Any chance of a 2010 NA 5.4 Mach1?
If you want to distinguish between Ford factory ordered and built Special Edition Mustangs, versus Ford standard "GT Upfitters Packages" shipped out and modified by a secondary manufacture like Saleen, Roush or Shelby, that makes sense.
But if your position is that the Ford factory ordered and Ford factory built S197 GT500 is not a Special Edition Mustang, there is a big flaw in your logic.
But if your position is that the Ford factory ordered and Ford factory built S197 GT500 is not a Special Edition Mustang, there is a big flaw in your logic.
Of course, cost via fords point of view.
From my my point of view, I could be forced to live without the ambient lighting, HID headlights and navigation to be able to afford the cost of the the alum. block etc.
But, your right, its all about cost....but, I still dont understand it.
From my my point of view, I could be forced to live without the ambient lighting, HID headlights and navigation to be able to afford the cost of the the alum. block etc.
But, your right, its all about cost....but, I still dont understand it.

The GT Supercar block is not just a simple 5.4L aluminum block.
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator






Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 10,648
Likes: 2,519
From: Carnegie, PA
Are you sure about this?
Reason I ask is that Ford made it clear this year that they plan on churning out refreshed models every four years from now on. So if we consider that the 2010 will run '10, '11, '12, '13 (with the '10 arriving in mid-'09)...then cannot we assume that the complete redesign will hit in late '13 as a 2014 model?
Reason I ask is that Ford made it clear this year that they plan on churning out refreshed models every four years from now on. So if we consider that the 2010 will run '10, '11, '12, '13 (with the '10 arriving in mid-'09)...then cannot we assume that the complete redesign will hit in late '13 as a 2014 model?
This would also seem to make perfect sense, as this would also mark the Mustang's 50th anniversary.
So IMHO, it really wouldn't make any logical sense for Ford to launch a complete new redesign. With just 1-2 years remaining, before the Mustang reaches it's 50th anniversary.
I also agree with Pete (boomer) that in the meantime, Ford can just continue to change the body panels, until Mustang is ready to debut on the all new GRWD platform.
Last edited by m05fastbackGT; Sep 16, 2008 at 09:38 PM.
That's a long time for the S197 chassis to be in service.
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator






Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 10,648
Likes: 2,519
From: Carnegie, PA
Not to mention the Fox lasted FOREVER! Well, not quite eternity, 16 model years.
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator






Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 10,648
Likes: 2,519
From: Carnegie, PA
Kory, I don't know where your getting 16 model years from. But Mustang ran on the Fox platform for 14 years from 1979-1993, however if you also include the SN-95, which ran on the Fox 4 platform from 1994-2004. The entire Fox platform, technically ran for 24 years. So in that respect, yes it did last for almost an eternity. 

