GT350 AND Mach 1?
Thread Starter
GTR Member
Joined: October 18, 2006
Posts: 5,553
Likes: 11
From: England
GT350 AND Mach 1?
http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2013/0...rning-as-well/
I surprised this isn't already being discussed..............it's even on the TMS homepage.
OK, so the GT will be a tweaked 5.0 Coyote.........GT350 is rumoured to be a n/a 5.2 V8.........so what would power the Mach 1?
Personally, I'd welcome the name back.
I surprised this isn't already being discussed..............it's even on the TMS homepage.
OK, so the GT will be a tweaked 5.0 Coyote.........GT350 is rumoured to be a n/a 5.2 V8.........so what would power the Mach 1?
Personally, I'd welcome the name back.
. Wonder (if it actually makes it to production) if a new one will "grab" me as much my current one did and still does?!
Post *****
Joined: February 3, 2004
Posts: 14,160
Likes: 73
Cobra R Member
Joined: January 10, 2011
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 1
From: Ontario
Bullitt Member
Joined: April 13, 2013
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
I would love to see a new Mach 1, if produced and looks good, it could be my 1st ordered car...
I disagree. Just because something's been done before doesn't necessarily make it 'retro'. True to its roots, perhaps, but not retro. Just as any Mustang is expected to have certain features or dimensions, certain special editions would be expected to carry certain elements just the same. A Mach without a shaker would be like a Bullitt without torque thrust wheels, or a Shelby without a Cobra emblem. Just ludicrous.
That aside, I welcome the return of either of these names to the Mustang lineup. And I wonder if either one would receive an N/A version of the current GT500's 5.8L.
That aside, I welcome the return of either of these names to the Mustang lineup. And I wonder if either one would receive an N/A version of the current GT500's 5.8L.
Post *****
Joined: February 3, 2004
Posts: 14,160
Likes: 73
About as useful as **** on a bull, on a modern fuel injected car. Indeed, the awkward plumbing required to make a shaker scoop work at all probably saps most of its intended (supposedly) function whereas a cold air system tailored for a fuel injected car would reap much more actual performance.
Recall the ungainly bump on a lump on a hump required to somehow jam all the requistite hardware atop the last Mach I motor--a piece of engineering complexity that would warm the heart of Rube Goldberg.
A modern shaker scoop is essentially a retro cod-piece and a triumph of nostalgia at the expense of actual function. Perhaps bring back, from the dead, another Mach I aimed at stoplight/drag racers, but bring the engineering details in line with 21st century realities rather than trying to clumsily replicate technology of the mid-20th century.
Recall the ungainly bump on a lump on a hump required to somehow jam all the requistite hardware atop the last Mach I motor--a piece of engineering complexity that would warm the heart of Rube Goldberg.
A modern shaker scoop is essentially a retro cod-piece and a triumph of nostalgia at the expense of actual function. Perhaps bring back, from the dead, another Mach I aimed at stoplight/drag racers, but bring the engineering details in line with 21st century realities rather than trying to clumsily replicate technology of the mid-20th century.
In general -- re: GT350 and Mach I -- I could see rationales for that.
The GT350 would essentially fill the role of the recently departed Boss, that of a more stripped down road and track racer, a role that the original Boss essentially filled ala the original GT350. There would be even more coherence if the GT500 returned as the top dog Stang with perhaps a TT version of the 5.0 vs. a tweaked NA 5.0 for the GT350 (update of the Boss motor essentially).
As for a Mach I, it would be aimed more for the stoplight/strip racers where perhaps a punched/stroked out 5.2 version of the 5.0 would give a bit more low end punch at the sacrafice of a bit of high end revability. While the GT350 and Mach I might make similar peak HP numbers, they would have power curves and characteristics better suited for their respective duties (low end punch vs. high end scream).
The GT350 would essentially fill the role of the recently departed Boss, that of a more stripped down road and track racer, a role that the original Boss essentially filled ala the original GT350. There would be even more coherence if the GT500 returned as the top dog Stang with perhaps a TT version of the 5.0 vs. a tweaked NA 5.0 for the GT350 (update of the Boss motor essentially).
As for a Mach I, it would be aimed more for the stoplight/strip racers where perhaps a punched/stroked out 5.2 version of the 5.0 would give a bit more low end punch at the sacrafice of a bit of high end revability. While the GT350 and Mach I might make similar peak HP numbers, they would have power curves and characteristics better suited for their respective duties (low end punch vs. high end scream).
Post *****
Joined: February 3, 2004
Posts: 14,160
Likes: 73
In general -- re: GT350 and Mach I -- I could see rationales for that.
The GT350 would essentially fill the role of the recently departed Boss, that of a more stripped down road and track racer, a role that the original Boss essentially filled ala the original GT350. There would be even more coherence if the GT500 returned as the top dog Stang with perhaps a TT version of the 5.0 vs. a tweaked NA 5.0 for the GT350 (update of the Boss motor essentially).
As for a Mach I, it would be aimed more for the stoplight/strip racers where perhaps a punched/stroked out 5.2 version of the 5.0 would give a bit more low end punch at the sacrafice of a bit of high end revability. While the GT350 and Mach I might make similar peak HP numbers, they would have power curves and characteristics better suited for their respective duties (low end punch vs. high end scream).
The GT350 would essentially fill the role of the recently departed Boss, that of a more stripped down road and track racer, a role that the original Boss essentially filled ala the original GT350. There would be even more coherence if the GT500 returned as the top dog Stang with perhaps a TT version of the 5.0 vs. a tweaked NA 5.0 for the GT350 (update of the Boss motor essentially).
As for a Mach I, it would be aimed more for the stoplight/strip racers where perhaps a punched/stroked out 5.2 version of the 5.0 would give a bit more low end punch at the sacrafice of a bit of high end revability. While the GT350 and Mach I might make similar peak HP numbers, they would have power curves and characteristics better suited for their respective duties (low end punch vs. high end scream).
Pretty much.
I imagine the Coyote V8 will be the basic V8 powerplant for the Mustang now with various states of tune and induction (NA and forced) being the main differences, perhaps with even some architecture changes--a bore and/or stroke job for a bit more displacement--but I'd be a little more questioning on that. I suspect most of the differences will be in tuning for the sub-GT500 models and the latter having turbos lashed to it. Who knows though, Ford hogged out the 5.4 to 5.7l for the GT500s swan song, so who knows, today's Ford really isn't the "good enough" Ford of even a few years ago.
As for the GT500, presuming it does go the turbo route, I wonder if they put them in the V, with "hot-V" reverse-flow heads, like many/most 90-degree V8s seem to be doing lately or keep them outside the V like the 60-degree TT3.5 Egoboost 3.5?
I imagine the Coyote V8 will be the basic V8 powerplant for the Mustang now with various states of tune and induction (NA and forced) being the main differences, perhaps with even some architecture changes--a bore and/or stroke job for a bit more displacement--but I'd be a little more questioning on that. I suspect most of the differences will be in tuning for the sub-GT500 models and the latter having turbos lashed to it. Who knows though, Ford hogged out the 5.4 to 5.7l for the GT500s swan song, so who knows, today's Ford really isn't the "good enough" Ford of even a few years ago.
As for the GT500, presuming it does go the turbo route, I wonder if they put them in the V, with "hot-V" reverse-flow heads, like many/most 90-degree V8s seem to be doing lately or keep them outside the V like the 60-degree TT3.5 Egoboost 3.5?
