2011 V6 Mustang: Near Future, Bargain High Performance Piece?
7/21/08, 07:19 PM
#1
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
2011 V6 Mustang: Near Future, Bargain High Performance Piece?
The upcoming 400hp 5.0L V8 has so overshadowed it's V6 little brother that latter has frankly gotten lost in the hooplah. But little brother may just have a lot to say about who sits atop the pony car mountain with numbers we already have in hand boding very well for the V6 Mustangs future. To wit. Could the 2011MY V6 Mustang end up the bargain high performance surprise of the year? Crunch the numbers with me and see for yourself.
Assuming the Mustang gets the existing, bog-standard 3.5L V6 with no future improvements of any sort we are looking at power figures of 265hp @ 6250rpm and 250lb-ft of torque @ 4500rpm. Using the existing V6 Mustangs base curb weight of 3300lb and change......IIRC Ford says 3300lb even.....when Ford swaps out the surprisingly large, cast iron block 4.0L V6 for the smaller and lighter 3.5L V6 were left talking about a 2011 Mustang V6 coupe which will actually lose weight coming in around 3300lb or less in the real world even if we allow for some 'dynamic improvement/ more standard features' weight gain and other niceties like the current brake and suspension package available on the V6. For a modern, rwd coupe that is featherweight territory no matter how you slice it.
Folks, it isn't inconceivable that a 3.5L V6-equipped Mustang very similar to the above could make for a stock, very high 13 second ride if backed with the proper gearing. The pre 2006 350Z's sported 287hp, 274lb-ft of torque, and a 3300lb curb weight and easily broke into the high 13 second range. A slight hp improvement, a nice six speed, a curb weight that squeaks in at 3200lb and change, and some clever marketing on Ford's part and we could easily end up with the fastest sub 20,000 dollar car on the market by a huge margin. Even better, given the FE ratings of larger, 3.5L equipped cars like the Taurus such a car would be assured of obtaining a rating better than the 28mpg hwy the big Ford knocks down.
Thoughts?
Assuming the Mustang gets the existing, bog-standard 3.5L V6 with no future improvements of any sort we are looking at power figures of 265hp @ 6250rpm and 250lb-ft of torque @ 4500rpm. Using the existing V6 Mustangs base curb weight of 3300lb and change......IIRC Ford says 3300lb even.....when Ford swaps out the surprisingly large, cast iron block 4.0L V6 for the smaller and lighter 3.5L V6 were left talking about a 2011 Mustang V6 coupe which will actually lose weight coming in around 3300lb or less in the real world even if we allow for some 'dynamic improvement/ more standard features' weight gain and other niceties like the current brake and suspension package available on the V6. For a modern, rwd coupe that is featherweight territory no matter how you slice it.
Folks, it isn't inconceivable that a 3.5L V6-equipped Mustang very similar to the above could make for a stock, very high 13 second ride if backed with the proper gearing. The pre 2006 350Z's sported 287hp, 274lb-ft of torque, and a 3300lb curb weight and easily broke into the high 13 second range. A slight hp improvement, a nice six speed, a curb weight that squeaks in at 3200lb and change, and some clever marketing on Ford's part and we could easily end up with the fastest sub 20,000 dollar car on the market by a huge margin. Even better, given the FE ratings of larger, 3.5L equipped cars like the Taurus such a car would be assured of obtaining a rating better than the 28mpg hwy the big Ford knocks down.
Thoughts?
Last edited by jsaylor; 7/21/08 at 07:29 PM.
7/21/08, 07:38 PM
#2
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree. I think that the 3.5 will be making a bit more in the Mustang if it is used.
I think Ford is at a crossroads, and are going to let the buyer decide which path they should go down. Rather than make the assumption that the buyers are panicking about gas prices and want another Mustang II or SVO, I think they will offer a tempting base model without putting all their eggs in one basket by completely downplaying V8s and throwing a 4 cylinder in the base.
