The elephant in the room (and it's wearing a bow tie)
#41
Cobra R Member
Am I the only one more concerned with how the power is able to be put down, than how much a dyno says the engine can make?
It doesn't need to be the fastest car out there. If it can be "fast enough" while offering a more refined ride, better mileage and a better interior then I think it will ultimately be a much better vehicle. The other companies can keep the horsepower war awards as all they're doing is tossing a ton of power into a crap car and calling it good.
It doesn't need to be the fastest car out there. If it can be "fast enough" while offering a more refined ride, better mileage and a better interior then I think it will ultimately be a much better vehicle. The other companies can keep the horsepower war awards as all they're doing is tossing a ton of power into a crap car and calling it good.
#42
Legacy TMS Member
Well in order to get the 5.2 there you see what Ford had to do. Like I said in a previous post that .2 bump in displacement would get a standard Coyote up to or a bit past 450 horsepower.
Ford would need around 5.8 to 6.0 liters to hit 500 hp.
The bore at the stock 92.2 mm would require a stroke of over 108.7 mm which would make it even longer than what was used in the 5.4 and 5.8 used in the GT500 and would require nearly a 7" connection rod length (center to center) to maintain a similar rod/stroke ratio which would make the rod about an inch longer compared to the 5.0 unit which in turn would require a corresponding increase in deck height to house.
Piston speed for a stock coyote at 7,000 rpm is 4257.9 feet per minute and to get the same sort of piston speed you would have to lower the rev limit to just under 6,000 rpm.
the 2013/14 GT50-0 had an over rev feature that allowed it to temporarily rev to 7,000 rpm and the piston speed was almost 4860 feet per minute. In the same scenario this 5.8 coyote would be limited to just a bit over 6800 rpm in a temporary over rev but being a volume engine Ford would most likely limit the engine to around the Road Runner's 4562 feet per minute or about 6400 rpm or lower.
#43
Legacy TMS Member
Am I the only one more concerned with how the power is able to be put down, than how much a dyno says the engine can make?
It doesn't need to be the fastest car out there. If it can be "fast enough" while offering a more refined ride, better mileage and a better interior then I think it will ultimately be a much better vehicle. The other companies can keep the horsepower war awards as all they're doing is tossing a ton of power into a crap car and calling it good.
It doesn't need to be the fastest car out there. If it can be "fast enough" while offering a more refined ride, better mileage and a better interior then I think it will ultimately be a much better vehicle. The other companies can keep the horsepower war awards as all they're doing is tossing a ton of power into a crap car and calling it good.
The Camaro handles its 455 horsepower well. The times achieved were in 55 degree weather and the auto and manual cars were within a tenth or two of each other.
#44
Legacy TMS Member
Originally Posted by bob
The Camaro handles its 455 horsepower well. The times achieved were in 55 degree weather and the auto and manual cars were within a tenth or two of each other.
Though, if I could get a clean launch, my car should be around those times too. I just need to install all my suspension stuff that I've been sitting on. And actually have my tires warmed up.
#45
Legacy TMS Member
Then I would need to actually nail the 2-3 and 3-4 shifts, which considering my MT-82, is highly unlikely. Though I also need to install my BF bracket too LOL
#46
Cobra Member
I would not be opposed to the new Camaro. My only and stipulation is that it would need to be a convertible. I test drove the 2014 model (before I bought my S197) and I did not like the small windows and the feeling I got of being inside of a tank.
#47
Cobra Member
#48
Legacy TMS Member
Originally Posted by JoeMidnight
THIS is why the V6 is king.
LOADS of performance AND has the fuel economy to boot.
My last fill up, I was averageing 27-28MPG
Best of both worlds!
LOADS of performance AND has the fuel economy to boot.
My last fill up, I was averageing 27-28MPG
Best of both worlds!
#49
If you look at the bore and stroke on the 3.7 it's pretty much the 5.0 motor with two less cylinders. Makes sense from an engine development standpoint because it makes it more cost effective. Easier to develop a tried and true bottom end that they know all the ins and outs about. I enjoy mine. It offers good performance for a daily driver car and easy to maintain. I'm averaging 21.6 mpg right now on 93 octane.
#51
Yea that's good mpg. I've looked at the ProCharger Supercharger for the 3.7 which pushes the car to 540 bhp with 10 psi and amazingly over 900 bhp with a modified engine. Gotta be forged everything and dipped in chrome or something lol.
#52
Super Boss Lawman Member
The Camaro is hideous. Performance is one thing, but style is another, and that simply doesn't have any. Well, it does, sure, but only if you like ugly.
No thanks. I'll keep my ol' 'dated' S197 looks, thanks. I don't care if my 4.6 is walked by the LT1 or the Hemis, or even the Coyote.
She looks way better. And that's more important.
/I... well, shucks, I might be a little biased, but whatever.
No thanks. I'll keep my ol' 'dated' S197 looks, thanks. I don't care if my 4.6 is walked by the LT1 or the Hemis, or even the Coyote.
She looks way better. And that's more important.
/I... well, shucks, I might be a little biased, but whatever.
The Camaro and it's driver's, good or bad, can run circles around me all day but i will still smile when i head off into the sunset with my s197.
I agree with you 100% on style.
#53
Cobra R Member
My mother has a 2013 V6 RS convertible Camaro. Pretty much loaded. Awful car to drive. Tossing aside the fact that I hate convertibles, it's just not at all fun to drive. Has zero "feel" to it, I might as well just be in an Impala. Not to mention the interior is hideous. Even if my car was slower (which it's not...by a long shot) I'd still prefer it. I feel considerably more connected in my Mustang.
#55
Mach 1 Member
I'm impressed with the new camaro, but I'm waiting till dodge comes out with replacement to the challenger, make it weight close between the new 2 rivals, have the 6.4 as standard engine and drop 5.7, and tune it to 495 or even 500/500. Keep the relative lines and quad headlight and I might buy one. The replacement for challenger might be the car that either might get me to trade up, or make me decide to keep my current car forever, as that's still my plan at this point.
Last edited by =HYPERDRIVE=; 11/3/15 at 12:21 PM.
#56
Legacy TMS Member
I don't think they would dump the 5.7, the 5.7 is a good entry level V8 for people who want a V8 but don't want all the extra power or added insurance expense if the higher performance is a factor ( usually not but it could be).
#57
Mach 1 Member
They will ave the alpha romeo Giulia platform ,and it looks like a promising platform on that car, make it weight same as camaro or mustang, stick a all aluminum 6.4, have it make at least current hp figures or go beyond and try to reach 500hp on that motor. Dodge might have a chance to even out play the new camaro.
Last edited by =HYPERDRIVE=; 11/4/15 at 08:06 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Evil_Capri
Ford Discussions
1
8/27/15 01:08 PM