95cobraR

You again go to the macroeconomics. Heck, some guys have C4C money and another $8,000 in tax credits for buying a home. Do you purpose an Obama tax credit for buying a muscle car?

I had to pay retail for my cars and my home. Am I supposed to feel sorry for someone?

If a guy hasn't saved enough money to buy a new Mustang, so be it. There are plenty of very nice used Mustangs looking for a home.

It wasn't easy for me either. The standard of living today is much better than it ever was back in 1989.

eci

No replacement for displacement. 5.0L is too small. If I wanted a tiny little turbo engine I'd buy a 335.

bob

I can agree with that, the Hennessey F5 has a FAT torque curve below 4k compared to the Super Snake. While some of that is due to the valve limited nature of the engine and its tuning, the extra 48 cubic inches definetly help.

Boomer

I'd personally wait to see what it could do first before making such a statement.

jsaylor

Exactly. BMW's 4.4L GTDi engine produces 450lb-ft of torque or more all the way from 1750rpm to 4500rpm, and this in run of the mill passenger car trim. That is more than 100lb-ft of torque per liter over most of the usable rev range.....torque curves don't get much fatter than that. Even more, the Ford 5.0L is more advanced in almost every respect including engine control, head design, and vvt implementation...add another half liter or so of displacement onto the above formula and combine it with the other advantages mentioned and you're probably talking about 500lb-ft or better....and likely noticeably better since this engine would be using turbos meant for a slightly different effect.....over virtually the entire usable rpm range. Frankly you're probably talking about an engine that would actually make closer to 600lb-ft of torque over that same kind of rpm range, and we're still arguing that there is no substitute for cubic inches? Guys, the Mustang this engine would be intended to power is a GT500, not a P51D.

max2000jp

Sorry, I gotta throw this out there

jsaylor

Based on what exactly? Exactly what do you know about the EcoBoost and Coyote programs that leads you to this conclusion? Feel free to believe what you will.

max2000jp

The proof is on you. Unless you designed the heads, VVT system, etc. there is no way you can make that claim. If you have the specs, let everyone see them

Does the Coyote have a specific output of 100 hp/liter? Hell, the Coyote isn't even going to be introduced with direct injection.

Even at 80 hp/liter projected for the Coyote, it cannot match BMW's performance V8's.

jsaylor

Yes, of course....let me throw everyone I know with any links to Ford under the bus to please you. I live for your approval and satisfaction.

Is there a naturally aspirated, production 5.0L BMW V8 with 100hp per liter? Also, given your statement I can only assume that you must know that there wont be any naturally aspirated version of the 5.0L Coyote that even comes close to 100hp per liter. Please expound upon this. Also, I do feel somewhat inclined to let you know now that, after the true performance potential of the upcoming Mustang/Coyote engine program is made public known I am going to use this little quip...
..frequently when you post anything about the new Mustang. Since you are so certain of your argument I can only assume that you wont mind and will want to be reminded of your past contributions.

So yet again we see that now you apparently know something about Coyote specs? Also, I can't help but notice that your statement infers that there is only one trim level of naturally aspirated Coyote....again, please do share what you know. And be specific if you don't mind since you seem so keen on requiring the same, no need to be restrained by issues like prudence.

As for me I'll let the next twelve months or so reveal the accuracy of my statements. And of course, as these issues unfold I'll be more than happy to remind you of your valued contributions to this thread as mentioned above.

As for the portion I can talk about, the fuel delivery system in the Bosch/Ecoboost design is much more effective and efficient than the BMW piece which relies more heavily on adjustments after the fact to resolve certain issues with fuel distribution and combustion rather than actually fixing the cause of problem. For example, one of the reasons BMW has faced problems with overheating in the 3.0L turbo design is a less effective delivery method than the Ford/Bosch setup uses. The BMW design doesn't dissipate heat as well during the combustion process, in large part because fuel dispersal and delivery isn't nearly as efficient or as accurate before the combustion process, which leads to thermal buildup over time as we have seen in the 3.0L units. EcoBoost doesn't have this problem and Ford didn't solve the issue by throwing in a bigger cooling system or needlessly huge intercooler, both of which would have robbed performance, they actually designed the system itself to minimize heat buildup within the combustion chamber by implementing novel solutions both in the programming and in hardware like the y-pipe setup used to deliver the fuel and, as such, they never had the issue in the first place.

BMW's DI turbo technology is ahead of most manufacturers, but it isn't the equal of the EcoBoost setup Ford uses and if you knew anything about the systems I wouldn't find myself here now educating you sufficiently to participate in a debate that you started. The rest of your 'objections' will have to wait to be quashed.

max2000jp

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaylor

Yes, of course....let me throw everyone I know with any links to Ford under the bus to please you. I live for your approval and satisfaction.

Face it, you know just as much as everyone on this forum.


No, BMW does have a 100 hp/liter V10 and 100 hp/liter V8 (4.0L).