Offer a V6 with good performance, offer a V8, and see what sells better! It may be that people aren't interested in a V6 no matter what the numbers, but it may also turn out that if a V6 can run actually run 13's and be more nimble than a V8, people will start to turn away from V8's.
Of course there will always be the puritans who would never even consider anything without a rumbling V8 no matter what the 6 can do and vice versa, but there a lot of people who are sitting on the fence and could be be swayed either way depending on what's offered.
I have always had V8 Mustangs but if the 2010/11 is running 13's...for a much lower price...it would be very tempting.
I think Ford is at a crossroads, and are going to let the buyer decide which path they should go down. Rather than make the assumption that the buyers are panicking about gas prices and want another Mustang II or SVO, I think they will offer a tempting base model without putting all their eggs in one basket by completely downplaying V8s and throwing a 4 cylinder in the base.
Offer a V6 with good performance, offer a V8, and see what sells better! It may be that people aren't interested in a V6 no matter what the numbers, but it may also turn out that if a V6 can run actually run 13's and be more nimble than a V8, people will start to turn away from V8's.
Of course there will always be the puritans who would never even consider anything without a rumbling V8 no matter what the 6 can do and vice versa, but there a lot of people who are sitting on the fence and could be be swayed either way depending on what's offered.
I have always had V8 Mustangs but if the 2010/11 is running 13's...for a much lower price...it would be very tempting.
7/21/08, 07:50 PM
#3
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
I totally agree. I think that the 3.5 will be making a bit more in the Mustang if it is used.
I think Ford is at a crossroads, and are going to let the buyer decide which path they should go down. Rather than make the assumption that the buyers are panicking about gas prices and want another Mustang II or SVO, I think they will offer a tempting base model without putting all their eggs in one basket by completely downplaying V8s and throwing a 4 cylinder in the base.
Offer a V6 with good performance, offer a V8, and see what sells better! It may be that people aren't interested in a V6 no matter what the numbers, but it may also turn out that if a V6 can run actually run 13's and be more nimble than a V8, people will start to turn away from V8's.
Of course there will always be the puritans who would never even consider anything without a rumbling V8 no matter what the 6 can do and vice versa, but there a lot of people who are sitting on the fence and could be be swayed either way depending on what's offered.
I have always had V8 Mustangs but if the 2010/11 is running 13's...for a much lower price...it would be very tempting.
I think Ford is at a crossroads, and are going to let the buyer decide which path they should go down. Rather than make the assumption that the buyers are panicking about gas prices and want another Mustang II or SVO, I think they will offer a tempting base model without putting all their eggs in one basket by completely downplaying V8s and throwing a 4 cylinder in the base.
Offer a V6 with good performance, offer a V8, and see what sells better! It may be that people aren't interested in a V6 no matter what the numbers, but it may also turn out that if a V6 can run actually run 13's and be more nimble than a V8, people will start to turn away from V8's.
Of course there will always be the puritans who would never even consider anything without a rumbling V8 no matter what the 6 can do and vice versa, but there a lot of people who are sitting on the fence and could be be swayed either way depending on what's offered.
I have always had V8 Mustangs but if the 2010/11 is running 13's...for a much lower price...it would be very tempting.
7/21/08, 08:18 PM
#4
This thread is causing me to sport wood! I have thought the same thing for over a year. I have always had a V8 Stang, but I would buy a 3250# 300 hp IRS 50/50 Big Brake 6 speed 30 mpg Mustang in a Heartbeat!!!!!!!
7/21/08, 08:48 PM
#5
THE RED FLASH ------Moderator
Well lets not forget about the new 5.0L 400HP GDI 4v either. It too, will also be more fuel efficient. In fact I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised, if this new 5.0L 4v would also be capable of reaching close to 30 MPG highway as well.