If one wants to consider the opposite end of the spectrum look at the LS7, its a great 500hp engine, very light weight too, but stretch it past 700hp in street trim (I say street trim, because supposedly full exhuast, tune, and a cam swap will get you 600hp, I imagine with more extenisve mods you might be able to get another 100hp without turning an LS7 into a pure race piece - which means anything more will require FI of some sort) and it becomes a grenade.
GM's LS9 doesn't seem to be appearing in anything less than the CTS-V or the ZR1 at the moment so I suspect its on par with the GT(40) mill in terms of cost.
So yeah, its a big dumb lump of iron, but is an affordable big dumb lump of iron that can take a beating that would leave GM's finest a melted pile of goo.
Last edited by bob; Sep 18, 2008 at 04:12 AM.
Agreed, people were already complaining about the increased cost of the GT500 relative to the "lack" of content to the Terminator. An aluminum block capable of handling 600 or 700hp+ reliably (and not as in aftermarket reliably, but OE reliably) would have excaberated the situation further.
If one wants to consider the opposite end of the spectrum look at the LS7, its a great 500hp engine, very light weight too, but stretch it past 700hp in street trim (I say street trim, because supposedly full exhuast, tune, and a cam swap will get you 600hp, I imagine with more extenisve mods you might be able to get another 100hp without turning an LS7 into a pure race piece - which means anything more will require FI of some sort) and it becomes a grenade.
GM's LS9 doesn't seem to be appearing in anything less than the CTS-V or the ZR1 at the moment so I suspect its on par with the GT(40) mill in terms of cost.
So yeah, its a big dumb lump of iron, but is an affordable big dumb lump of iron that can take a beating that would leave GM's finest a melted pile of goo.
If one wants to consider the opposite end of the spectrum look at the LS7, its a great 500hp engine, very light weight too, but stretch it past 700hp in street trim (I say street trim, because supposedly full exhuast, tune, and a cam swap will get you 600hp, I imagine with more extenisve mods you might be able to get another 100hp without turning an LS7 into a pure race piece - which means anything more will require FI of some sort) and it becomes a grenade.
GM's LS9 doesn't seem to be appearing in anything less than the CTS-V or the ZR1 at the moment so I suspect its on par with the GT(40) mill in terms of cost.
So yeah, its a big dumb lump of iron, but is an affordable big dumb lump of iron that can take a beating that would leave GM's finest a melted pile of goo.
has a lot of room for incresed HP etc.
Based on your knowledge, what do you think Ford will do with the Mach1 & Boss?
Seems like the 5.4L N/A could have been a possibility a year ago.
What do you think?
I think the 5.4 was canned for obvious reasons.
Mainly weight of the engine, weight it added to the car, and the disruption of the handling characteristics to the vehicle.
With Fords recent kick on weight reduction, I couldn't see them wasting the time/money to go forward with an engine, for all intents and purposes, that will get its hoop handed to it by an engine coming down the line within 12 months that's scheduled for the GT
Basically Ford will take the 1 year hit with the lack of power to prep for the next coming in a year.
I would love to see a BOSS with the 302 (5L) in 2011 or 12.
Pump the tune up to take advantage of 91 octane, and put some of the new GT500 handling/brakes parts on it, change the wheels and a body panel here and there...and call it a day.
Mainly weight of the engine, weight it added to the car, and the disruption of the handling characteristics to the vehicle.
With Fords recent kick on weight reduction, I couldn't see them wasting the time/money to go forward with an engine, for all intents and purposes, that will get its hoop handed to it by an engine coming down the line within 12 months that's scheduled for the GT
Basically Ford will take the 1 year hit with the lack of power to prep for the next coming in a year.
I would love to see a BOSS with the 302 (5L) in 2011 or 12.
Pump the tune up to take advantage of 91 octane, and put some of the new GT500 handling/brakes parts on it, change the wheels and a body panel here and there...and call it a day.
Hooah. I agree with Boomer. Doesn't have to be too difficult and different, just so long as it's not just a sticker package. Make it unique, but not impossible.
I think the 5.4 was canned for obvious reasons.
Mainly weight of the engine, weight it added to the car, and the disruption of the handling characteristics to the vehicle.
With Fords recent kick on weight reduction, I couldn't see them wasting the time/money to go forward with an engine, for all intents and purposes, that will get its hoop handed to it by an engine coming down the line within 12 months that's scheduled for the GT
Basically Ford will take the 1 year hit with the lack of power to prep for the next coming in a year.
I would love to see a BOSS with the 302 (5L) in 2011 or 12.
Pump the tune up to take advantage of 91 octane, and put some of the new GT500 handling/brakes parts on it, change the wheels and a body panel here and there...and call it a day.
Mainly weight of the engine, weight it added to the car, and the disruption of the handling characteristics to the vehicle.
With Fords recent kick on weight reduction, I couldn't see them wasting the time/money to go forward with an engine, for all intents and purposes, that will get its hoop handed to it by an engine coming down the line within 12 months that's scheduled for the GT
Basically Ford will take the 1 year hit with the lack of power to prep for the next coming in a year.
I would love to see a BOSS with the 302 (5L) in 2011 or 12.
Pump the tune up to take advantage of 91 octane, and put some of the new GT500 handling/brakes parts on it, change the wheels and a body panel here and there...and call it a day.
carryover engines they will still sell mustangs etc. But, I had myself convinced that the 5.0 would be available in 2010 considering the GM/Dodge competition.....despite your saying all along that it would be 2011.
As it turns out, your most likely right and I was unsuccesfully optimistic.
However, a nice weight reduction and a 5.0L could make for an incredible stang in 2011.....ok, ok
a shaker scoop and some Boss stripes would be cool too.


