Some conjecture:

1. Shelby is legendary, and Ford is lucky to have him--vertical or horizontal. Ford should be negotiating with Ol' Shel' the vertical to have the Shelby name as an automotive brandname bequeathed to FoMoCo when he becomes Shelby the horizontal--no good can possibly come from years of haggling with the Shelby heirs in court over the use of the name on FoMoCo products. The deal should be cut in stone while Ol' Shel' the vertical can smack down post-mortem attempts to cash in on his legacy by every snot in the phonebook. This should include the right to build Shelbys entirely without any input or control by any past or current Shelby organization, although Shelby's manufacturing organization and post-title set-up is probably an asset Ford would find both useful and advantageous for offsite special editions (and might offer sub-union-scale labor rates not available through SVT). Personally, I prefer the in-house apparatus of SVT, but I've never ran a vehicle assembly-line program of any scale so this cannot be considered "an informed opinion".
2. The TiVCT 5.0L is too internally tight to allow more than token boring & stroking--don't go there. It means lotsa custom-sized parts for either boring (pistons, rings, yada yada yada) or stroking (crankshafts, connecting rods, yada yada yada)--stick with the 4951 cc (or is it 4952 cc?). Be grateful that the original pushrod, two-valve, single-cam Five-Point-Oh was such a legendary performer and hope that the new Five-Point-Oh will earn the same respect and reverence.
3. Stick with the TiVCT 5.0L engine and pass on the 5.4L modular. And pass on the Boss 6.2L, a SOHC two-valver not even as advanced as the 4.6 three-valve modular. Considering that for a few months the world's fastest production car was the Koenigsegg CCR powered by a de-stroked four-valve modular of around 4.3L--4.5L (look it up if interested)--then there's plenty of power available from a full five liters of contemporary technology (and that's before GDI is added). Going bigger in displacement is just too GM ("Why make it better when you can still make it bigger?")...
4. Go with turbos if you go with boost at all--turbo technology has reached the point that traditional superchargers are struggling to keep up with the easy power that turbo engines can create with little parasitic loss to consider. Advantage turbos. The little EcoBoost 3.5L V6 (under 214 cubic inches--smaller than any V8 Ford has ever put into a production vehicle, AFAIK) produces over 400 HP when replumbed for longitudinal placement into an engine compartment (A coupla/three years ago, Lincoln concept cars (MKR, was it?) with longitudinal EcoBoost V6s were at 415-416 HP). Presumably, the 5.0L TiVCT 5.0L V8--at least in its current naturally-aspirated state--is cheaper to manufacture & install in a Mustang GT than would be a longitudinal EcoBoost V6. But you can see the figures and what they mean as far as power per cubic inch is concerned...
5. If the GT500 is replaced by a "Cobra" or a "Boss" or a "Cobra Jet" or any other former or brand-new-name version of the Mustang, that Mustang MUST have more power than the GT500 it replaces. Else the fanbase will scream "Foul!" or other epithets beginning with "F". I think a 666 HP version with 666 lbs ft of torque called "The Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse Mustang" available only in "Hellfire Red" would make a Helluva (BUWAHAHAHAHA!) fine twin turbo 5.0L Mustang myself. With pentagram-style spoked mags, naturally
6. Ranging a little further afield, the OEM performance of the OEM TiVCT 5.0L V8 is so good that it may adversely impact most if not all Mustang tuner manufacturers--no longer can big gains be made by just adding CAIs, lower-restriction cat-back exhaust systems, and chip reflashes. Now, you'd hafta go internal on the engine--forged pistons & rods, four hot camshafts, yada yada yada to get anything noticeable when you smack the metal with the pedal. This takes money, and real tuning skill to improve upon the complex TiVCT controller logic. An improvement that a customer could genuinely feel might cost the tuner many, many thousands of dollars--which means the tuner's products go up many, many thousands of dollars...Maybe that's why Ol' Shel' talks about emphasizing the parts side of the aftermarket instead of the complete turnkey vehicle side of the aftermarket. Offhand, I'd say it's really good that the basic Mustang is now so powerful and handles so well from the factory--but I don't earn my living building or selling tuner cars...

