Let me start with this caveat: This is a technological discussion: I DO NOT WANT THIS TO DEGRADE INTO A V6 VS. V8 VS. GT VS. NON-GT CLASS DEBATE! And yes, I am yelling.

Now on to the topic. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]

Someone posted an article about a Honda Civic compared to a Mustang GT. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon24.gif[/img] It talked about the “technology” approach to the Honda’s 4-cly, and the old-fashioned “displacement” approach to the V8 GT.

This got me thinking. No, I’m not thinking about a 4-cyl GT, but what if engine technology were to produce a V8-power-producing comparable engine with six cylinders? Would the V8 crowd be interested?

Yes, I know a HP and torque rating are a couple of numbers that don’t tell the whole story. It's like MHz in a computer microprocessor or megapixles in a camera. It’s area under the curve, curve shape, RPM, and a host of other factors that dictate real would performance. But work with me here for a moment.

What if Ford had a base V6 (210HP) and a GT or “high-output” V6 (300HP)? Again, for the moment, lets assume actual road performance was similar between the fictitious “high-output” V6 (300HP) and today’s V8 (300HP). Would you be interested?

I guess it comes down to this - is it the “8” in V8, or is it that, for now, the only way to get the power (300HP) is to get the GT with the V8. Is the V8 as much a part of the muscle car image as all the other “identifiers”? I also concede that the new V8 isn’t exactly a technological slouch either.

Another scenario. Lets say 2007 was the last year for V8 Mustangs - lets say 330HP V8. Lets say for 2008 the GT engine was a 360HP high-tech V6 for $1000 more sticker. Would you jump on the last V8 Mustang to be produced, or go for more power, more cost, but forever give up those two cylinders. Or make it any set of years when you would be considering your next Mustang - you get the idea. Let’s also say the V8 could be easily modified, but the V6 was complex and high-tech, and would have more factory power to begin with, but was not readily modifiable.

Again, no V6-V8 class arguments. We all want more and more power. I just want to open up a discussion regarding a displacement/cylinder approach vs. a high-tech smaller engine approach.

What do you think …?

 

Fairly balanced horepower and torque numbers are the V8's domain.

Remember, it's also the torque as well for the 'seat of the pants' feeling. Generating high torque numbers either requires larger displacement, or a power adder, in this case supercharging, unless you are willing to use high RPM to get the power out, like the Nissan VQ or any Honda engine.

To have a large displacement V6 seems to defeat the purpose, so you'd need to go to a blown V6 to get the torque up. Take for instance the T-Bird SC 's 3.8 V6. HP was noting spectacular at 210-230HP, but the torque matches the GT's 320 lb/ft.

Just my 2cents.

 

dap that is an interesting ? you ask. I believe next year, the 6 gets a new 250hp 3.5. The 3v 4.6 is a pretty modern motor, great hp/torque, low emissions all on 87 octane. I still think the average stang buyer would opt for the 8cyl. This has been tried before SVO vs. GT. The SVO was a great car(handling,accel,braking,etc.). But numbers wise was pretty much ignored by the average stang buyer. Most 6ers purchased on styling not performance. Don't get me wrong the 4.0 is a good torquey motor and some are running V8 times with just N20. Turbo an SC kits hitting the streets as we speak. Gt owners purchased for looks and increased performance. I myself will choose the V8 instead of a hi output V6. I love torque. You may here some that would make the Mustang a little too"rice". However performance increases is good for competition. Just my .02.

 

well, I am all for high tech small engines.... like my dads M3, has a 3.2 liter inline 6 that has 333Hp and 290 lb/ft and it kicks hiney. BUT. the whole reason I got my mustang and not a BMW 330Ci, which is what I was looking at, and they are about as quick, I wanted the V8. I like the sound, the feel (even if a 6 has more power, it doesnt FEEL like an 8), and I like the smells. Its just the whole idea of a V8 and all that goes with it.

 

Yeah, its surpising to see how many people do not look at torque numbers and strictly at the HP an engine is putting out.