When Ford has a 105+ hp/liter V8, come talk to me. BMW does right now on 11/20/09. Frankly, when Ford’s Coyote comes out next year it’s almost a generation behind BMW’s M engines.


No, I do NOT know the Coyotes exact specs. I am reading the same things you are. I do know that Ford would have to make 500 hp to match BMW’s “inferior” engines in order to match efficiency per liter.

Additionally, my understanding of the BMW N54 issue is related to the lack of a oil cooler. I am not making excuses, but you are comparing an engine to the N64 which was released in 2006. Again, Ford is a generation behind.

Here is exactly what you posted about:
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=29946

I am done arguing. Show me a 500hp production Coyote and then we can talk about which is better. If Ford produces a 500hp 5.0L V8 and you are right, I will give you all the credit you want. I will be one happy guy too!

eci

So a bigger version of the same engine, same tech wouldn't make more power? Of course it would. If I want tiny engines I'll buy a different car.

stangfoeva

this is no knock to the gt500, but you do realize the gt500's engine displacement is only .4L bigger than the 5.0 right?

by that logic you should have bought a SS and had a 6.2L

jsaylor

Your right, I'm just a fantastic guesser...it's a gift.

Yep, and I replied that Ford's turbo program was superior and that the 5.0L has a superior head design compared to the 4.4L GTDi V8. What about these 100hp mills disproves this? Do try to stay on task.

So now it's 105+liter, do keep those targets moving.




Ah, and you seem so sure. Sadly, even when the info is public you are obviously not always reading the same stuff that I am as I will make clear later.

Ah yes, I've been down this road with you before. I say superior and then you narrow that definition to fit your personal preference. HP per liter is a very, very narrow measure of ability and, to be blunt, I'm just not impressed by it. Gas swilling engines that make peak power at 9000 rpm at the expensive of usable torque were silly even before the fad began to wear off to be blunt. Now even BMW thinks so, with their future plans involving GTDi engines almost exclusively, which should tell you something since they were the poster child for the rev her 'til she pops approach approach for many years.

Would you like for me to explain the myriad other issues that make Ford's GTDi engine program superior, or can you find out about those on your own too?

Lack of an oil cooler intended to remedy what? Here's one for you, supposedly the BMW engine gets hot because it doesn't have an engine oil cooler, right? Then pray tell, explain to me why the Ford doesn't need one. That's right, no engine oil cooler on an EB V6, and yet heating up while driving has yet to be even a minor problem with that engine. An oil cooler can be had as an option on the Flex with the Towing package, but the regular EB V6 doesn't use one. Hmmmm, wonder what differences between these two engines could account for this?

And your point is? Sadly I've seen this from you before as well. Nothing I have said about the Ecoboost program is a secret with the exception of the software, Ford has even bragged openly about virtually every advancement made by Ecoboost at this point, it's all on the net somewhere. In fact, that was largely my point, although the subtlety seems to have been lost on you. In the caswe of the EcoBoost program this stuff is available on the net, and as such there was no excuse for you not to know about at least this one issue if you were going to take the time to interject since, once again, it isn't a secret. And somehow, now that you mastered the wonder that is Google, the fact that you found one of those articles on the net is a revelation regarding my statements? You need to get a hobby.
Nope, I'm not letting you off that easy. When the truth is laid bare and it comes time to pay the piper I'm calling you out which will allow you to save the very valuable and oh so rare 'I'm so happy to be wrong' argument for another time.

As I stated earlier, the engine will make my case for me.

stangfoeva

As usual jsaylor puts the naysayers to bed

ManEHawke

A TT5.0 will have to be at least 550hp to be worthy on a GT500. Shouldn't be hard to believe if they use 12psi. The torque should be amazing, as stated.

max2000jp

HP/Liter is a measure of an engines efficiency. For example, look at an F1 engine which are the most advanced engines on the planet.

When Ford matches BMW's V8 and V10's hp/liter in N/A form, I will give you a cookie.

No moving targets.....Do the math on the S65.

Like I said, there is no point in arguing with you....

You want me to find a myriad of features that's superior with the BMW GTDI program? We can go at this forever. I forgot that you aren't an CAR ENTHUSIAST and will vehemently support Ford because you have blinders on. You will never give credit to anyone besides Ford. The Corvette is junk, Porsche's are junk, and BMW is inferior.

Prove to me that the Coyote in stock production form from the factory will be 500 hp. I'll be waiting for a long time I think. Right now the burden of proof is on you......If that happens, like I said I will admit I was wrong and at the same time happy about that. If I am wrong, then we enthusiasts have one hell of a engine for the Mustang. Until then, your claim that BMW's engine program is inferior is just that....a biased opinion.

max2000jp

It should be really easy to do. My stock longblock 3V puts out close to 550 at the crank at exactly 10 lbs of boost.

jsaylor

Thanks Jason.