Just imagine having a 3.5L V6 running in the low 13's, while at the same time, having a fuel efficient V8 running in the low 11's. All in all, IMHO both V6 and V8 enthusiasts have something very exciting to look forward to
Just imagine having a 3.5L V6 running in the low 13's, while at the same time, having a fuel efficient V8 running in the low 11's. All in all, IMHO both V6 and V8 enthusiasts have something very exciting to look forward to
7/22/08, 08:07 AM
#7
Bullitt Member
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boomer: "A slight hp improvement, a nice six speed, a curb weight that squeaks in at 3200lb and change, and some clever marketing on Ford's part and we could easily end up with the fastest sub 20,000 dollar car on the market by a huge margin."
The current Mustang 4.0 V6 already IS "...the fastest sub 20,000 car dollar on the market..." by a substantial margin per road tests in a comparo earlier this year. The Mustang's winning margin was not "huge", but it was substantial. The 3.5 V6 might convert that "substantial" to "huge"...
m05fastbackGT: "Just imagine having a 3.5L V6 running in the low 13's, while at the same time, having a fuel efficient V8 running in the low 11's."
'Say what??? Huh???
Anyhoo, what you guys want is the Shelby Terlingua Mustang with the newer 3.5 V6. Research that little Terlingua package for the V6 and be greatly impressed. Unfortunately, I believe it is only a conversion package--ya gotta have the V6 already and bring it to a Shelby modification center for the Terlingua treatment. I guess sellin' Terlinguas already assembled was deemed to be too big a competitor for the Shelby CS6...
My personal feeling is that a Shelby with the new 3.5 is just begging to be built as the reborn GT350...
The current Mustang 4.0 V6 already IS "...the fastest sub 20,000 car dollar on the market..." by a substantial margin per road tests in a comparo earlier this year. The Mustang's winning margin was not "huge", but it was substantial. The 3.5 V6 might convert that "substantial" to "huge"...
m05fastbackGT: "Just imagine having a 3.5L V6 running in the low 13's, while at the same time, having a fuel efficient V8 running in the low 11's."
'Say what??? Huh???
Anyhoo, what you guys want is the Shelby Terlingua Mustang with the newer 3.5 V6. Research that little Terlingua package for the V6 and be greatly impressed. Unfortunately, I believe it is only a conversion package--ya gotta have the V6 already and bring it to a Shelby modification center for the Terlingua treatment. I guess sellin' Terlinguas already assembled was deemed to be too big a competitor for the Shelby CS6...
My personal feeling is that a Shelby with the new 3.5 is just begging to be built as the reborn GT350...
7/22/08, 08:39 AM
#8
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
The current Mustang 4.0 V6 already IS "...the fastest sub 20,000 car dollar on the market..." by a substantial margin per road tests in a comparo earlier this year. The Mustang's winning margin was not "huge", but it was substantial. The 3.5 V6 might convert that "substantial" to "huge"...
Originally Posted by Eights
Anyhoo, what you guys want is the Shelby Terlingua Mustang with the newer 3.5 V6. Research that little Terlingua package for the V6 and be greatly impressed. Unfortunately, I believe it is only a conversion package--ya gotta have the V6 already and bring it to a Shelby modification center for the Terlingua treatment. I guess sellin' Terlinguas already assembled was deemed to be too big a competitor for the Shelby CS6...
Originally Posted by Boomer
V6 mid 14s
V8 High 12s
V8 S/C 11s could be possible
13s for the 6 and 11s for the GT are a LITTLE optimistic.
V8 High 12s
V8 S/C 11s could be possible
13s for the 6 and 11s for the GT are a LITTLE optimistic.
I do agree that 11's for the 5.0L are very optimistic.
7/22/08, 09:03 AM
#9
I Have No Life
Could very well be...
Your right, not enough info is out on the V6.
Who knows... could be the 3.5 or the 3.7
And if the GT can nail down high 12s... even a 14 second V6 doesn't encroach on it.
I could actually see that now that I think about it.
