xlover

you didnt really get it, now you only have 2 data points, what you need to do is creat a projected acceleration curve as the vehicle passes from launch RPM to shift point and so on. that is why people discuss flat torque curves and wide power bands. you need to create formula based on gearing and the rpm band. ie at 2k rpm torque is XX in the V6 and XX in the V8, then at 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and so on upto rev limiter to get your curve all the way through the rpm band. then apply the portions that will be under the acceleration curve based on shift points, ie 0-30 first gear, 30-65 second gear and so on, basically applying the portion of the rpm band that will be used between shifts. while the v6 may technically be putting more torque down through multiplication at peak, is it higher all the way through the band? based on your data your a making an assumption that the curve shapes are identical and peak power and gearing are the only nessesary comparision values to make a statement on acceleration potential. until some of the V6s end up on dynos or if ford releases thier data you wont know.

Adam

I like turtles.

PTRocks

I did get it, no one (outside Ford et. al) knows what happens below 4250RPM with the new engine, nor how flat the curve is between the two points. It would be great to have a curve to integrate.

One possible clue is the fact that the new V6 is still making almost 88% of peak torque at 6500RPM, vs. the 4.6L's 82.5% at 6250. So assuming a fairly typical convex torque above 4250, I would be willing to bet that from 4250 to redline, the new V6 wins, given the gearing Ford went with.

yugoboss

Wow, if it's all about horsepower, buy a Supersnake, there's always something better and faster.

YSUsteven

After you consider power under the curve, It will be close, but the old V8 will still win.

But since I want the new V8, I really don't care.

YSUsteven

I say thats too much work to create the data. Just wait for the numbers when released.

mustangfan123

A large debate on this is going to ensue I see. I just can't wait to see how close it is between the new v6 and 2005-2010 GT's.

Five Oh Brian

'11 V6 manual vs 05-10 GT manual: GT will win the 1/4 mile by several tenths of a second and by 2-3 mph through the traps.

'11 V6 auto vs 05-10 GT automatic: GT will barely win the 1/4 mile by about a tenth of a second (maybe 2 tenths) and the trap speeds will be very similar with the GT barely edging out the V6 by maybe 1 mph through the traps.

Let's revisit this in the summer with actual, empirical evidence from timeslips.

Oh, the '11 V6 might come close to the 05-10 GT (may even match it, although I doubt that), but kick its butt? Gimme a break!

Ministang

The debate will only last until magazines compare the two under similar conditions and/or owners actually take possession and take them to the drag strip. Then the debate will be over, as it should be.

Even though one will likely be shown to be the obvious winner, it won't be a "butt-kicking" as the original poster seems to think it will be. It should be very close, and I certainly wouldn't call a couple of tenths in the 1/4 mile a butt-kicking, just a close win or loss.

PTRocks

zzcoop

Two words…

WHO CARES?

cinque35

I like the new 3.7, it's the rest of the car I have a problem with. I wish that Ford just replaced the 4.0 with the 3.7 and left the rest alone, at least the base model.

My '06 V6 Conv. weighed 3384 lbs, (3.31 was standard), if they replaced the engine only it'd be close to 3300 lbs and that would make a nice car.


Instead they managed to make it even heavier which will cancel out a lot of the extra new power

tbi0904

I'm not scared.

05GT-O.C.D.

Ministang

There are a few problems with this logic. Some of the extra weight on the 2011 V6 comes from the dual exhaust. Slapping on the single exhaust from the 2010 and earlier cars would likely choke the engine down, and it wouldn't make as much power. Some of the extra weight also comes from the 8.8 axle with limited slip. It wouldn't make sense to keep the 7.5 axle is it would likely have issues with all the extra power the new engine makes. There are other similar weight adding items that the new more powerful engine necessitates. You could always do some weight reduction on the 2011 V6 to get it down to the weight of the earlier V6 cars (with a lot more power).

2k7gtcs

'Kick its butt' would seem to imply blowing the doors off. Even with internet math I don't see that happening.


Seems like a little hyperbole to me. But it is the interwebs so I don't even know why I'm bothering to post this.

Falchion

What's the zero to sixty time for the 2011 V6 supposed to be? For the 2008 GT it's supposed to be 5.1 seconds. Is the 2011 V6 going to be quicker then that?

windsor202

Things have been stale for a little while now. It's about time someone kicks up some dust.

Skotty

By "left the rest alone", to what prior model year are you comparing to? The pre-2010 style or 2010? Surely not 2010, because not much else changed from 2010 to 2011 other than the engine.

cdynaco