I may add more stuff when I read the preceding postings in this thread again--I had issues with a number of items, and I may not have aired them all...

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

Greg, I disagree on several points:

- Going with turbos might seem like a simple solution with the Ecoboost motors becoming more of the norm, but if you haven't realized, the Mustang seems to always be the exception. SVT has made the blower one of the norms for the Mustang, just like the round fog lights that are a trademark of their design.

- The 5.0 is far from tapped out and will still provide ample power gains if we give it time. There's been promising info so far with tuning and CAI's that show that the car makes power efficiently, which is a good thing. I do think the next gen Cobra will have 580+hp and reduced weight, but I don't think the 5.4 is dead yet. The aluminum block version wouldn't have dropped this year for a 2-3 year run IMO.

- The Shelby name is nice, but if they lose it, it's not a huge loss. If SVT continues to make the cars they've been making, they can call it whatever they want to, and it'll still sell. I could care less personally if Shelby's name is on it or not.

- Most likely, the future SE's we'll see will blend some of the SVT design/engineering without the motor to back it up. The future of performance automobiles will push people into designing a better handling machine, and that's what I think we're going to see. Reduced weight, better chassis dynamics, and still retaining the upscale features that move the Mustang upmarket a half-notch, between the Chally/Camaro and the 3-series.

We might see Lincoln TT RWD cars, but I highly doubt that translates over to the S197 platform anytime soon.

 

Overboost: I had a specific, detailed reply that got lost to friggin' Time-out. Asterisk asterisk asterisk asterisk Time-out and the Camaro it rode in on.

 

Overboost, I'm gonna try again. First of all, thank you for the detailed and courteous reply! Excellent posting!

Yeah, SVT has invested in supercharging. But Ford has invested in turbocharging--note that all EcoBoost applications so far are using turbos to put the boost into "EcoBoost". That can't be by accident...

The DOHC TiVCT 5.0L V8 IS "far from tapped out", but the easy power has been rounded up and stuffed into its current iteration. 11.5:1 compression pistons is one, 4-valves-per-cylinder is two,
10-liter-volume intake manifold is three, stainless steel tube headers is four, port fuel injection is five, overhead cams is six, variable camshaft timing is seven, big throttle body is eight, oil squirters for piston cooling is nine, cut down lightweight pistons is ten, out-of-the-way oil passages are eleven, windage tray is twelve, holes through the main bearing bulkheads to balance crankcase pressures is twelve, forged crankshaft is thirteen, 6-bolt main bearing caps is fourteen, and having the bore & stroke at pretty much maximum sizes for the bore spacing and deck height is fifteen. And I may have missed some of the performance enhancements that this engine has been provided with!

Frankly, there ain't a lot left that can generate big power--boost, nitrous, and perhaps direct injection are about all that can add real power--long-tube headers may not add much to an engine already sportin' stainless tube headers from the factory (and long-tubes may not add anything at some RPMs). Ford's powertrain people stated that direct injection would only add one percent to naturally-aspirated versions of the new 5.0L. The new GT350 may show us what can be achieved via supercharging. In the realm of big gains, about all that remains unresolved is the benefits of nitrous and turbocharging. Porting/polishing probably adds little to an engine that breathes way over 500 cubic feet/minute (568 cubic feet/minute using standardized flow formulas).

Surely, the 2011 Mustangs have got to be near the absolute handling limit for solid rear axles/front MacPhersons. At least until tire width maximums can be increased via revised inner sheetmetal

Even reducing weight is tough--the hood is already aluminum and the decklid may be some kinda composite--our '03 Focus has a composite hatch. Aluminum/composite front fenders might require re-crashing for the NHTSA--an aluminum/composite body/frame would certainly require a whole new round of impact re-certifications.
I don't see a factory SE or a tuner vehicle going there...

Lincolns: Lincoln has seen little customer interest in sporty models--everyone praises the sporty Lincoln concepts yet almost no one whips out the checkbook. It was likely a mistake to spare Lincoln the axe that terminated Mercury--doing a big bucks remake of Lincoln equivalent to GM's big bucks remake of Cadillac is not a prudent move for a company with most of $30 billion in debts still on the books. The cost would be gigantic--yet the likelihood that a thriving, robust, highly profitable Lincoln would result is small, if not outright non-existent. Do I smell toast?