HP per liter is one measure of an engine's efficiency, and as I stated earlier it is obvious that you are hung up on this particular measure, some of us aren't. Frankly, it is easy to make an engine do one thing relatively well if you are willing to sacrifice other areas like fuel economy, peak torque production, and torque curve. I'm more impressed with engines that do all things well, and as I stated earlier the Coyote will make my case for me.

Quoting you directly.

And a few threads later it became 105hp/liter. It's obvious at this point your hedging you bet making sure you don't miss even one ounce of opportunity here worried that the Ford might be an all around superior engine, so you're focusing on a very narrow aspect of engine performance that Ford typically hasn't been hung up on to give yourself an out. Seriously, nobody here is that gullible.

Considering the nature of your position, in your case I would agree.

To be blunt you wont find many. BMW's GTDi engine program is very well done in most respects, but it is probably a half generation behind Ford's at this point if were talking about engines that are actually on the road. To be fair that is to be expected since Ford's turbo mills are newer, but hanging onto some silly notion that BMW is superior just because they are BMW, which you are obviously doing, is just sad.

Hmmmm, funny, I thought I loved Porsche...thanks for clearing that up for me. Now every time I call the 911 the world's benchmark for sports cars (to be fair it might be the Cayman now, but it's hard for me to imagine the 911 not being king) I'll stop and remind myself that I don't really mean it because of what you have show us all here. I have quite the soft spot for BMW too, though I have always been at odds with their approach to their Motorsport offerings...personally I like torque. Now that they seem to be embracing the utter opposite of that philosophy I find myself particularly interested in their future offerings, the somewhat homely 5-Series sedan aside of course.

As for Corvette, that one really might be junk price considered. I just can't see myself paying that kind of money for a car with an interior that literally could have come from a Cobalt. And frankly, the Cobalt SS interior might even be better than the Vette overall and that is truly saying something as the Cobalt SS interior needs some work even if we consider the price tag. I just can't excuse that kind of apathy in any car, but especially not in one which starts at close to 50k. Throw in the forever sub-par steering rack and amazingly lazy build quality and it all just conspires to be too much. An amazing powertrain, exceptional performance, and good looks only go so far without at least some of the other ingredients. Heck, if they gave it decent seats and a standard interior on par with even Hyundai's new Forte I would give the car a pass, that makes it a bit difficult to argue that I am asking for much here.

If the comparison is you and I, and the debate is who is the true enthusiast, there is no comparison.

So the only way Coyote is ever going to be proven superior is if it produces more hp per liter? That is ridiculous. Coyote will amaze enthusiasts in every respect, including power per liter particularly when you take the whole package into consideration, what it does for folks like you who just want to look like they are right I can't say.

As for Ford's GTDi program compared to BMW's, there is no comparison...Ford wins. BMW may counter, and may take the lead again in short order, but right now the 3.5L EcoBoost already delivers it's power more efficiently than BMW's GTDi mills can, for example the Taurus SHO comes within 1mpg of the BMW 335i's highway fuel economy rating despite a half liter bigger mill that pumps out more hp per liter than the Bimmer's smaller GTDi I6 does all in a car with standard awd and which weighs roughly 1000lb more than the Bimmer. And that brings me to an interesting aside here, the EB V6 bests either of the mainstream BMW GTDi engines sold on our shores in terms of hp per liter despite being artificially limited to preserve the fwd drivelines it currently lives with. So, even if we employ your narrow and frankly ridiculous definition of superiority, hp per liter, the EB V6 has to win. Ironic the webs we weave when we try so hard to tilt the odds in our favor, wouldn't you say?

I said it before and I'll say it again, the Coyote will prove my point for me over the next year or so. And in the spirit of fairness, I do feel obliged to warn you that that the Coyote is so good that this approach you're taking trying to spin superiority into this narrow little definition of hp per liter wont carry you through like you think it will. Do yourself a favor and stop now, you are just setting yourself up to look like a fool.

Nice, throw that together yourself?

Boomer

Yeah, cause someones just going to come in here and 'set you straight' just to prove that you are wrong and explain to you what Ford has up their sleeve for the next decade.....rrrrrrright.
If I were that person, I'd probably tell you to go pound salt...

All warrantied and passing Ford's internal engine tests and getting great mileage right
.....yeahhhhhhh... thought so.

If you don't know about anything other than size of engine and other minor details, you really can't comment on what it's capable of. And please don't bring the 'well so and so can only do this'.
That means absolutely squat.

max2000jp

Because anyone in the know won't be posting it on the internet. JSaylor isn't a Ford engineer and if he was he wouldn't be posting any proprietary data on this forum. Look at Groot as an example.

I've got 30K on the car with the blower and it gets stock gas mileage numbers. It's all in the tune. It won't pass EPA regulations though

You two are acting like Ford has developed a revolutionary internal combustion engine. First, let's see a factory rated 400hp N/A motor and then let's talk potential.