Zastava_101

So F-150 will get 6.2L afterall ... Sweet.

SuperSugeKnight

Why not bring back the Boss 302? The one from Ford Racing. Make it production. 5.0L OHV V8. Why not? Pushrods work. Look at the LS7 and Hemi. It would be cheap too.

Boomer

That engine would never pass emissions...

Knight Rider

why?

97svtgoin05gt

If GM can keep their pushrod motors emission friendly and DMC can, there is no reason Ford cannot. They seem to be hardcore against doing the pushrod engines again. While this is understandable, if they won't bring back the pushrods, then they need to develop OHC engines large enough to counter those being brought forth by competing companies. Ford is lagging behind now in both trucks and cars with their V-8s. I'm not sure where their V-8 R&D dollars are going, but we need them front and center ASAP. The Mustang NEEDS a 5.8L 385HP option yesterday. And yes, I feel it should be available as an option on a regular GT. I'd bet the farm that Chevy will bring the Camaro to the table with 400hp for under 35K. If you take the Mustang and put in a $4,000 optional 5.8, we're still in the competitive range as far as price and performance. If things are left alone, it'll take a $5,000 blower install just to stay competitive. There are some that say performance competition isn't necessary but I firmly disagree with that. The old Camaro was a turd looks, design, and ergonomically. Even though they had superior engine packages, the Mustang still won out because the car itself wasn't impressive from an overall package standpoint. This new car will NOT be the same. Everything I've seen and read so far indicates that the car will be on par with and or better than the current Mustang. The problems that plagued the last car will no longer be present. All things being equil including price, would you buy a 300hp perf car over a 400hp one?

Right, didn't think so. More than likely most others won't either.

instigator311

I think that one of the main reasons the GTO failed was because a 6.0 with 400 hp was just too much for the majority of consumers. Even considering price, I'm not so sure that the average consumer would jump on the 400 hp car. I'm sure that some people would, but as other people have already stated on these forums, the people that would actually buy such a vehicle are the minority. Perhaps the market is changing and large volumes of people will actually be willing to make that purchase, but maybe not. Although I'd still love to see the new Boss V8's make it into the Mustang, perhaps a less powerful GT is still needed.

Boomer

Need and want being 2 seperate things indeed.
Not only that, but so are the lines that devide the every day joe and the mustang enthusiaist.

How many times have YOU heard 'how does that 5 litre go?' in any car past 96?
There are even oldschool car guys that still think my car has a 5 litre....

While i'm all for the options, I think the base mustang should still retain the 4.6 3v for a while... but yes indeed, add the option of having a bigger engine (and NOT in an SE.... there's no reason why there can't be an option for the 5.8 in the GT, and yet still have special editions that carry that as its motor)

And anyone that thinks that its only HP that needs to be increased, needs to look back a little more at the last 10 years.

The whole 'it needs to compete HP wise' mentality will get the car too expensive and canned very quickly.

Like I said, I'm all for the options.... but say the Mustang GT NEEDS 400+hp...is just getting a little naive.

Thunder Road

Where Ford really messed up was dropping the Clevland motor. It was every bit as good as the Chevy small block of the day, which has carried on very well. Had Ford continued on with developing the Clevland as new technology came about, Ford would have a v8 second to none.

V10

Once again thank Ford's bean counters. They considered the 351C and 351W interchangeable and since the Cleveland was more expensive to make, they killed killed the Cleveland and shipped the tooling to Australia. A real stupid move because Ford quickly found itself unable to build enough 351 CID engines to meet demand. That led to the horrible 351M, which was a destroked 400 that cost more to make than the original 351C.

tacbear

This is what we need:

2010 Car Line Up:


Full Size front wheel drive car.

Base Galaxy---3.5L D35 DOHC V6 250HP, 5 sp. Auto
Galaxy 500(AWD)---3.5L D35 DOHC V6 270HP, 5 sp. Auto w/paddle shifter.


