I just found it interesting how 300hp can be easily pulled from a 4.0L and run in a harsh marine environment and run at over 4000rpms for hours at a time..... Plus a 7 year warrantee-

I love my stang but with all the competition, even a hyandai has a 260hp car running around. Our v6 made a great jump from the old v6, I can't wait to see what the future holds-

 

Undoubtedly the new 3.5 V6 with at least 265hp, maybe somewhat more for the Stang. While the 4.0 was a big improvement over the 3.9, an ancient design, the 4.0 ain't no spring chicken either and the upcoming 3.5 should be an immense improvement yet.

 

Exactly - I am eager to see the new 3.5 in the Stang

Seems like every other car company has some V-6 now putting out an average of 240-280.... Ford has to step up.

 

I can see a new thread starting now:

"ENGINE SWAP: 4.0 FORD TO 4.0 SUZUKI HOW HARD ??"

 

You probably won't see the 3.5 in a Mustang, as it has a horrible torque curve compared to the 4.0.

3.5 V6
Horsepower 265 @ 6500 and torque 250 @ 4500
4.0 V6
Horsepower 210 @ 5300 and torque 240 @ 3500

hmm, which looks like more fun?

So, if you don't like to break your tires loose from a dead stop and don't mind sounding like a Honda then the 3.5 will do wonders for you.

 

im sure that the 3.5 would be tuned for more tq than hp not just fusion to mustang engine placement

 

x 2

 

More torque, a lot more power, better economy and emissions, smoother, hmmmm, lemme think a minute ... 3.5!

Sure, if you more interested in teenage antics like spinning your wheels from a stoplight, all while sounding like the old truck motor the 4.0 is, well, perhaps the 4.0 is a better choice, though. But I think the new 3.5 will be of much sportier overall character than the 4.0. It might well be tuned a touch higher yet for the Stang (freer intake and exhausts and ECU tuning to match) to maybe get a good even 275 or so out of it, but they'll probably not tune it so high as to require premium.

Unless the 3.5 is constrained by production limitation, my guess is that Ford will consolidate and put the new 3.5 in most every V6 application.

Not sure how or why the 3.5 would "sound like a Honda," unless maybe you're thinking the Honda (Acura) NSX, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

 

Here are some photos of the beastie...

 

There is no replacement for displacement. The bigger displacement gets me a lot of compliments (exhaust note) and I think the 3.5 would be a sacrifice.

Keep the 4.0 design just take some notes from other manufacturers- If suzuki can pump out 300hp from a 4.0 block and use the thing in adverse conditions like a marine environment ford can easily pump out 250 from the 4.0. My old explorer 4.0l had 190hp I think, and ford made the mustang 4.0 with 20 more horses, now step it up another 20, and then another

 

What an unoriginal and ingorant comment. If there's no replacement for displacement, then how is Ferrari making nearly 500hp from a 4.3-liter V8 when the Mustang is only doing 300? Mind you, without any loss on streetability on Ferrari's part.

But you're partly right, in the sense that displacement is important. But just as important is design. This is why he have EFI, coil-on-plug ignitions, roller camshafts and such. Because it works. So does displacement. Put them together and you get magic. Such as the old 427 Cammer Fords, making 660hp in a day when 330 was par for the course from a similar displacement motor.

 

Agreed, displacement is a factor, but only one quantitative factor that says nothing about the qualitative aspects of a motor's design, where the 3.5 is light years ahead of the old 4.0. Sure, the power band might be a scad higher in the 3.5, but its smooth, free breathing, easier revving character ought to make it a joy to dip into, not a begrudging chore to be endured. And it's not like the 3.5 is lacking in torque, much less power.

To think the very slighter smaller 3.5 will thus sound like some blatty 1.6 liter Honda 4 banger is just silly. It might have a slightly sharper note I imagine, due to the quicker exhaust valve ramp rates allowed by the 4V design, but a touch of crispness in the high notes ain't so bad.

In general, I think the 3.5 will be another huge step forward for the V6 Stang, finally giving it a fully up-to-date, world class motor that can stand head-to-head with any other out there, no excuses or equivocations. And there's lot's more power potential hiding in that motor -- 3.7 varient, DI, higher compression ratio, turbos, etc. -- that Ford has already hinted at. 300+hp ought to be easily achievable naturally aspirated and power approaching the 400hp mark would be reasonable for a (twin?)turbo version. A fully-fleshed V6 performance version of the Stang would be interesting indeed (GT 350 for a hi-po 3.5?), with an emphasis on well balanced, all-around performance envelope that includes top-notch chassis dynamics.

 

I personally think Ford would be making a mistake by putting the 3.5L in the Mustang. The 4.0L is a terrific engine with great sound and great torque. It is also capable of a lot.

Another thing is the higher engine makers string these motors up the harder it is to delve into them and upgrade the internals. I did the heads and cams on my car, and it was a beotch

Oh well.... at least it'll still be a Stang, though barely.

 

The 4.0L Mustang is sort of like the 900HP capable SVO Mustang from 84-86.. Most people never gave it enough credit or time..

The SVO 4 Cyl turbo engine could withstand easily 900HP!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH8rBJXz6d0

However, you dont hear much about those either Flapjack.. You just keep doing what your doing buddy! We cant save the world..

 

How much does a Ferrari 4.3 liter V8 cost? How much does a Mustang cost? Once you recognize the difference in price between the two the answer is obvious.

 

Well you can get Mazda's 2.3 liter turboed engine in the Speed3 for - well 22/23K for the complete package (suspension, 6 speed, etc...)

a comparable lower/similar displacement engine with higher HP/tq doesn't have to cost as much as the ferrari example.

its different world than 10 years ago - dependable smaller liter engines making better numbers than high displacement counterparts are commonplace nowadays

 

I agree. The 4.0 liter is capable of more but Ford chose not to tune it for more, since it's the base engine in the Mustang and they want to keep costs down and have a larger difference in horsepower between the V6 and GT. All these people who compare it to these other import V6s that make more horsepower, don't take that into consideration. Usually the the V6 is the top performance engine in other makes, while in the Mustang the V6 is the base engine. They are also usually 4 valve engines while the 4.0L in the Mustang is a two valve.

In this test a magazine added 20 rwhp to a 4.0L with just a CAI and underdrive pulley making 204HP at the drive wheels. That's what, about 235 hp at the flywheel with 15% drivetrain loss figured in?

 

Funny you mentioned this. My girlfriend is absolutely hooked on F/I. She's gonna order the HiBoost turbo for her 2.3L 2005 Mazda 3 whenever Juan from HB calls her back. She's really excited about it, too. We'll be doing the install ourselves, of course...

 

DUDE - good for you guys!

I'll tell you - I am not really a huge fan of small cars.... but my buddy got a silver Mazda 3 a while back and I REALLY ended up liking the car (makes sense considering the underpinnings of the European Ford Focus - which makes the US Focus look like a joke)

So just last month (he's been trying for four months to get the deal he wanted) he traded it in and got a Cosmic Blue Speed3 - lemme tell ya, I wouldn't mind one of those myself. I love the fact that except for a few styling cues here and there (ie - no huge EVO scoop or giant wing, etc..), it looks almost identical to the regular 3 - but that thing is a little ROCKET in stock form. The thing hauls, especially from a dig - plus it turns on a dime and has a 6 speed.

Hope the turbo intall goes smooth!!!
First time he really got on it I told him with a smile
'Welcome to the world of forced induction '