Your right, not enough info is out on the V6.
Who knows... could be the 3.5 or the 3.7
And if the GT can nail down high 12s... even a 14 second V6 doesn't encroach on it.
I could actually see that now that I think about it.
7/22/08, 09:12 AM
#10
Bullitt Member
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boomer: Upstream in this thread I said there was a comparo that found the Mustang 4.0 V6 to be the fastest car sold in the USA for under $20,000. The article is from the April, 2007 issue of Car and Driver magazine (it was still online in April of this year, but may be archived by now), and here it is, sans pictures:
The Quickest Cars of 2007: Less Than $20,000 - Feature
Last time we had this much fun, we were using our lunch money and somebody got four hours of detention.
April 2007
At our 2007 10Best competition, we calculated that the average U.S. transaction price for a new car was $28,400. That was the average. So you wouldn't expect you could slice $8400 from that sum and still be rewarded with a full measure of vehicular va-va-voom. Tell the bartender you want to deduct a buck from your next draft beer, and all you'll get is foam, right?
It used to be that the bottom feeders inhabiting this niche were plasticky and good for about three years' worth of hard daily use. They were the cars you'd get when you told the rent-a-car clerk, "I'll take whatever's cheapest," an utterance you'd regret about a mile from the airport.
But you know what? The sub-$20,000 category is nowadays populated by some alluring characters, and they aren't all as slow as politicians doing math. Consider: The average 0-to-60-mph sprint in this 10-car group consumes only 7.4 seconds. That's just a 10th behind, say, a Saturn Sky roadster.
To make the cut, contestants must boast a base price at or below $20,000 and must be available in showrooms throughout the bulk of calendar-year 2007. Production cars only—no aftermarket specials, although tuners aplenty exist, should you desire more puissance. If two cars post identical 0-to-60 dashes, then the car with the quicker quarter-mile sprint gets the nod. If they're still tied, then the winner is the car that first reaches 100 mph, then 110 mph, and so forth. Simple. Like us.
We know it's unlikely that any of these 10 will draw the sort of attention that causes parking valets to bump you to the head of the queue. But neither will they draw attention from the constabulary or from your insurance agent.
There's a Zen-like purity in that.
Tenth Place: 2007 Subaru Impreza 2.5i
Ninth Place: 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS
Eighth Place: 2007 Honda Civic
Seventh Place: 2007 Hyundai Tiburon GT
Sixth Place: 2007 Honda Accord
Fifth Place: 2007 Scion tC
Fourth Place: 2007 Mazda 3 s
Third Place: 2007 Nissan Altima 2.5
Second Place: 2007 Chevrolet Cobalt SS and Pontiac G5 GT
First Place: 2007 Ford Mustang V-6
2007 Ford Mustang V-6 - Feature
First Place: The Quickest Cars of 2007: Less than $20,000
Base Price: $19,995
0-to-60-mph time: 6.5 sec
Quarter-mile time: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Enthusiasts assume that drivers of V-6 Mustangs are dental hygienists and hair stylists plotting revenge on flaky ex-husbands. Call us sexists, but Ford will tell you the same: The majority of V-6 Mustangs get parked on the distaff side of the garage.
Nowadays, however, the girly-car reputation is increasingly bogus, as the base Mustang's 4.0-liter SOHC V-6 demonstrates. It is an engine familiar to drivers of Explorers, Mountaineers, and Rangers—nothing wimpy about that—producing 240 lb-ft of torque as low as 3500 rpm. Step-off is, well, macho. Fitted with the five-speed manual, this Mustang posts an astounding 6.5-second dash to 60 mph, and even the automatic is only four 10ths behind.
Thing is, the trip there is somewhat riotous. The shifter is stiff, and the V-6 becomes raucous north of 4000 rpm. By 5000 rpm, pieces of interior trim begin to buzz. At idle, at 70 mph, and at wide-open throttle, this Mustang makes way more racket than any of the five full-size pickup trucks in our April 2007 comparo.
