroom floor means, future Mustang V6 owners are going to be a force to be reckoned with on the drag strip? I dont see this engine having too many problems with a 200shot? Do you?
If you do see a problem with that much of a shot, please point it out for us.. Thanks!
Honeslty, I would hate to be lined up against one of these 3.5 motors while he is squeezin! I mean can we admit even a 250 shot might be ok? Just curious.. There are alot of guys here much more knowledgable than me about this.. What are your thoughts?
Looking at the specs of the engine, isnt it safe to assume, that a future V6 Mustang owner can purchase his new 3.5L Mustang, and with the utmost of confidence, can go ahead and install a 200Shot of nitrous without pretty much any fear of the consequences..?
I mean, you all can see the interanls for yourself.. Cant we deduce by the design and internals used, that a 200shot of nitrous off the showroom floor means, future Mustang V6 owners are going to be a force to be reckoned with on the drag strip? I dont see this engine having too many problems with a 200shot? Do you?
If you do see a problem with that much of a shot, please point it out for us.. Thanks!
Honeslty, I would hate to be lined up against one of these 3.5 motors while he is squeezin! I mean can we admit even a 250 shot might be ok? Just curious.. There are alot of guys here much more knowledgable than me about this.. What are your thoughts?
11/9/05, 11:20 AM
#22
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JeffreyDJ@November 9, 2005, 10:16 AM
From reading above, it'll first be mounted to a 6 speed automatic, MSP. So technically, *you* won't be shifting anything.
From reading above, it'll first be mounted to a 6 speed automatic, MSP. So technically, *you* won't be shifting anything.
That would be sweet!! LOL!
11/9/05, 11:33 AM
#23
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Originally posted by MSP+November 9, 2005, 1:22 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MSP @ November 9, 2005, 1:22 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Lets be honest guys! Most of us are viewing this motor, and have thoughts of the 1/4mile.. Lets lay out all the cards on the table for once..
[/b]
[/b]
MSP, if it'll make it as quick as a Maxima, most will be happy.
<!--QuoteBegin-MSP@November 9, 2005, 1:22 PM
I mean, you all can see the interanls for yourself.. Cant we deduce by the design and internals used, that a 200shot of nitrous off the showroom floor means, future Mustang V6 owners are going to be a force to be reckoned with on the drag strip? I dont see this engine having too many problems with a 200shot? Do you?
[/quote]
I've been trying to use my super powered x-ray vision and can't see a thing beyond the picture. Either way, I think the engine will need to be produced and in a car before we can deduce anything beyond what Ford just told us.
11/9/05, 11:43 AM
#24
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have about zero interest in the 1/4 mile, so am looking at this motors many other attributes for real world driving.
Light weight
Compact size
Broad power band
Efficiency
Broad (and high) rpm range
Short term robustness
Long term durability
Low emissions
NVH refinement
I am more a broad-spectrum, real world performance enthusiast who tends to hold onto cars a long time and value balance, refinement and quality much more than flash or single dimension performance myopia. And I know the difference between low cost and high value (or high cost but low value for that matter).
This motor, potentially of course, seems to represent a vast improvement over the hoary ol' 4.0 and will make the V6 Stang, and a slew of other FoMoCo cars, a much better performance and all around car, bringing it up to 21st century levels of power, refinement and efficiency.
Now if Ford could see fit to do the same with the rear suspension... (sorry, had to slip that in :-)
Light weight
Compact size
Broad power band
Efficiency
Broad (and high) rpm range
Short term robustness
Long term durability
Low emissions
NVH refinement
I am more a broad-spectrum, real world performance enthusiast who tends to hold onto cars a long time and value balance, refinement and quality much more than flash or single dimension performance myopia. And I know the difference between low cost and high value (or high cost but low value for that matter).
This motor, potentially of course, seems to represent a vast improvement over the hoary ol' 4.0 and will make the V6 Stang, and a slew of other FoMoCo cars, a much better performance and all around car, bringing it up to 21st century levels of power, refinement and efficiency.
