Shelby V6?
10/31/05, 03:30 PM
#101
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 2, 2005
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@November 1, 2005, 2:43 AM
I must stress, that I am not saying that the 4.6 is not better than the 4.0.. Rather that the 4.0 is good in its own right and should be respected for what it is.. Its basically an engine Ford crafted for the 2005 V6 Mustang, in which its become pretty much obvious that they did intend for the motor to have a very strong aftermarket life..
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
I must stress, that I am not saying that the 4.6 is not better than the 4.0.. Rather that the 4.0 is good in its own right and should be respected for what it is.. Its basically an engine Ford crafted for the 2005 V6 Mustang, in which its become pretty much obvious that they did intend for the motor to have a very strong aftermarket life..
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
I want to point out something about these numbers. Stock versus stock, the V8 is much more efficient at making HP and torque. A 65mm throtttle body is plenty for the V6, you wouldn't get much switching to a larger throttle body. I'm guessing 5 HP tops. The V8 has a power advantage do to VCT and a extra valve. The extra valve will probably get you an extra 4-5 percent on volumetric efficiency.
Conservative GT RWHP and RWTQ is 265/280. A V6 190/215. Divide this out and the GT has a 20 percent advantage on HP and 12 percent on TQ. The V6 has a truck background and probably does a lot better down low compared with a GT.
I have owned a 94 GT and I drive a LS V8. My Mustang will be a V6. There are a lot of practical reasons for the V6, insurance, fuel costs, vehicle price. I can get the same satisfaction from modding a V6 as a GT. Don't race others race yourself. How much have I improved this car com@ared with stock?
10/31/05, 07:38 PM
#102
Bullitt Member
Join Date: April 18, 2005
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by buscg@October 31, 2005, 12:44 AM
I know plenty of straight six turbo supras that will smoke his "big bad gt" in a heartbeat, along with some wrx's.
I know plenty of straight six turbo supras that will smoke his "big bad gt" in a heartbeat, along with some wrx's.
Thanks for the update. You know what 300rwhp mustangs and 600 rwhp supras have in common right?
12 second et's!
Supras put up neat numbers and all but 99% are just dyno queens that won't even race from a dig.
10/31/05, 07:42 PM
#103
Originally posted by Shifty@October 31, 2005, 9:41 PM
Thanks for the update. You know what 300rwhp mustangs and 600 rwhp supras have in common right?
12 second et's!
Supras put up neat numbers and all but 99% are just dyno queens that won't even race from a dig.
Thanks for the update. You know what 300rwhp mustangs and 600 rwhp supras have in common right?
12 second et's!
Supras put up neat numbers and all but 99% are just dyno queens that won't even race from a dig.
Well at least we are on some common ground here, Mustangs smoking ricers. I'm sure every mustang owner can enjoy this one! Last time I looked it up, a 600 rwhp supra was running in the low 12's.
11/1/05, 07:46 AM
#104
GT Member
Join Date: October 13, 2004
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd love to to see this happen. This would be a great road racing car with less weight and better balance than a GT. What would be really cool is if they put in an IRS system. This could be the new equivalent to the SVO Mustang of the '80s.
11/1/05, 08:52 PM
#105
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: February 22, 2004
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=38033
All hail Crazyhorse!!! I really like the looks of the Shelby CS6.
All hail Crazyhorse!!! I really like the looks of the Shelby CS6.
11/1/05, 09:01 PM
#108
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MilStang@November 1, 2005, 7:55 PM
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=38033
All hail Crazyhorse!!! I really like the looks of the Shelby CS6.
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=38033
All hail Crazyhorse!!! I really like the looks of the Shelby CS6.
11/1/05, 09:11 PM
#109
Originally posted by MSP@November 1, 2005, 11:04 PM
Thanks for the update MilStang! Both cars look great.. It seems a safe bet for the 4.0 to run with around 300RWHP..
Thanks for the update MilStang! Both cars look great.. It seems a safe bet for the 4.0 to run with around 300RWHP..
Yes, you are the man. :worship:
That car is a work of art, my wife just saw it....then said..."oh crap". LOL. Notice it has a paxton in it, not a vortec anyone?????
11/1/05, 09:19 PM
#111
Yea I know, just noticed I quoted the wrong post. It was directed at him (crazyhorse)!
11/2/05, 07:06 AM
#115
GT Member
Join Date: October 13, 2004
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11/2/05, 07:14 AM
#116
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MilStang@November 2, 2005, 3:49 AM
I would guess sometime early next year at the latest. More likely you might be able to get that info at SEMA or not long after SEMA ends.
That is all guesses though....
I would guess sometime early next year at the latest. More likely you might be able to get that info at SEMA or not long after SEMA ends.
That is all guesses though....
Based on the 25 number, its really hard for me to wrap my arms around these cars.. Yes they are nice, but actually seeing one on the streets someday will be like winning a quick pick in the lottery.. Owning one will be like winning the lottery..
11/2/05, 07:32 AM
#120
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Grimlock@November 2, 2005, 6:27 AM
Where does it say the CS6 is limited to only 25 cars? The 25 number is for the Shelby/West Coast Customs V8 car.
Where does it say the CS6 is limited to only 25 cars? The 25 number is for the Shelby/West Coast Customs V8 car.
You may be correct.. Looking at the .pdf again, it would appear that perhaps Ford dealerships could ship a V6 car over to Shelby for the V6 Stage 1 or Stage 2 performance upgrade, at any time.. So you may in fact be correct that dealerships may now have this option to send cars over for the packages..