Antigini-GT/CS

Anyone have an idea of where these guys came from? I was having a discussion with my boyfriend about how the 5.0 is sounding awfully similar to other non-domestic automakers with how they squeeze every last bit of power out of what they've got. He wanted to know if the engineers had previously been with another company and I had no answer for him.

Captain Spadaro

I don't think it's so much a case of the engineers coming from other automakers, but rather borrowing ideas from other automakers (example: the vertical intake ports. The AMG 6.2 liter V8 has vertical intake ports and revs to 7200 RPM). I think the oil pan gasket with an integrated windage tray is an industry first, though.

eci

The 5.0 is all "copied tech" but good to see it in something that doesn't cost $50,000. Add direct injection and it's a win.

Rampant

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest DI is worth it on an NA engine.

eci

Cadillac CTS 3.6.

bpmurr

I would agree but the new 3.7 is putting out around the same power without it.

ManEHawke

It allows much more precise control, and the next step in fuel injection. The combustion engine continues to become more efficient, this is a needed stage.
Its like saying COP isn't much better than coil packs. They are all needed changes.

eci

and WITH TiVCT.

Captain Spadaro

From what I've seen, naturally aspirated direct injection engines tend to be somewhat peaky (the possible exceptions being the 2GR-FSE in the Lexus IS and GS and the 1UR-FSE in the Lexus LS), whereas forced induction direct injection engines tend to be torquey (EcoBoost, BMW N54).

MARZ

Who cares how it makes its power and achieves its efficiency as long as it does, be it through the use of DI or TiVCT?

All new engines typically feature "copied" technology, unless they come from a German manufacturer. There's only so much new "tech" you can provide without pricing your product out of its intended range, especially with the Mustang which has to rely on "trickle-down" technology to achieve its price point.

cdynaco

Wow. You make it sound like Ford couldn't do anything if it wasn't for 'das German' engineers throwing a few crumbs off the table. LOL Ask VW owners about how great that German technology is - and how expensive the repairs are.
Don't you think Ford learned anything over its years of racing and racing partnerships??
After watching America's Greatest Racecar about Shelby/Ford's effort to beat Ferrari with the Daytona, you can see where Ford has used every efficiency to compete and win for a long time - and much of that from the ground up.

PTRocks

Ford put out a number of stories on the engineering of the 5.0 with their initial press releases. You will find them an interesting read:

Mustang Chief Engineer
Engine Programs Manager
Cylinder Head Tech Expert
Intake, Combustion, Exhaust engineer

jedikd

I don't think the engineers were ever what was holding the mustang engine program back. It's usually the budget/scheduling to develop a new engine program. The engineers were probably always there who could develop a engine like this, they just weren't given a proper chance until recently.

MARZ

Actually, I was being facetious; it's hard to convey that on an Internet forum, I'll admit. My post, it was in direct response to a post a day or so ago that said something along the lines of, "only Germans come up with new technologies," or something to that effect.

It's funny you mention the VW Jetta, as my mother has a 2003 TDI; it's a great car, but it's not what I would call "masterfully engineered." The myriad of problems it's had make for great conversation here, though. I just hope the new BMW 335d they've (my parents) ordered is built better.

Overboost

That's how engineering works. Someone comes out with it, and people try to rush and improve or reverse engineer a design. I'm sure all the OEMs have each other's cars in a warehouse and tear them down to find new ways of saving money, improving efficiencies, or doing things different than their engineering team did it.

The 5.0 was partially copied tech, but in a new wrapper. It was time for Ford to get up to pace with the rest, and they did, and allowed them ample room (from what I've heard/read) to add to the motor in the future.

The other funny thing about engineering/business in general is you never come out guns blazing. You gotta call the bluff and let the cards fall how they may...

A lot of people look to the Germans because they will usually push the envelope for tech that the US/JDM engineers deem 'unncessary' or 'expensive'. It's also clearly reflected in the price tags. Take a look at the S-class over the years and see how many safety features have trickled down to nearly every car on the market today. You'll be surprised.

blksn8k

Is anyone here willing to pay for the extra cost of extremely high pressure fuel pumps, fuel lines and injectors for a few incremental increases in power and efficiency in a naturally aspirated Mustang?
I am sure there are huge gains in a turbo application such as EcoBoost like the ability to control combustion chamber temps and fuel timing events. Otherwise Ford would not be doing it.

Tony Alonso

It's all about the money indeed! The cost to develop, certify, and then figure out to manufacture in sufficient volume, while hitting a cost target, play a big role.

I tip the hat to Ford for making this a priority in these challenging car buying times, while trying to balance fuel economy, emissions, and performance in an engine with visual appeal.

To the thread starter - The Ford engineers I've known are people who came out of school in Michigan and started there as a first job. They didn't need to go to another company to develop the prowess to do something like this 5.0 engine.

Overboost

Well, it's pretty obvious that the 5.0 is getting the start in the Mustang, but it'll see duty in the trucks and SUVs down the road. That'll help justify the R&D costs when the F-150 gets it and sells like it usually does.

And yes, I agree. Engineers typically strive to do the best possible thing, but when you get back to reality, budgets, schedules, and other factors can cause for the 'meeting in the middle' on specific design features.

As for going DI, the cost isn't astronomical. Deployed across the fleet they could add it into the normal inflated year to year costs and most people wouldn't even blink.

rhumb

Sounds like a bit of "not invented here" syndrome that sometimes afflicts American cars, an almost perverse aversion to adopting something that's very effective simply because someone else may have thought of it or adopted it first. A lot of the features on the new 5.0 look remarkably like the ones on my 2001 M3 -- VVT, coil on plug, vertical intake ports, tube headers, forged internal bits, etc. -- and seemingly to similar great effect: excellent power, efficiency, low emissions and great drivability and refinement. The big difference is that Ford is doing it far more affordably.

Would the converse of this question imply that Ford shun some of the features that seem to make the 5.0 such an impressive engine? I am glad that Ford engineering is not being at all myopic, insular or xenophobic when it comes to looking for the best world class technology and adapting it in a very affordable manner. Rather, I think they should be cheered for doing so rather than questioned or subtly impugned. That Ford engineers are aggessively adopting world-class, leading edge technologies is paying huge dividends in my opinion, as well exemplified by the TT3.5, and the '11 Stang's two new motors.

As for DI, while its benefits are more obvious on turbo'd motors, it does have significant benefits on NA motors too, allowing higher compression ratios and resultant power, torque and efficiency as but one example. Look at Audi's 4.2 liter V8 motors as an example of that. I think DI will evolve much like fuel injection did in the '80s. Remember all the keening and belly aching when Ford finally ditched carbs for fuel injection on the old 5.0? My guess is that DI will first appear on an SE 5.0, maybe a Boss 302, for an extra boost in power over the port injected version, and then gradually be adopted as standard.

Moosetang

The only V8s making more hp per liter in N/A form in the world are those which cost more than an entire Mustang. Efficiently. Affordably. Sorry, but it's a win.