Notices
2010-2014 Mustang News on the Previous Generation Mustang

Return of the SVO?

Old 7/3/08, 10:22 AM
  #1  
Founder
Thread Starter
 
TMSBrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Location: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
Posts: 9,882
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Return of the SVO?

I was surprised about three weeks ago when, out of nowhere, this photo of a 1984 SVO appeared on the Ford media site. Why would they have one photo, and no accompanying article, for a 25-year old car?

Today, Garage419 is reporting that Ford is considering an SVO revival, with a 300-hp Ecoboost four cylinder engine mated to a six-speed transmission in a car weighing as much as 500 pounds less than a GT.
TMSBrad is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 11:08 AM
  #2  
Mach 1 Member
 
SuperSugeKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 29, 2007
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting. Now is this an SVO or standard V6 replacement?

Like it or not I'm thinking by 2014 will see this line up.

Base: Turbo I4
GT: Twin Turbo V6
Boss: 5.0L V8
Shelby: Twin Turbo 5.0L V8
SuperSugeKnight is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 11:10 AM
  #3  
GT Member
 
Katshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 4, 2007
Location: Newtown, PA
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Both Ford and GM have mentioned that they have plans for bringing small displacement engines (mainly 4 cyl) back into a front and center position in their line-ups. I know GM stated recently that they will be bringing a 4 cyl. to the Camaro, and I believe I read that Ford was talking dual-turbo 4 cyl. engines to replace even some 8 cyl. applications. The technology is there, and now with the added pressure from rising fuel prices, more people are likely to consider a smaller engine with forced induction as a "reasonable" alternative to a big V8 or V10.
Me? I still love my V8's thank-you but.....I guess you should never say never, huh?
Katshot is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 11:35 AM
  #4  
Mach 1 Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2005
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So are we talking similar power potential of an SRT4(ie 4 cyl turbo 3200 lbs give or take)?
tw0scoops123 is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 11:38 AM
  #5  
 
Blue Notch's Avatar
 
Join Date: December 5, 2006
Location: Trapped in Minnesota
Posts: 21,949
Likes: 0
Received 69 Likes on 65 Posts
An SVO would be really cool, but I think it'd be awkward in a different body style. And a non-V8 GT is just plain wrong.
Blue Notch is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 11:48 AM
  #6  
Cobra R Member
 
97GT03SVT's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From what I have seen forced induction turbo or blower leads to poor mileage either way. Look at the new WRX/STI or the EVO they get about the same fuel economy as 4.6 V8......... I like the idea of a 300HP 4 banger but is it really gonna be much better on gas? In my opinion a regular I4 in the base Mustang will do fine. For the most part base model Mustang owners are more interested in looks over performance.
97GT03SVT is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 12:10 PM
  #7  
Mach 1 Member
 
SuperSugeKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 29, 2007
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 97GT03SVT View Post
From what I have seen forced induction turbo or blower leads to poor mileage either way. Look at the new WRX/STI or the EVO they get about the same fuel economy as 4.6 V8......... I like the idea of a 300HP 4 banger but is it really gonna be much better on gas? In my opinion a regular I4 in the base Mustang will do fine. For the most part base model Mustang owners are more interested in looks over performance.
From what I understand the EcoBoost engines are low boost. less than 5 psi. While the EVO and WRX's are pushing close to 15 psi. Also, when cruising on the highway, the turbos are essentially off.
SuperSugeKnight is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 12:21 PM
  #8  
Mach 1 Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by tw0scoops123 View Post
So are we talking similar power potential of an SRT4(ie 4 cyl turbo 3200 lbs give or take)?
I think I see where your are going. I saw several Mustangs get walked by a couple of SRT-4s at US41 strip a month ago. I would really like the idea if the mustang was as easy and, especially, as cheap to mod as the SRT-4 was. I wouldn't mind running thirteens and driving home on the same tank of gas.
jarradasay is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 12:32 PM
  #9  
Mach 1 Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by 97GT03SVT View Post
From what I have seen forced induction turbo or blower leads to poor mileage either way. Look at the new WRX/STI or the EVO they get about the same fuel economy as 4.6 V8......... I like the idea of a 300HP 4 banger but is it really gonna be much better on gas? In my opinion a regular I4 in the base Mustang will do fine. For the most part base model Mustang owners are more interested in looks over performance.
Think about what you just said. (taking aside the fact that these cars a priced $10K above the standard mustang)

The two cars you just mentioned are both all wheel drive (enemy of mpg), they both have three, count them three differentials, the center of which is electronically controlled to adjust distribution, both have four doors, four sets of power window. In short they turn twice as many wheels (four times as many if you consider the standard open diff on the V6), they have three time the number of diffs they have to hawl around, all the computer and motors to control all that electrical stuff, two more doors. Technologically these cars make the mustang look like a model T, but use the engine tech and mate that with a mustang set up and you could have a 300 HP 3300lb rocket on your hands.

What is sad is that even with all that stuff they are lugging, the V6 mustang is still heavier. So is the weight in the engine or in the car?

BUT! FORD IF YOU ARE READING THIS, FOR ALL THAT IS SACRED AND HOLY, PLEASE DO NOT PUT AN OPEN DIFF ON THIS VEHICLE!
jarradasay is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 03:10 PM
  #10  
Cobra R Member
 
Paris MkVI's Avatar
 
Join Date: August 18, 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,956
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 16 Posts
We will see some incremental improvements in MPG from the domestics. They have to, in order to keep the regulatory dogs off their heels. But no matter what, if you want more power, you gotta move more air and more fuel. We can maximize efficiency, but there's still no free lunch.