Now if Ford could see fit to do the same with the rear suspension... (sorry, had to slip that in :-)
11/9/05, 12:06 PM
#25
GT Member
Join Date: June 28, 2005
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally i dont understand ford and its goals.... hey what the heck with Toyota right on our back lets make the ford GT and up the horsepower on every car we make...dont get me wrong...i love fast cars just as much as the next guy here but I think Ford should be dedicating more research into fuel alternatives and winning the war against the foreign car market. Hopefully this will be fuel efficient ...but then again its closing the gap on the mustang GT owners...which is going to be upsetting to them...
11/9/05, 12:07 PM
#26
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rhumb@November 9, 2005, 10:46 AM
I have about zero interest in the 1/4 mile, so am looking at this motors many other attributes for real world driving.
Light weight
Compact size
Broad power band
Efficiency
Broad (and high) rpm range
Short term robustness
Long term durability
Low emissions
NVH refinement
I am more a broad-spectrum, real world performance enthusiast who tends to hold onto cars a long time and value balance, refinement and quality much more than flash or single dimension performance myopia. And I know the difference between low cost and high value (or high cost but low value for that matter).
This motor, potentially of course, seems to represent a vast improvement over the hoary ol' 4.0 and will make the V6 Stang, and a slew of other FoMoCo cars, a much better performance and all around car, bringing it up to 21st century levels of power, refinement and efficiency.
Now if Ford could see fit to do the same with the rear suspension... (sorry, had to slip that in :-)
I have about zero interest in the 1/4 mile, so am looking at this motors many other attributes for real world driving.
Light weight
Compact size
Broad power band
Efficiency
Broad (and high) rpm range
Short term robustness
Long term durability
Low emissions
NVH refinement
I am more a broad-spectrum, real world performance enthusiast who tends to hold onto cars a long time and value balance, refinement and quality much more than flash or single dimension performance myopia. And I know the difference between low cost and high value (or high cost but low value for that matter).
This motor, potentially of course, seems to represent a vast improvement over the hoary ol' 4.0 and will make the V6 Stang, and a slew of other FoMoCo cars, a much better performance and all around car, bringing it up to 21st century levels of power, refinement and efficiency.
Now if Ford could see fit to do the same with the rear suspension... (sorry, had to slip that in :-)
Well I have strictly a performance interest for this motor, so I have a 250shot of nitrous planned after its home..
But I can surely respect your bone stock approach.. I also dont think our 4.0's are ol' and hoary
:angry: .. Trust me, everyone here with a 4.0, will try their best to run down one of these 3.5's.. Most likley with very little success, but we will try.. I think these motors in the proper hands, will be running with the SC 4.6's to some extent.. I can surely see how the motor could be setup for 500RWHP.. This might be a pipe dream.. But its fun to ateast imagine its good for this amount, so early out of the gate..
11/9/05, 12:16 PM
#27
I Have No Life
I'm thinkin its going to be a nice motor for cars that have the 3.0 that NEED something more.
It needs to be successful in the bread/butter cars... I'm sure the Stang will get it eventually....
Anyone know the kill-date of the 4.0?
I know its been around a long time, and wouldnt be around TOO much longer...and it was a holdover...
Maybe 2009-2010 the redesign....
It needs to be successful in the bread/butter cars... I'm sure the Stang will get it eventually....
Anyone know the kill-date of the 4.0?
I know its been around a long time, and wouldnt be around TOO much longer...and it was a holdover...
Maybe 2009-2010 the redesign....
11/9/05, 12:35 PM
#28
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Boomer@November 9, 2005, 11:19 AM
I'm thinkin its going to be a nice motor for cars that have the 3.0 that NEED something more.
It needs to be successful in the bread/butter cars... I'm sure the Stang will get it eventually....
Anyone know the kill-date of the 4.0?
I know its been around a long time, and wouldnt be around TOO much longer...and it was a holdover...
Maybe 2009-2010 the redesign....
I'm thinkin its going to be a nice motor for cars that have the 3.0 that NEED something more.
It needs to be successful in the bread/butter cars... I'm sure the Stang will get it eventually....
Anyone know the kill-date of the 4.0?
I know its been around a long time, and wouldnt be around TOO much longer...and it was a holdover...
Maybe 2009-2010 the redesign....
I am curious how the intro of the 3.5L will effect resale value of the 4.0L Mustangs.. This could mean, we need to get out fast, or just be furious!