Intermediate Sport Sedan.(Front engine RWD based on the Australian Ford Falcon and would look like the Iosis Concept Car http://www.autoblog.com/2005/08/31/f...press-release/)
Torino—3.5L D35 DOHC V6 270 HP 5 sp Manual/5 sp Auto
Torino GT----4.6L D46 DOHC V8 340 HP, 5sp Manual/5 sp Auto
Police Interceptor---5.4L 3V SOHC V8 360 HP, HD 5sp Auto, HD Brakes
SVT Torino----5.4L 3V SOHC V8 360 HP, Aluminum Block 6 sp Manual/6 sp Auto-Paddle Shift/Brembo Brakes/opt. Recaro's


Mustang ST---3.5L 4V DOHC V6 275 HP, 5sp Manual/5 sp Auto
Mustang GT---4.6L D46 DOHC (Duratec 3.5 w/2 more cylinders)V8 350 HP opt. 5.4 370 HP, 5 sp Manual/5sp Auto
Mustang Mach 1---Boss 6.2L 3V SOHC V8 400 HP 6 sp Manual/6 sp Auto-Paddle Shift (Iron Block/Forged internals)Live axle/optional equipment to match package.
Mustang Boss —Boss 6.2L 3V SOHC V8 400HP 6 sp. Manual (Aluminum Block/Forged internals)All aluminum IRS/Brembo 4 Piston brakes/Recaro's/Ultralight 18"wheels/decontented for light weight(3400#)
SVT Shelby Mustang------ Cobra Jet 6.2L (supercharged) 4V DOHC V8 600HP 6 sp Manual(Aluminum Block/Forged internals) HD IRS/Recaro's/Brembo's/HUD/Ultralight 18"wheels.


Midsize:
Fusion-----------2.0L 4V DOHC I4 140 HP 5 Sp Manual or 5 .Auto
Fusion Sport---3.5L 4V DOHC V6 270 HP 5 Sp Manual or 5 sp. Auto
SVT Fusion-----3.5L 4V DOHC Direct Injected V6 290 HP 6Sp Manual or 6 sp. Auto/paddle shift, w/ limited slip diff/Brembo Brakes/Recaro's/HUD/ultralight 18"wheels


Focus (left hand drive European version)
Base Focus------2.0L 4V DOHC I4 140 HP 5 Sp Manual or Auto
Focus L(luxury)---------2.5 4V DOHC I5 170 HP
SVT Focus------2.5L 4V DOHC Turbo I5 250 HP 6 Sp manual w/limited slip
diff/Brembo brakes/Recaro's/Lightweight wheels


Lightweight Roadster(Front engine RWD)(based on Mazda MX5)
Interceptor---2.5 DOHC I5 250HP 6sp. Manual/6 sp. Auto w/paddle shift.
SVT Interceptor---3.5 D35 DOHC Direct Injected V6 300 HP 6sp. Manual w/paddle shift, 14� Brembo's, Koni Shocks,optional retractable hard top.


Shelby GR1---Super Cobra Jet 6.2L (supercharged) 4V DOHC V8 650 HP, 6 Sp. Manual 15" Brembo's/Recaro's/19" ultra light wheels/HUD—top speed 225.

DynamicmustangGT

as nice as that sounds none of it like except the 3.5 dohc ~270 hp in an intermidate sedan which will be the ford taurus rated at 263hp

bob

If also it hadn't been a design in wretched excess. In concept the cleveland engines were pretty good, execution left something to be desired with the silly port volumes and valve sizes used on the motor and some issues with the cylinderwalls (IIRC, a victim of thin wall casting)

The aftermarket heads for the Cleveland engines now are pretty darn good though.

However, with the amount of air modern inline valve heads can flow (witness the LS7 heads), would there have been justification to keep producing a canted valve head? Aside from the size of the head, due to the splayed nature of the valvetrain, you have to use better materials in order to maintain reliability. When GM did the original LS motors one of the reasons why it used a tall narrow port was to facilitate better alignment from the cam to the rocker arm reducing stresses on the valvetrain and the requirement to use more expensive and tougher materials to maintain reliability (or so they - meaning GM - say).

rhumb

I was always very impressed with the Cleveland motor, especially the 4bbl heads, which were pretty awesome, at least from an all out performance standpoint.