Ford needed to move on from Mercury, and Ford needs to move on from Lincoln, too. The PAG (Premier Automotive Group) was a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad idea...

Although I do hate that Ford had to part with Aston Martin. Times are tough...

Have I pontificated enough yet?

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

Think so eh?

There's a line between comfort and suspension setup.
The challenge is to try and have both...without swaying too far to one side.
Team Mustang and SVT have done a bangup job so far...why stop

THe other thing to consider timeline wise is how much work to put into something that may or may not stay the same over whatever the lifecycle of a vehicle/platform is.

 

Lot to read there. I agree with some thoughts, but disagree with others.

First, in terms of the new engine design, I think you're going to see more and more auto manufacturers doing this, pushing the edges of what is conceivably "safe" for a high mileage, reliable car (I mean safe in terms of what will last, not what is dangerous or not). In the points you brought up, you spelled it all out. There is still more that can be extracted from the factory motor. Long tube headers on the 5.0 have shown considerable gains (~30rwhp from what I've read), and the intake/tune combo really seems to add a considerable jolt of life into the motor from the already solid 412hp.

I think that the upcoming Boss/SE needed some room, so they capped the GT at the current levels for that very reason. Allowing it to breathe in and out a bit more will certainly gain more power, and adjusting the tune, even ever so slightly, will produce the same result.

Regarding EcoBoost, I still have a feeling we won't see it called that in a Mustang at all. Do I think SVT will use an EB motor for an SVT/RS Focus. Absolutely. Do I think they'll strap a pair of snails onto a 5.0 or 5.4 block anytime soon? Slim chance IMO. Since the 03-04 Cobra, the factory Roots blower has been the staple of the top-tier Mustang model coming from SVT.

I sincerely think that DI setups will be the next step, and appropriate tuning to increase gains will be modest. I think the downside to that will be having to relearn the motor with the new updates and tune around that. Going from the 4.6 3V to the 5.0 4V has been a bit of a challenge with tuning so far, but they've been able to learn and adapt quickly, and the results are in all of the products that have hit the market recently for the 2011. DI, from a tuning standpoint, is a bit of a headache. From the DISI MZR motor in the Speed3/Speed6/CX-7, and hte DI Ecotec in the Cobalt SS/TC, aftermarket companies have hit "the wall" with DI tuning, and once you get there, it's tough to overcome. Spend some time on any of those forums and read up on the challenges of the DI motors. They've got promise, and I don't doubt they'll overcome it once more companies cross into that, but it's still relatively new.

Suspension wise, the S197 performs as well as the IRS equipped Zeta chassis that underpins the Camaro and the LX/LY platform of the Challenger. When they make the jump to a revised S197 or global chassis, which more than likely will have IRS, they'll be fine. The added weight of the rear suspension components can be offset in other areas. Use of stronger steel can reduce thicknesses while providing the same or better structural integrity of the vehicle (take a look at the '08+ Super Duty trucks and the chassis/body changes for more detail on that ). Aluminum is too costly to use on a large scale, and CF is another tough to produce on a mass-production scale right now.

Lincoln stuck around for a few reasons. First, they aren't as heavily badge-engineered as the Merc vehicles were. Typically, they had a premium powertrain in them compared to their Ford/Merc counterparts. I suspect that Ford will take Lincoln globally in the next few years, especially in China, to combat the growing GM sales of Buick and Cadillac over there. Europe, with a Lincoln C-segment, could be a great opportunity to expand sales as well. Killing Mercury was a good move, and it cut the bleeding that has been going on since 2003, when Mercury lost their last unique vehicle. I think the company(s) that should have been kept were Jag and Aston. Since the XF and XJ are out, and the refresh across the line, Jag has seen major sales increases. That was all in the works before Tata got ahold of them.