11/9/05, 12:36 PM
#29
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks promising. Like the all-AL design to keep weight down and it looks like they thought it out well for future hybrid and forced induction demands.
Couple of questions though:
- How much does it weight compared to 4.0L?
- Will they have an MT for it? (I don't want any AT-only crap)
- How will this impact pricing?
- Will it find its way into the Mustang soon? (the BIG question)
Couple of questions though:
- How much does it weight compared to 4.0L?
- Will they have an MT for it? (I don't want any AT-only crap)
- How will this impact pricing?
- Will it find its way into the Mustang soon? (the BIG question)
11/9/05, 12:42 PM
#31
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
The 3.5's probably won't affect resale at all. MSP, when the 3.8's were bumped to 190, not much happened to the value on the 98's, other then what typically happens when a car is redesigned.
At least to begin with, MSP, the 4.0's will have more after-market modifications going for it.
But, if you're buying a car for resale value, you're buying the wrong thing to begin with.
And, it'd be hard for Boomer to give up on an engine he doesn't even have, MSP.
At least to begin with, MSP, the 4.0's will have more after-market modifications going for it.
But, if you're buying a car for resale value, you're buying the wrong thing to begin with.
And, it'd be hard for Boomer to give up on an engine he doesn't even have, MSP.
11/9/05, 01:01 PM
#32
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JeffreyDJ@November 9, 2005, 11:45 AM
The 3.5's probably won't affect resale at all. MSP, when the 3.8's were bumped to 190, not much happened to the value on the 98's, other then what typically happens when a car is redesigned.
At least to begin with, MSP, the 4.0's will have more after-market modifications going for it.
But, if you're buying a car for resale value, you're buying the wrong thing to begin with.
And, it'd be hard for Boomer to give up on an engine he doesn't even have, MSP.
The 3.5's probably won't affect resale at all. MSP, when the 3.8's were bumped to 190, not much happened to the value on the 98's, other then what typically happens when a car is redesigned.
At least to begin with, MSP, the 4.0's will have more after-market modifications going for it.
But, if you're buying a car for resale value, you're buying the wrong thing to begin with.
And, it'd be hard for Boomer to give up on an engine he doesn't even have, MSP.
)
11/9/05, 01:31 PM
#34
I Have No Life
hahah,
I'm not givin up guys...I'm just looking ahead.
Originally the stang was suppose to have 2 V6 options... 3.0 and 4.0
It eventually went to just one..the 4.0 (mind you the GT was suppose to have 2 as well... 4.6 and 4.9)
Many people didn't even KNOW the 04 V6 was a 3.9 not the 3.8
Even though it was ...really...the same engine.
MANY people questioned the 4.0 cologne engine as KNOWING it wasn't going to be around long, and it being a truck engine.
I have nothing against the engine, but if there is something lighter, more powerful, and more fuel efficient..hey..what the heck...
I'm not givin up guys...I'm just looking ahead.
Originally the stang was suppose to have 2 V6 options... 3.0 and 4.0
It eventually went to just one..the 4.0 (mind you the GT was suppose to have 2 as well... 4.6 and 4.9)
Many people didn't even KNOW the 04 V6 was a 3.9 not the 3.8
Even though it was ...really...the same engine.
MANY people questioned the 4.0 cologne engine as KNOWING it wasn't going to be around long, and it being a truck engine.
I have nothing against the engine, but if there is something lighter, more powerful, and more fuel efficient..hey..what the heck...
11/9/05, 02:09 PM
#35
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also dont think our 4.0's are ol' and hoary ..
While greatly updated -- OHC rather than OHV for one -- it still is an old design and well past its prime. Judicious tuning and whatnot can still get a good bit of kick out of the ol' gray mare, as is true of most any motor really, but at a cost to competing qualities such as efficiency, driveability, NVH, emissions, breadth of power band, etc.
Basically, she's served long and well and is ready to be put to pasture to make room for the new filly.
11/9/05, 02:10 PM
#36
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Boomer@November 9, 2005, 12:34 PM
hahah,
I'm not givin up guys...I'm just looking ahead.
Originally the stang was suppose to have 2 V6 options... 3.0 and 4.0
It eventually went to just one..the 4.0 (mind you the GT was suppose to have 2 as well... 4.6 and 4.9)
Many people didn't even KNOW the 04 V6 was a 3.9 not the 3.8
Even though it was ...really...the same engine.
