Back to the original question. I voted for the twin turbo 5.0L. My reasoning is that the GT500 should showcase Ford's best and latest technology in their flagship enthusiasts car. While the 5.4L SC has been a solid performer, like others have said, it's time has passed. A GTDI engine would also be more efficient and very likely more powerful based on what we have seen from the 3.5L EB. Both are important considerations these days. The GT500 needs to keep pushing the envelope of Mustang performance. Even if the 5.4 goes to an aluminum block I have to believe a GTDI 5.0 would be a lighter and more compact powerplant and that would benefit performance and efficiency. The 5.4 is a W I D E, and T A L L engine. Imagine how much smaller and lighter the Mustang could be if it didn't need to accommodate an engine that is arguably too massive for its displacement. With a shorter deck height and no heavy supercharger on top the center of gravity would be lower as well.

 

The 5.0 twin tubo which will fit well with the GT 3.5 twin turbo and the Mustang 2.5 twin turbo. Maybe by that time it will be a turbo deisel.

 

That is news to me. I wonder why no one races a Subaru or Mitsubishi if these cars are so awesome?
http://www.grand-am.com/standings/index.cfm?series=k

And what series do you race in? Or do you just race on the internet?

Engine Mfr-Pos-Manufacturer Points
1. Ford 346
2. BMW 345
3. Porsche 287
4. Chevrolet 85
5. Dodge 5

I know why:

 

Probably see that in the next gen, although I dont see where the current car is "too" big. In any event the S-197 makes for some excellent hotrod material

http://www.jonkaaseracingengines.com...e-mustang.html

Funny but true, bolt a Boss 429 in and get a better GT500

 

Once again, why are we talking race cars???

I believe by the point standings you are listing the answer is obvious. The cars listed, Mustang, EVO, STi. are not racing in the same class. And for good reasoning. the other two are four door 5 passenger vehicles, AWD, and Japanese. Japanese car manufacturers are not really throwing in support for grand am racing. (notice toyota, honda, nissan are all also missing from the list of Manufacturer points) Does that mean that none of those cars out corners, steers, and brakes better then the mustang? of course not. The EVO and the STI will out corner, out brake, and out steer the mustang. But the mustang has the pull and the top speed to best them through out the track.

face it a 300 hp turbo 4 cylinder turning 4 wheels, I don't know all the specs for the Grand Am, but my guess is the EVO and the STi can't even qualify.

Stock Gt vs. Stock STi/EVO will be close in the 1/4, the GT will lose in braking, the GT will lose in the twisties.

 

Only one question mark is necessary. It's because SilverSStang said:
I assumed that he knew what he was talking about. Or, was he just talking about street racing?

****, if I thought an Evo or a STI was the performance king on the street or on the track, I'd buy one.

You guys need to trade-in your Mustang for a Japanese car if you think it's the fastest thing on earth.

I can show you that it is not anything but an ugly-looking pretender.

 

Whichever is lighter.

 

Uh, I thought the title of this thread was "Next Gen GT500 Engine" ??

 

All aluminium 5.4L S/C through to about 2014..

 

Err well I meant next all brand new chassis, for whatever reason I was in the "based on S-197" frame of mind.

 

Performance does not mean racing! Get it through your head.

He was referring to STi, EVO and The mustang, Not a purpose built FR500, or the like.

We dont ignorantly blind ourselves to think that our mustang is the best performer on earth. It is not, never will be. It is not produced and marketed as such. Stop deluding yourself.

I don't need to trade in my stang for anything. That is just an ignorant statement. I am smart enough to know the difference between what I like and factual data. I like my stang, if I wanted an EVO or an STi I could have one, but I don't want one even though they out corner, out steer, and out brake my stang.

 

C/D just tested a bunch of cars, including the WRX (which they said runs about as fast an STI) and a '10 GT. The Mustang creamed it on the hotlap. I guess you were wrong.

 

My mistake. They said the STI was actually 2.4 seconds slower around the lap than the WRX, which means that the Mustang was a whopping 5 seconds faster around the track than the STI. Wow, for a car that can't handle, steer, or brake, the Mustang sure does a good job getting around a racetrack!

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...p_2009-feature

 

if they announced a twin turbo V8 for 2014 i'd prolly put my deposit down now. the more compact proportions will contribute better balance to what is hopefully a world class all around sports car.

 

That Hot Lap WRX definitely was a head scratching enigma, and does raise some question for Subaru, "what for art thou, STi?" if the mid-range WRX seems to be just as speedy, at least in some regimens. Of course comparing one year to another year's results is problematic, both due to different track conditions, drivers and model year changes, a potential STi buyer might have reason for second thoughts.

That all said, I think for many reasons the GT500 should go boldly into the future with a TT 5.0. While the Mustang should clearly reflect its heritage, it certainly become mired as a retro-relic either but rather, should carry the overall Mustang spirit into the future with the best technologies available to compete in today's world, not some fondly recalled golden era. Ford clearly is advancing and consolidating its engine classes and technologies and the various trends are clear:

Smaller displacements
Light alloy heads, blocks and other major components
Turbos for hi-po applications
DI, primarily in turbo apps initially where the benefits are most significant, but I imagine it will trickle down throughout much as port fuel injection did.
4V heads
VVT

All these add up to meet the necessities of the future such as significantly increased efficiency/economy coupled with lower emissions of various detrimental gasses. These are necessities the 5.4 didn't have to deal with to such a high degree and would likely have trouble meeting them all. Also, from a broader perspective, it makes far more sense for Ford to concentrate its engineering, development and manufacturing resources rather than dissipating on old and outgoing engine families. I would prefer an excellently done 5.0TT than a 5.4 SC clawing along on the dregs of development resources.

The 5.4 has served well and nobly but should be given a respectful retirement.

 

No dice http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/08/f...-shelby-gt500/

 

But an aluminum block is good news.

 

wow- 63 to 63 votes...guess opinions are pretty split on this one

my only beefs with turbos is the possibly increased heat(can it still run without water in 'limp' mode? doubtful), can the intercooler(no mattter how big) get intake temp equal to a big twin screw, and lastly it could change that beautiful noise coming from the pipes...

I really truly wish they would come up with a real 'MadMax' clutched blower setup...the bypass valve is certainly cheaper, but still not as free spinning as just a pulley, so its still adding a little parasitic loss that dont NEED to be there 90% of the time...would just be neat to have a switch/button on the dash that shifted the tune/blower into 'hold on to your hat mode'

 

Actually, the intake charge temp is heated due to the fact it's being compressed, not because of heat soak due to the exhaust heat. And there are center sections cooled by water too. Those last much longer than oil only units. And the best part, they don't produce a drag on the engine like superchargers since they are turned by wasted energy on the exhaust That's why they're so efficient.

 

Other.....6.2L NA!!! That would make the chevy nutt huggers STFU. If ford can match GM's 6.2L in output, imagine the Ford 6.2!