I really think that we're still going to see a blown 5.0 with a revised internal setup for the next SVT model. Once the current aluminum block GT500 runs its course, they'll streamline engine design and run with what they've got. Use the PWTC coating, forge the rods/pistons, and throw it the boost, and you'll see 580-600hp GT500/Cobras for the next iteration, all while maintaining weight or shedding 50-200 lbs.

 

What gets me is we have a 400hp+ Mustang GT with quarter miles in the high 12's and 0-60 times in the mid 4 sec range...what more do you want for $30K. This 5.0 is a gem and could still be tweaked to 440-50 hp but why do we sweat it. It has enough power for most people considering a GT 10 years ago had 260hp. The next Gen Stang will be lighter so the same engine will perform even better...if the formentioned numbers aren't good enough for you.

 

This.

 

If Ford really drops 2-300 pounds off the next model, we are going to have a TRUE world class sportscar on our hands. Look how this car performs now, at ~ 3700 pounds. Imagine it at 3400. V6 0-60 times will be 5 seconds flat, GT will be 4 seconds and the SVT car will be in the high 3 second range. Add in the IRS, and they wont be able to build enough if they keep the price down.

 

Lotsa stuff here since I last shared my wit & wisdom with the TMS regulars!

I'll do rebuttals/concessions in no particular order, beginning with the wholesale concession that the DOHC TiVCT 5.0L is the greatest production engine ever offered in an American production vehicle--and it is the greatest by a whole bunch, too!

To Topnotch and to stangfoeva I say: What's wrong with the greatest becoming even greater? There was a time when the Rolls-Royce Merlin of Spitfire and Mustang (P-51/F-51 instead of S197) fame was probably the greatest aircraft powerplant ever created--but I'm glad it's not the powerplant in F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, F-22s, and F-35s...

To laserred38 I say: Don't we wish we had real knowledge of the details of the post-S197 Mustang to come? Who's to say if it will be significantly lighter? Desirable as that is, lightness costs--and unoptioned V8 Mustang GTs are already $30,000. I pointed out in my last response some of the difficulties of using aluminum/composites for weight reduction: material cost and crash re-testing, not to mention re-tooling to form parts/body panels from the stuff, employee training expenses, safe disposal of residue materials, yada yada yada...And just this week the NHTSA announced a toughening up of requirements to get a five-star safety rating in any of the safety categories. One bright spot, ironically, is the EPA and it's CAFE requirements--companies may have no choice but to ante-up for the aluminum, the composites, the titanium, the magnesium, the high-strength steel alloys, as well as an over-all size reduction of vehicles in general.

To Boomer I say: Yeah, investing much into anything that doesn't fit into where the corporation is going just seems like a lack of business sense. I don't have access to insider info at Ford or anywhere else. Ford needs to be nailing down "the next Mustang" pretty soon--larger/smaller/stay-the-same--and see what changes will have to be made to comply with all the myriad of regulations that dictate what our vehicles may and may not be. New regulations may become law before "the next Mustang" hits the showrooms that might have a profound effect on what it'll be like (Eight-cylinder engines have to be taking note that there are smoke signals rising from all the mesas--I hope General Custer ordered someone to pack the Gatling guns and lots of ammunition). I'd advise V8 lovers to get out their lucky rabbit's feet and give 'em a rub--but they evidently weren't that lucky for the rabbits...

To Overboost I say: There's a lot to address here, understandably, and I want to do your fine posting proper justice! It'll take some thought and assessment to either effectively concede some points or to effectively challenge some points. Our degree of disagreement is slight, and it'll all seem trivial once Ford does whatever it will do with standard Mustangs, special editions, Shelbys, and "the next Mustang". I gotta git, but I will say that with the GT350 having a supercharged DOHC TiVCT 5.0L already, the GT500's replacement probably is now in place. I'm a-thinkin' the GT500 will become history before too long--unless Ford decides it needs a street version of the Funny Car/Top Fuel "Boss 500" engine developed by the John Force group! That ain't happenin'...Is it???

More later...

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

If certain upcoming requirements or standards are known, they will be built in.
If they happen after, there's a certain ammount of grandfathering to get the car through a period of 'adjustments'

Ford has stated that they want to lighten vehicles across the board.
We'll start to see the fruits of this labour in the next couple of years...