Perhaps catering to the femmes, Ford has lightened the steering, dialed out the traditional Mustang oversteer, and tuned the suspension for ride, not grip—0.81g on the skidpad, versus the Mustang GT's 0.89. You don't have to be Danica Patrick to notice the difference. Still, this V-6 pony offers decent fuel economy and a quintessentially American driving experience.
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE: $19,995
ENGINE TYPE: SOHC 16-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 245 cu in, 4009cc
Power (SAE net): 210 bhp @ 5300 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 240 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 187.6 in
Width: 73.9 in
Height: 55.4 in
Curb weight: 3439 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.5 sec
Zero to 110 mph: 23.1 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 113 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 183 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 19/28 mpg
There are short sub-articles on the other nine vehicles in the comparo, but I've only copied the sub-article on the Mustang. Check out the C&D website for those other nine sub-articles if you're interested.
Greg "Eights" Ates
The Quickest Cars of 2007: Less Than $20,000 - Feature
Last time we had this much fun, we were using our lunch money and somebody got four hours of detention.
April 2007
At our 2007 10Best competition, we calculated that the average U.S. transaction price for a new car was $28,400. That was the average. So you wouldn't expect you could slice $8400 from that sum and still be rewarded with a full measure of vehicular va-va-voom. Tell the bartender you want to deduct a buck from your next draft beer, and all you'll get is foam, right?
It used to be that the bottom feeders inhabiting this niche were plasticky and good for about three years' worth of hard daily use. They were the cars you'd get when you told the rent-a-car clerk, "I'll take whatever's cheapest," an utterance you'd regret about a mile from the airport.
But you know what? The sub-$20,000 category is nowadays populated by some alluring characters, and they aren't all as slow as politicians doing math. Consider: The average 0-to-60-mph sprint in this 10-car group consumes only 7.4 seconds. That's just a 10th behind, say, a Saturn Sky roadster.
To make the cut, contestants must boast a base price at or below $20,000 and must be available in showrooms throughout the bulk of calendar-year 2007. Production cars only—no aftermarket specials, although tuners aplenty exist, should you desire more puissance. If two cars post identical 0-to-60 dashes, then the car with the quicker quarter-mile sprint gets the nod. If they're still tied, then the winner is the car that first reaches 100 mph, then 110 mph, and so forth. Simple. Like us.
We know it's unlikely that any of these 10 will draw the sort of attention that causes parking valets to bump you to the head of the queue. But neither will they draw attention from the constabulary or from your insurance agent.
There's a Zen-like purity in that.
Tenth Place: 2007 Subaru Impreza 2.5i
Ninth Place: 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS
Eighth Place: 2007 Honda Civic
Seventh Place: 2007 Hyundai Tiburon GT
Sixth Place: 2007 Honda Accord
Fifth Place: 2007 Scion tC
Fourth Place: 2007 Mazda 3 s
Third Place: 2007 Nissan Altima 2.5
Second Place: 2007 Chevrolet Cobalt SS and Pontiac G5 GT
First Place: 2007 Ford Mustang V-6
2007 Ford Mustang V-6 - Feature
First Place: The Quickest Cars of 2007: Less than $20,000
Base Price: $19,995
0-to-60-mph time: 6.5 sec
Quarter-mile time: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Enthusiasts assume that drivers of V-6 Mustangs are dental hygienists and hair stylists plotting revenge on flaky ex-husbands. Call us sexists, but Ford will tell you the same: The majority of V-6 Mustangs get parked on the distaff side of the garage.
Nowadays, however, the girly-car reputation is increasingly bogus, as the base Mustang's 4.0-liter SOHC V-6 demonstrates. It is an engine familiar to drivers of Explorers, Mountaineers, and Rangers—nothing wimpy about that—producing 240 lb-ft of torque as low as 3500 rpm. Step-off is, well, macho. Fitted with the five-speed manual, this Mustang posts an astounding 6.5-second dash to 60 mph, and even the automatic is only four 10ths behind.