It was crazy, and way cool, that they lashed these 4bbl heads with their gaping ports and manhole-cover valves to the modest 302 Windsor block. Flow velocities were, of course, rather langorous at low revs, but at the upper reaches that little sucker would come alive. Having heads that would do justice to a healthy big block motor finding a home on the little 302 was just a cool and distinctive approach to power in the "ever-bigger" death spiral of the sixties, early seventies (are we repeating that same death spiral today???)

The Cleveland 4bbl motors, especially the Boss 351 which I think was one of the finest motors of its time, were really something but perhaps appeared on the scene at the wrong time. By the early seventies, the twin blades of EPA and CAFE were poised over the necks of Detroits big three. Ford, with redundant 351 designs, decided to pitch the more hi-po oriented Cleveland and consolidate on the milder, cheaper Windsor versions, which, while not bad, were nowhere near the performance beasts as the Clevelands.

rhumb

That would be a drool inducing lineup and meet the Camaro head on, thus, given Ford's proclivity to do the wrong, insipid thing ("Bold", yeah right!), will never happen.

The only real changes I would make to the Stang lineup would be the Boss. In the spirit of the gaping, Cleveland-headed, high winding original Boss 302, which I think to be the iconic version, I'd put the 4V DOHC heads on the smaller, presumably lighter AL 5.4 block to give it the Trans-Am racecar revvy nature of the Boss 302. The big 6.2 Mach I could be the torque monster version and the SC 6.2 SVT the uber version.

instigator311

Some of the latest speculation floating around with the Falcon spy shots is that the next Mustang would share some Falcon DNA. Obviously it's just more speculation, but when you really think about it, the Falcon has a few key things to offer the Mustang; such as a 6-speed transmission, IRS, and their Boss engine line up. I think the Boss engines are iron, which I think most people here would not be happy about. I have no clue whether any of those things could be made to fit into the Mustang, but I guess the potential is there. Doesn't sound like a bad line up to me though, the Boss 260 could be the standard GT with around 350 hp, the Boss 290 could be the SE with around 390 HP, and the GT500's engine could be re-used with perhaps some more power for the SVT model. Don't know anything about the fuel economy or emissions though. Seems feasible to me...


PS: Ford, I would still prefer the new Boss V8's...

Boomer

It would be part of the next falcon, not the current.

The idea would be to put the Mustang, Falcon, Galaxy (Interceptor) on the same platform to share... (the D2C right now is ONLY being used by the Mustang... not great for sharing of costs... BUT they did a great job at updating the car, and still turning a profit)

If they can share a platform (even newer...) that is designed to be better, but is more expensive, if they can share it across multiple cars, it'll bring the costs down...and we get an even more kickin car

Moosetang

Exactly. GM and DC didn't even consider getting into the segment before they had a shared platform to use. It's good testimony to the Mustang's popularity that Ford was able to go it alone, but's high time for a shared RWD platform at Ford that doesn't have a boxed ladder frame

bob

Every mod motor Ford makes will fit in the Mustang. The car is IRS capable, but I don't know if Ford could simply swap in an IRS (like the control blade IRS) like it could the Mod motors. IMO I hope the next chassis is SRA/IRS capable. I'm diehard SRA and would even be willing to let Ford soak me for an SRA, as in make IRS/SRA a no cost option by jacking up the cost of the SRA to cover the IRS.

GTJOHN

I was at the store glancing through the new Motortrend and caught that. I didn't have time to thoroughly read the article. Was Motortrend theorizing or speculating?

If there is going to be a new shared platform in 2011 or 2012, there is a good chance we will have a new V8 by then as well. My guess is that the rumored cancellation of the Boss engine project was due to very poor gas mileage. Ford should take their time and build a V8 with the same technological advances as their new V6 and the Mazda motors.

Black331

The 5.8 Boss should easily get better mileage than than the thirsty mods, especially with technology like DI, VVT, and DOD, not to mention they can always put in taller gears since the engine produces so much power. Leave it to Ford to screw everything up though..