The more you think you know, the more you don't
Just wait and see.
Fords frieght train isn't slowing down anytime soon.

 

I firmly believe the Mustang GT will ALWAYS be available with a V8, no matter which generation it's in. And the Shelby engine still has some life in her yet.

 

I agree. I don't know why they'd go through the hassle of modifying the 5.4 if it didn't have a few years of life left in it.

 

I tend to agree. And the 5.4 has a different character than the 5.0.

The 5.4 appears to have more low-end torque on tap. And if there is an Achilles Heel in the new 5.0, it seems to be torque. The new Boss set-up has a 120-hp advantage over the old 4.6, but only a 55-ft lb of torque advantage.

Potentially, the 5.4, in N/A form, could make its way into an SE, perhaps a Mach 1, with 420-HP and 425+ ft lbs of torque. As a marketing move, it covers the bases, providing a hi-revving car with road-race capabilities (the Boss) with good high-end horsepower and a quarter-horse (a Mach 1) with a huge amount of low-end torque.

Plus the 5.4 does have a track record with forced induction. If the AL block is as strong as the iron block it replaced, 630-750 is not too much for the motor to handle. FI might be on the table for the 5.0, but might be a ways off.

 

Loads of excellent, informed knowledge in this thread!

Since I last posted, the Boss 302 & Boss 302 Laguna Seca have been introduced! Wow! Gimme Competition Orange with black graphics!

That probably exhausts the Special Editions coming from Ford itself until 2013, and likely will be the last Special Editions on the S197 chassis--but this assumes that an all-new Mustang chassis will debut in 2014 (not a given at all)!

That much being said, I sorta think this doesn't bode well for a future Mustang Cobra until the all-new Mustang chassis debuts down the road. Add to this the new mandate to acheive a 60 MPG CAFE by 2025 and things get tricky.

Luckily, we have the Boss 302 and Boss 302 Laguna Seca to tide us over until whatever happens regarding the ANMC ("all-new Mustang chassis").

Now that we have the Bosses back, the next real Mustang issue would seem to be the future of the Shelbys. I just can't see a case for continuing to produce the 5.4L for the GT500s beyond any contracts Ford may have signed with Shelby, Koenigsegg, Panoz, and any other users of various versions of the 4.6L/5.4L modulars. It's being dropped from all Ford trucks and SUVs, too. The new GT350 may actually be the intended successor to the GT500--possibly the Shelbys will be re-named to "GT350" for the versions that will be powered by a naturally-aspirated TiVCT 5.0L and to "GT500" for the versions that will be powered by a supercharged TiVCT 5.0L. The big, gaping hole in this speculation is that the Boss 302 sorta makes a Shelby with the naturally-aspirated TiVCT 5.0L rather redundant, don't you think? Of late, Ol' Shel' has been talkin' more & more about wanting Shelby American to become a parts business--maybe there's more to what he's saying than just daydreaming outloud...

In any case, thank you Alan Mullally for not cutting the Boss 302 program in the name of The Economy, the EPA, social responsibility, fiscal integrity, or whatever-da-^%&$*!

There are just too many "What ifs..." to conjecture much of anything about the ANMC--may it be a smaller, lighter, RWD, two-door coupe/convertible with manual-transmissions and V8s still offered.

Amen.

Pope Greg "Eights" Ates

 

You've got to realize too, SVT is more focused now than in the past. We'll see one car and one truck from them for now, and maybe a second pending the final outcome of the merging of SVT and Team RS.

With that said, I think the decision to limit production of the GT500 was a purposeful move. There are more changes on the horizon from SVT. Wait until we see the Boss 302 and GT500 with SVT PP line up and hit the tracks to compare each other, and we'll see even more info. Also, the Boss was built by Team Mustang, not SVT. I'll let that simmer for now...

 

Good point about the CAFE legislation. But allow me to play Devil's Advocate. Since this is section for speculation, the fact that Ford chose to invest more money in a mature product, the 5.4, might be interpreted as a good omen for a Cobra. ( Of course, reading tea leaves, or portents in the stars, might be just as accurate in deterimining the direction of automotive development.)

