TMSBrad

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.

SuperSugeKnight

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

Katshot

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?

tw0scoops123

So are we talking similar power potential of an SRT4(ie 4 cyl turbo 3200 lbs give or take)?

Blue Notch

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.

97GT03SVT

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.

SuperSugeKnight

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.

jarradasay

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

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!

Paris MkVI

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.

WaltM

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.

05stangkc

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

Topnotch

had the Mustang SVC at SEMA in 2006

codeman94

it would still be expensive...no way it stays under 20K

SuperSugeKnight

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.

GT40 2

I hope it doesnt have the lima engine.

jsaylor

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.

97GT03SVT

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 0–60 mph 5.5 sec. Slalom 72.4 mph Quarter Mile 14.0 sec. @ 101.8 mph Skidpad 0.92g 60–0-mph Braking 117 ft.

SuperSugeKnight

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.

Topnotch

Now that I look closer!!