3.5 V6 Twin Turbo coming to the Mustang
3/6/07, 05:50 PM
#81
With Ford's 2007 fleet, under the new rules Ford would have to pay something like $20B in gas guzzler fines.
3/6/07, 05:57 PM
#82
Hadn't heard either of those claims. Do you have a URL where this is definitively stated?
I wouldn't be entirely surprised, of course, but it would tend to support the theory that Alan Mulally really won't be able to fix the company without first cutting out the rot that is better known as the 'marketing & finance dept.'
I wouldn't be entirely surprised, of course, but it would tend to support the theory that Alan Mulally really won't be able to fix the company without first cutting out the rot that is better known as the 'marketing & finance dept.'
3/10/07, 04:48 PM
#85
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 30, 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3/15/07, 01:37 PM
#88
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What TT mass production cars have ever done well from a marketing perspective? The 3000GT VR-4, 300ZX TT, and Supra TT were all cool/fast cars but none of them sold well enough to justify their development costs. Also, does anyone know what a D35 costs per unit compared to the 'Stangs 3v SOHC?
3/15/07, 02:14 PM
#89
GT Member
Join Date: June 6, 2006
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A TT Mustang doesn't really fit to me. I say put it in a performance version of the Fusion or in a Lincoln or Mercury based off the Mustang platform. A TT F-150 is kinda interesting but I'd rather see Ford put the GT500 5.4 in a new Lighting.
3/15/07, 03:30 PM
#90
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What TT mass production cars have ever done well from a marketing perspective? The 3000GT VR-4, 300ZX TT, and Supra TT were all cool/fast cars but none of them sold well enough to justify their development costs. Also, does anyone know what a D35 costs per unit compared to the 'Stangs 3v SOHC?
The first TT 2.7 V6 Audi S4s actually sold pretty well and still command a good price today in the used car market. They seem to be darlings of the ski set as their AWD combined with the high altitude compensating benefits of a turbo suite that group well apparently. That same motor was used in the A6 2.7, though to much less fanfare even while it was quite a nicely performing sleeper (sub 6-seconds to 60 with the available, if rare, manual tranny).
I don't see Ford developing a TT V6 solely for the Stang, but if developed for other uses, it would make an interesting plug-in motor for some SE Stang varient (SVT) to go after the Euro/Tuner/Japanese sports coupe market.
3/15/07, 04:15 PM
#91
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright, I'll give you the previous gen S4, but look at the car today--apparently Audi thought a V8 the better all around option. I definitely think the TwinForce is cool, I just find it hard to believe it would ever beat a similarly well-developed V8 with respect to factors beyond horsepower and torque (to name a few: manufacturing, repair, and fuel costs as well as packaging difficulties.)
3/16/07, 07:19 AM
#92
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 30, 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the rumors I've read on BON about the engine, the primary impetuous driving the TT 3.5L V6 was to make a more fuel efficient F-150 (where it can get 20 MPG City!), which we all know is Ford's bread and butter.
It also fits well with the D3 (500/Taurus platform) lack of being able to fit a 4.6L V8 in it, but the issue remaining with that is there isn't a heavy duty FWD/AWD transmission in Ford's line up that's good for over 260 FT Lb of Torque, so they are using some torque limiting programming in the computer to get around that, but to me sounds like a warranty/reliability issue waiting to happen to me...and will find a home in the MKS
3/18/07, 11:46 AM
#93
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The D35 in its most pedestrian state of tune gets Mustang GT gas mileage in a family sedan (MXX), how could a twin turbo, bored out/hotted up version get BETTER mileage in a truck?
3/18/07, 12:16 PM
#94
Team Mustang Source
In real-world experience, it probably would not get any better mileage. On paper though, in the EPA testing, it could very well get better mileage. This is the nature of the turbos.
At steady cruise, the turbos are not doing anything, and the engine is very efficient. When you give it the gas to get going, like stop and go driving, the turbos kick in and suck down the gas. While this kind of driving is certainly accounted for in the testing, it is not real world testing.
The majority of people out there do NOT drive the way the cars are tested. They go faster, and accelerate harder than the testing. This is where a turbo will suck down more gas than a n/a engine.
At steady cruise, the turbos are not doing anything, and the engine is very efficient. When you give it the gas to get going, like stop and go driving, the turbos kick in and suck down the gas. While this kind of driving is certainly accounted for in the testing, it is not real world testing.
The majority of people out there do NOT drive the way the cars are tested. They go faster, and accelerate harder than the testing. This is where a turbo will suck down more gas than a n/a engine.
3/18/07, 06:52 PM
#95
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 5, 2006
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In real-world experience, it probably would not get any better mileage. On paper though, in the EPA testing, it could very well get better mileage. This is the nature of the turbos.
At steady cruise, the turbos are not doing anything, and the engine is very efficient. When you give it the gas to get going, like stop and go driving, the turbos kick in and suck down the gas. While this kind of driving is certainly accounted for in the testing, it is not real world testing.
The majority of people out there do NOT drive the way the cars are tested. They go faster, and accelerate harder than the testing. This is where a turbo will suck down more gas than a n/a engine.
At steady cruise, the turbos are not doing anything, and the engine is very efficient. When you give it the gas to get going, like stop and go driving, the turbos kick in and suck down the gas. While this kind of driving is certainly accounted for in the testing, it is not real world testing.
The majority of people out there do NOT drive the way the cars are tested. They go faster, and accelerate harder than the testing. This is where a turbo will suck down more gas than a n/a engine.
3/19/07, 03:26 PM
#96
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo motors can be real Dr. Jackyl and Mr. Hyde types when it comes to economy. Drive like grandma and you are basically driving a mildly tuned 3.5 liter. Bare your fangs, spool up the turbos and that motor will start guzzling like a frat boy at a free beer fest. Turbos also tend to run a bit rich under the whip to keep combustion temps and detonation at bay, also adding to the thirst when driven in anger. Probably really depends greatly on the type and style of driving as to whether any individual might actually realize more real-world economy with a turbo vs naturally aspirated motor of the same power.
3/19/07, 04:16 PM
#97
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, and I realize the benefit of that nature with respect to a loaded and unloaded pickup, but would this offer a sufficient improvement compared to an efficient V8 to justify the added cost/complication of the turbos, intercoolers, and plumbing? I'm not positive the answer to that question is "no," so I'm glad Ford is doing the research and development to find out, but I have my doubts.
3/19/07, 09:38 PM
#99
Legacy TMS Member
Y'know why doesn't Ford take a page from GM's book, big cube high torque V8 coupled to a trans with more than 4 gears and a really tall final drive ratio so that the engine is essentially idling for most of the time and offers good acceleration with minimal throttle input. Doesn't seem like a bad strategy Boss V8 copuled to a double OD 6spd auto or manual trans. Especially if the engine were to offer VVT and direct injection.
4/5/07, 10:36 AM
#100
Legacy TMS Member
I'm all for a TT V6 as long as it doesn't replace the V8. The thing that won't make business sense is that if the TT V6 makes more power and gets better milage than the base V8, why would most consumers go with the V8? I'm not saying that Mustang enthusiasts wouldn't still want the V8, but mainstream buyers might opt for the more powerful, more fuel efficient motor, even if the V8 had more low end torque and better sound.