While it is true the 5.4 iron-block has been dropped from the SUV and truck line, the AL 5.4 never was a part of those product lines. A 5.4 is definitely a part of the Cobra heritage. The 2000 R was powered by a N/A 5.4 producing 385-hp and 385-ft. lbs of torque. (Both those numbers were considered to be conservative estimates.) With CAFE changes looming, and the Shelby run perhaps coming to a close, 2013 would seem like a perfect opportunity for Ford to market an Anniversary Issue Cobra SE to commemorate the 1993, (if the stars align just right). It could be one last hurrah before Congress passes a 'no-fun-lets-be-sensible' bill. (Or, one last chance to recoup some of the investment in plasma transferred wire arc.)

Ironically, I can see the Cobra emerging (or perhaps a Mach 1) as a complimentary product to the Boss, not a competitor. The 5.4 has a different character than the new 5.0. It will not match the high-revs, and maybe not the peak HP of the 5.0, but it does deliver more torque than the 5.0. (A 10-year old Cobra R 5.4 delivers more torque than the current Boss 302.) In a way it is very similar to the scenario when Ford offered a Boss 302 and a Boss 429. Both Mustangs, but very different in character.

(Naw, never happen.)

 

And more good stuff from bt4! Hell, I hope there's a Mustang Cobra just like everyone else in TMS--there cannot be too many Special Edition Mustangs and tuner Mustangs, IMO!

Now tell me, are the new Bosses built on the regular Mustang production lines in Ann Arbor or on the SVT production line in Ann Arbor? Does Team Mustang also have a separate production line just for special editions like SVT has for the GT500?

With SVT dedicated to producing 5500 GT500s this year (3300 of which are sold or on order as of a coupla weeks ago) and some (?) number of Raptors this year, how many staff members and how many resources are available to develop and produce a Mustang Cobra in the foreseeable future?

Some months back, Ford announced that a Focus RS will be available once the new worldwide Focus hits the 'States. Unless that RS is imported essentially complete from Europe, who else could build it here but SVT? Shelby American? Ford Racing Performance Parts brings us the "FR500C/FR500GT" racing Mustangs, but I think the bulk of that work is handled by Multimatic of Canada. I'm not sure who builds the "FR500S" Mustangs (I believe Roush does the engine work and then seals the engines per Grand-Am regs), but that's sorta moot since the FR500S Mustangs have one race left before The Mustang Challenge is history...

In short, who would build a Mustang Cobra with so many resources committed to existing projects? I can only see the staff that built FR500Ss having any time on their hands, but since I can't recall who had that responsibility I cannot speculate what other demands may be on them.

Finally, I'd rather have Ford concentrate on doing a magnificent job on the Boss 302 models than do a merely good job on the Boss 302 models and a good job on a Mustang Cobra model(s). Magnificent > good. 'Just sayin'...

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

Well there has been some great posts.

Regarding the Al 5.4 I don't think this engine will be going away. Ford seems to have limited the number of 500s so that it will have a somewhat special appeal. The 5.4 does produce more tq then the 5.0 so we may not see a Mach but Ford could possibly bring back the Boss 429 nameplate. It would be logical and a great SE for 2013.

The problem is we still don't have a Cobra. If Shelby America does in fact end its contract with Ford the SVT should take over producing Cobras. They should focus more on removing weight and making this car as great as the 03-04s were.

I think SVT will use a S/C version of the 5.0. My reasoning behind this is that The terminator was a S/C version of the regular GT engine, granted it did have 4V instead of 2Vs. This car should have all forged internals and come with a factory eaton, pushing 550-600hp. I don't think it would be impossible bc FRPP has a 624 S/C kit for the 5.0 and this is without forged internals.

Whatever happens I am proud to be a Mustang enthusiast.

 

If I ever end up with a GT500 the reason won't be that 'it's a Shelby'. Imo the Shelby name on the car is a little false. I'd rather it be called something else. Maybe Boss 500. Anything that isn't tied to someone who really didn't have anything to do with the car.