A physically smaller, lighter engine always helps. But I admit, I would have a hard time getting used to a screaming blown 4-banger sound coming from a Mustang. I have marched too far towards coot-dom to accept that.

To me, a Mustang GT just has to have a V8 under the hood.

But I am thinking the day is coming when it won't.
Paris MkVI is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 03:27 PM
  #11  
Cobra R Member
 
WaltM's Avatar
 
Join Date: August 9, 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hey...

Take it from an SVO owner that this car would be very well received. There's an abundance of die-hard SVO owners out there (http://www.svoca.com) that would gladly pay any ADM without question.

Also remember that the original SVO is/was all about handling as well. The original used Lincoln LSC components. Maybe this will be a Cobra with a hot I4; at least that's my hope.

In any event, this would be an SE (yes, I believe it will be a Special Edition) with good timing. My '86 is silver, but I'll take my 201? in black.
WaltM is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 03:27 PM
  #12  
Super Moderator
 
05stangkc's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Posts: 6,247
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
The Higher the Price at the Pump the More Accepting Attitudes are becoming for Non V-8's! I guess I will go out with a Bang! Due to Slow Car Sales and the High Cost of Doing Business as of Today I am Commuting in my Gt-500. 1 hour Drive both ways. I lost the Company Truck I had enjoyed for 9 years. I suppose I could Sell the Shelby and get something More Fuel Efficient,NOT!

KC

Last edited by 05stangkc; 7/3/08 at 03:39 PM.
05stangkc is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 03:48 PM
  #13  
Team Mustang Source
 
Topnotch's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 31, 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stainless Steel Brakes Corporation

had the Mustang SVC at SEMA in 2006



Topnotch is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 04:17 PM
  #14  
 
codeman94's Avatar
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Goshen, IN
Posts: 7,890
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
it would still be expensive...no way it stays under 20K
codeman94 is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 04:28 PM
  #15  
Mach 1 Member
 
SuperSugeKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 29, 2007
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by codeman94 View Post
it would still be expensive...no way it stays under 20K

Brings up a good point. Will these EcoBoost motors be forged? If they are that will surely bring up the price a bit. Maybe not a lot since they are mainstream.
SuperSugeKnight is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 04:35 PM
  #16  
Mach 1 Member
 
GT40 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: February 1, 2004
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
I hope it doesnt have the lima engine.
GT40 2 is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 05:02 PM
  #17  
Team Mustang Source
 
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Posts: 2,357
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Regarding the price of a GTDi 4 cylinder Mustang, assuming the motor is a mainstream piece it shouldn't cost any more to produce than a 3.5L DOHC six equipped Mustang, and potentially wouldn't cost as much. I say this because a turbo four is typically a cheaper engine to produce than is a six even when the latter is naturally aspirated so long as production volume and tech are reasonably similar. And even if the GTDi four is question uses a forged crankshaft, the reality is that the 3.5L Duratec does too and as that is the most likely alternative for Mustang duty this doesn't work in the six pots favor. Outside of that variable a turbo four is typically a cheaper engine to produce than is a six even when the latter is naturally aspirated so long as production volume and tech are reasonably similar.

The more I think about this the more I cannot get around the fact that the SVO was the coolest, non V8 Mustang ever produced by some margin. A revived model would be loved for all the same reasons that car is, so in the great turbo four versus V6 debate I think I'm leaning back toward the GTDi 4 side.
jsaylor is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 05:21 PM
  #18  
Cobra R Member
 
97GT03SVT's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe a turbo 4 wouldn't be such a bad idea........... I think I found my new daily driver sorry guys it's a chevy.
The 2008 260HP turbo 4 SS Cobalt. Why can't Ford make a Focus like this?!? i'd buy one if they did.

Price As Tested $23,490 MPG 22 city/30 highway/26.0 average 060 mph 5.5 sec. Slalom 72.4 mph Quarter Mile 14.0 sec. @ 101.8 mph Skidpad 0.92g 600-mph Braking 117 ft.
97GT03SVT is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 05:50 PM
  #19  
Mach 1 Member
 
SuperSugeKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 29, 2007
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 97GT03SVT View Post
Maybe a turbo 4 wouldn't be such a bad idea........... I think I found my new daily driver sorry guys it's a chevy.
The 2008 260HP turbo 4 SS Cobalt. Why can't Ford make a Focus like this?!? i'd buy one if they did.

Price As Tested $23,490 MPG 22 city/30 highway/26.0 average 060 mph 5.5 sec. Slalom 72.4 mph Quarter Mile 14.0 sec. @ 101.8 mph Skidpad 0.92g 600-mph Braking 117 ft.
Why won't Ford make a Focus like that? Because buyers rather have a Focus with Sync than a Focus with a turbo. Focus buyers aren't into performance. Seems like they rather have techno gadgets and MPG rather than horsepower and cornering ability. It has shown recently with the boom of Focus sales.
SuperSugeKnight is offline  
Old 7/3/08, 05:56 PM
  #20  
Team Mustang Source
 
Topnotch's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 31, 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now that I look closer!!
Attached Thumbnails Return of the SVO?-svo.jpg  
Topnotch is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Return of the SVO?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.