Overboost

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/06...el-engine.html

Don't really see that Bobcat engine going in a Mustang. No room for two fuel tanks, plus the added weight would be a step in the wrong direction. Makes sense in a truck application though.

Boomer

Highly doubt we'll see anything like that anytime soon in the stang.
The 5L more than fills the role, remember GT people like the V8 and swear by it. Even if it would tear it a new one.

More options = more money

The trend seems to be downsizing to get the same HP for the less MPG.
The V8 I would see as an exception. The only way around that one is to have a smaller FI V8.

Automagically

Oh, I don't see it filling a role in the Mustang either. Just impressed by the little engine that could.

So far the 5.0L is doing well in many aspects. Hopefully it won't have to shrink any time soon. I don't think it will. Given the success of BMW's smaller V8's, it's not inconceivable, just saying it works. But since the 5.0L does waaaay better on fuel mileage, it just doesn't make sense.

Though not much horsepower, the 4.3L V8 in the last Caprice models was a good and efficient engine. Had a nice V8 note, got great gas mileage. But now V6's can easily fill that role.

Boomer

Me too. The 5L has legs... and a bunch of avenues to go down if it needs to.
But say things change for the drastic...I wouldn't exactly be upset if there was a smaller V8TT under the hood pumping out over 425hp.
Know what I'm sayin'
I'd see THAT before the V6TT

V8s aren't going anywhere.

ace22

nice article overboost. dont believe ive seen that one. 150 octane is pretty significant. out of the cars i messed with mi on, i only tested one to see how it compairs to fuel only. It was a supercharged non intercooled svt focus a buddy of mine owned. we tuned it on 93 octane. and acheived 202 hp with 8lbs of boost on a dynojet. On the same dyno My 2001 mustang gt put down 255 with mild port and polish cold air intake pullies long tubes full exhaust 93 octane tune (for comparison). The tune i had in his car was a hot tune and we noticed under heavy load 5th up hills it would knock ever so slightly. I told him i needed to detune it a little but he refused. Finally i conviced him to buy a methanol kit. before we installed it we saw how far we could go with fuel. 116 octane produced roughly 265 no knocking. back to pump gas with methanol kit produced 256 no knocking. Im assuming the di helps with methanol as far as best time to inject it as well as better cylinder distrabution to help increase octane to 150? We also experimented with different types of windshield washer fluid. one that worked the best was dollar general 50/50 without the bug tar removal. by the way last pulls we made with his car were with 10lbs. Now whenever i mess with it i just buy a drum of methanol from the strip and mix it myself.

ace22

ADDITION TO WISH LIST
THIS IS A REALLLLLLLY LONG SHOT
solenoid actuated valvetrain before 2020

mfournier

Falcon? What? Ford has not built and sold a car under the Falcon name plate since the 70s
The New Mustang should be designed and Built on a clean sheet it should be a coupe 2+2 yes. But It Must have a modern Coil over suspension and near 50/50. But as Normal it will come in many levels but the GT should meet or best a M4 or Audi R Coupe in handling and power.
I have always been a Stang fan but have always had to spend plenty of money on suspension upgrades (out of all the turn key stangs you can buy from a ford dealer I think Rouch had the best out of the showroom including the new 302boss)
If Mod tuners like Griggs solution to modifying the suspension of a s197 is to replace basicly everything to make it race ready then you know Ford need to do a lot better this time around.
And NO DO NOT turn the stang into a Tuner car (the Focus RS is for that) But please Lets get a modern design I don't mind a 1967 inspired body work but my 2009 has the same basic rear end as the 1967 GT (it now has coils over leaf springs ) that is taking retro design a bit too far. Don't get me wrong my 2009GT is a fun car for the money and in some ways it's short comings make it what it is But when you build a car like the GT500 or the Boss302 on that basic platform it's faults become even more obvious and you really should not put that much HP in a car that has a truck axel rear end. For me it is not about what the new Mustang will look like but what is under that body work I feel is Ford does this right they should start with a completely new platform and the then build a line of rear and 4 wheel drive cars on that platform with the Mustang GT as the flag ship. (like the BMW 3 series and the M3) And Ford could then build a great car AND reduce costs by consolidating all there cars to 2 to 3 really great platforms (The bulk of the market still wants front wheel drive sedans and 4x4 crossovers and suvs or compacts and ford has a great selection in this area (just which they would consolidate there US and European designs so we could get cars like the Rally inspired RS here) But they have Too many platforms now imagine a rear/4wheel driver 4 door sedan (name it what you want) that handles like a BMW5 series and then a Mustang coupe built in a shorter version of that platform. You not only get one great car a new mustang you get a whole line of new fords that can go head to head with the best BMW Merc. and Audi can send over

danman_s

Actually, if you head to Australia, the Ford Falcon name plate has been in strong usage since the 70's and they are doing some pretty slick things with the supercharged 5.0's.

http://www.ford.com.au

bob

Look to Mercedes, generally when it comes to that stuff they tend to be early adopters (by dint of being the guys who invented the gas engine) when they go to a e-valvetrain the rest of the industry isn't far behind.

The problem with an e-valvetrain is the energy and cooling requirements. One of the precursors to using soleniods is going to a 24v electrical system.

Automagically

Unless they can come up with an incredibly sophisticated DC to controlled AC system. It would be a lot smoother but the AC generation would take a lot of PWM and timing for not only the valve per RPM but each valve. This could be overcome by using a small control system for each set of valves, all running off of a similar timing system using the overall piston cycle as a base. Still not impossible though.

Take for instance a cam shaft is basically an oscillator, going even further if you took a set of lobes it would look a lot like a summation circuit.