There are so many factors.

 

Ah, you early responders are sharp. Yes, there is an inherent flaw to my scenario that I purposely left out - I guess I’ll add it to the arena. It’s the increased low-end torque as opposed to equal higher RPM horsepower. More fist-punches per revolution. Who wants a 300HP 4-cyl that has to turn 8500RPM to get it.

You will unlikely not get a V6 to “look-sound-feel-perform” like a V8. And the technology you can apply to a V6 you can still apply to a V8. I’m also wondering about the future of the V8 with fuel economy concerns and the performance gains that we are seeing in the V6s. I’d still prefer a V8 with cylinder-shut-down technology to an engine smaller displacement or fewer cylinders.

However … keep the debate/discussion going! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

 

torque is what causes that 'seat of the pants meter' feel

 

Sound is a big part of the mustang experience, and the six can't match the 8. Just the facts.

 

I'll take the 8 even if the 6 made MORE horsepower. You did read that right.

 

Plus, you will never get a 6 to be as smooth as a 90 degree V8. Physics simply means a 90V8 has much better primary and secondary balance than a 60V6 (or God forbid, a 90V6!). And there is nothing you can do with the reciprocating assembly to change that. The only choice is a balance shaft which adds a lot of weight, slows the revs down and costs fuel economy.

Give me the V8 every time.

 

given equal engines 4.6 V8 against a 4.6 V6, I'd take the V6. (my truck has a straight 6 4.9L in it, so don't say a 4.6 for a 6 cylinder is too much)

you could tweak that 6 out to put down some wicked torque (not that the 8 couldn't put down it's own amazing numbers).

I guess I enjoy taking the less beaten path, and standing out with a V6 that can hold it's own, rather than joining in with the V8 crowd. (nothing wrong with the V8 crowd)

Yes, I've owned V8's. I've even rebuilt a few out in my garage. The V6 is just more of a challenge. More hurdles to overcome, more custom work you have to do/have done, etc.

 

I think a lot of this is marketing. Muscle cars are suppose to have V-8s and have V-8 rumble. I think import buyers appreciate technology more than muscle car owners. Ford's new V-6 can be stroked to 4.0 liters and could easily make 300 HP. It wouldn't have the torque or feel of a V-8. The only advantge or reason for the V-6 is weight savings. Its probably 100 pounds lighter. I have driven some smooth 60 degree V-6s (Maxima) and some rough V-8s (94 GT) so I'm not sure about the smoothness factor.

 

Being "old fashioned"... I'd probable take the V8 all things equal.

 

No matter how much money or technology you put into the v-6, the same amount put towards a v-8 yields greater results.

IMHO, combustion engines only work properly in a I-6, v-8, or v-12 format. The harmonics and produceable uncharacteristics of the others are just wasted time, energy and space.

Long live the Holley four barrel 750cfm, 12.4:1 compression, and a cam with bigger lumps than Pam Anderson. Big Blocks Forever, crate motors being the only saving grace of the American Auto Industry.

Toyota in Nascar, yet they have never had a 358 carb v8.
The 2006 Daytona 500, the last Great AMERICAN Race.(it is only cheating if you get caught)

 

Muscle = V8 I never understood why they put V6's in mustangs or camaro's . But then again I dont get the automatic trans either. To each his own.

 

225hp V6 in my Rx300 vs. 200hp V8 in my '82 Vette. Vette any day....and yes, sound and torque is a bit part of it.

 

Wait, I was in the middle of taking my contacts out and thought I read that Toyota will be joining NASCAR... That's a joke right? .... I hope? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif[/img]

 

Personally I really respect small engines with big power. Perfect example would be the Porsche 997 Flat-six. Brilliant piece of work, tiny, wieghs nothing, economical and belts out 355 hp. Very cool. But for a Mustang I like a loud obnoxious gas guzzler.

 

Size does matter as well as the angle of the dangle...

 

Its not the size of the pen- its how you write your name with it........