MANY people questioned the 4.0 cologne engine as KNOWING it wasn't going to be around long, and it being a truck engine.
I have nothing against the engine, but if there is something lighter, more powerful, and more fuel efficient..hey..what the heck...
hahah,
I'm not givin up guys...I'm just looking ahead.
Originally the stang was suppose to have 2 V6 options... 3.0 and 4.0
It eventually went to just one..the 4.0 (mind you the GT was suppose to have 2 as well... 4.6 and 4.9)
Many people didn't even KNOW the 04 V6 was a 3.9 not the 3.8
Even though it was ...really...the same engine.
MANY people questioned the 4.0 cologne engine as KNOWING it wasn't going to be around long, and it being a truck engine.
I have nothing against the engine, but if there is something lighter, more powerful, and more fuel efficient..hey..what the heck...
Your looking at 78.65HP per liter for a 4.6L.. Effective 361HP 4.6L, and for a 5.0L your looking at 107.25HP per liter, and 536HP for a 5.0L.. I say we all keep our fingers crossed for a version of this engine to appear at either 4.6L or 5.0L, or anything in between!!
11/9/05, 02:38 PM
#37
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So lets look at our options, if lets say Ford used this design...
3.5L= 71.5HP per liter= 250HP Motor- Mustang V6 (-U-) code
4.0L= 75HP per liter= 300HP Motor Mustang V6 (-C-) code
4.3L= 77HP Per Liter= 332HP Motor Mustang V6 or SE or V6 (-K-) code
4.6L= 78.65HP per liter= 361HP Motor -Mustang GT (-S-) code
4.8L= 92.95HP per Liter= 446HP Motor -Mustang GT-R (-Q-) code
5.0L= 107HP per liter = 536HP Motor GT500 or Cobra (-R-) code
5.4L= 135.85HP per liter = 733HP Motor---Used for the Racing applications-(Not for Public Resale)
5.8L= 164HP Per liter = 953HP Motor (NHRA Pro-Stock)
I say lets go for it guys!! LOL!! Boy thats a very nice Mustang Line up! I like the Mustang GT-R motor!! That baby is rippin Normally aspirated!
3.5L= 71.5HP per liter= 250HP Motor- Mustang V6 (-U-) code
4.0L= 75HP per liter= 300HP Motor Mustang V6 (-C-) code
4.3L= 77HP Per Liter= 332HP Motor Mustang V6 or SE or V6 (-K-) code
4.6L= 78.65HP per liter= 361HP Motor -Mustang GT (-S-) code
4.8L= 92.95HP per Liter= 446HP Motor -Mustang GT-R (-Q-) code
5.0L= 107HP per liter = 536HP Motor GT500 or Cobra (-R-) code
5.4L= 135.85HP per liter = 733HP Motor---Used for the Racing applications-(Not for Public Resale)
5.8L= 164HP Per liter = 953HP Motor (NHRA Pro-Stock)
I say lets go for it guys!! LOL!! Boy thats a very nice Mustang Line up! I like the Mustang GT-R motor!! That baby is rippin Normally aspirated!
11/9/05, 02:40 PM
#38
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: February 1, 2004
Location: Hurricane,wv/Cinn,OH,Mooresville,NC
Posts: 2,508
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
I like the 4.0 V6 but time for change with 4.0 it be around since 95 , 3.5 V6 is't a Mazda motor by Mazda in the Mazda 6?
I like see Ford get 300hp out of the 3.5 V6 by 08 model year.
I like see Ford get 300hp out of the 3.5 V6 by 08 model year.
11/9/05, 02:41 PM
#39
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by 05mach1@November 9, 2005, 3:43 PM
I like the 4.0 V6 but time for change with 4.0 it be around since 95 , 3.5 V6 is't a Mazda motor by Mazda in the Mazda 6?
I like see Ford get 300hp out of the 3.5 V6 by 08 model year.
I like the 4.0 V6 but time for change with 4.0 it be around since 95 , 3.5 V6 is't a Mazda motor by Mazda in the Mazda 6?
I like see Ford get 300hp out of the 3.5 V6 by 08 model year.