Thing is, the trip there is somewhat riotous. The shifter is stiff, and the V-6 becomes raucous north of 4000 rpm. By 5000 rpm, pieces of interior trim begin to buzz. At idle, at 70 mph, and at wide-open throttle, this Mustang makes way more racket than any of the five full-size pickup trucks in our April 2007 comparo.
Perhaps catering to the femmes, Ford has lightened the steering, dialed out the traditional Mustang oversteer, and tuned the suspension for ride, not grip—0.81g on the skidpad, versus the Mustang GT's 0.89. You don't have to be Danica Patrick to notice the difference. Still, this V-6 pony offers decent fuel economy and a quintessentially American driving experience.
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE: $19,995
ENGINE TYPE: SOHC 16-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 245 cu in, 4009cc
Power (SAE net): 210 bhp @ 5300 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 240 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 187.6 in
Width: 73.9 in
Height: 55.4 in
Curb weight: 3439 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.5 sec
Zero to 110 mph: 23.1 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 113 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 183 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 19/28 mpg
There are short sub-articles on the other nine vehicles in the comparo, but I've only copied the sub-article on the Mustang. Check out the C&D website for those other nine sub-articles if you're interested.
Greg "Eights" Ates
7/22/08, 01:29 PM
#12
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
4 Posts
+1 I agree. Especially in the convertible the thing has such soft suspension that spirited driving can cause sea sickness. And my grandparents 91 Buick LaSabre after 100,000 miles on the original shocks dove less under braking than my Mustang.
I understand that there is a market for such a V6 Mustang, but Ford, if you are listening, put a sport package as an option on the next V6.
Stiffen up the suspension, better tires, maybe LSD... I think you can see where I'm going with this.
7/22/08, 03:03 PM
#14
Bullitt Member
Join Date: April 28, 2008
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7/22/08, 03:43 PM
#15
Needs to be more Astony
The future V6 stang will offer good performance in todays market but once that time comes, we will also see the 400hp gt and be like oh for 5k more dollars i can have that and again we won't care about he V6 
, not to mention the competition is always getting faster as well.
, not to mention the competition is always getting faster as well.
7/22/08, 09:22 PM
#17
THE RED FLASH ------Moderator
My bad, what I meant was running in the high 13's for the 3.5L V6, and high 11's for the 5.0L 400HP V8.
At any rate: my apologies for the misinterpretation on my part.
7/23/08, 04:15 AM
#18
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 2, 2005
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm definitely thinking about a V-6 and the Stang is a performance bargain. I'm just concerned with a 20 grand base price and the costs associated with the upgrades. I can see Ford sticking with a T-5 manual and 3.31 gears do to cost and fuel economy for the V-6. This would keep a V-6 in the low 14s. 4.10s, T-Lok, and a tune would probably put you into high 13s. Maybe $23,000, car and mods, for 13s? That's a good deal!
7/31/08, 01:35 PM
#19
V6 Member
Join Date: April 23, 2008
Location: Fairfield, CT
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd read the next Mustang could have the turbo V6 out of the Lincoln MKZ. I don't recall if the power would be the same, but it's going to have to be competitive with the 300hp V6 Camaro at any rate. I think a boosted Six in the 270-280hp range could be lotsa fun - with that kind of power I'd be a customer for another V6 car vs dropping the extra Ks for a V8.
7/31/08, 03:24 PM
#20
I'd read the next Mustang could have the turbo V6 out of the Lincoln MKZ. I don't recall if the power would be the same, but it's going to have to be competitive with the 300hp V6 Camaro at any rate. I think a boosted Six in the 270-280hp range could be lotsa fun - with that kind of power I'd be a customer for another V6 car vs dropping the extra Ks for a V8.