PoorCollegeKid

Larger in terms of displacement, yes, but the OHV SBC-derived engines are quite a bit smaller and lighter than their OHC counterparts. In fact, a SBC isn't much bigger or heavier than Nissan's V6, even though it puts out far more power in LS2 or LS7 form. I had the privilege of seeing then engine bays of both a Z06 (dry sump 7.0L OHV V8) and a Ford GT (dry sump 5.4L DOHC V8 S/C) a couple of weeks ago, and the Ford's engine was huge compared to the Z06's. The added size seemed to be all in the heads, because although the Ford engine looked to be a little shorter (length-wise) than the Chevy one, it was much, much taller and appeared to be a little wider. Of course, that's the advantage of the OHV layout. Your power:displacement ratio tends to be less than that of an OHC setup, but your power:weight and power:size ratios tend to be much better than that of an OHC engine because the OHV heads allow much more displacement to be crammed into a given space than the bigger, bulkier OHC heads do.

Don't get me wrong here, I like the new generation of Ford's mod engines (though I do wonder why they limit themselves to relatively low rpm, since revving is one of the advantage OHC engines have over their OHV counterparts) and agree with most of what you posted, but it's quite misleading to compare them to OHV engines in terms of displacement only. The Ford engineer that was talking to us about the development of the GT admitted that the 5.4L S/C engine and the modular V8 in general was quite large compared to Ford's old OHV engines and Chevy's small block when someone asked why the GT's engine was so big compared to the Z06's even though it displaced far less.

map

I'm going by what Hammond said on Top Gear 12/12/04

"On first impressions you won't be bowled over. Particularly if you're used to European cars. Take the engine for example, it's a 4.6 liter v8. That sounds like a lot, but it's not German. You get just 300 horsepower. That's hardly pushing the boundries of what's possible. On paper the figures look good; naught to 60 in just under 6 seconds, but it just doesn't feel rapid. Mind you that's not such a bad thing because it's also got the most basic suspension this side of a stage coach."

"The engine is a bit asthmatic and the interior is all plasticy and american."

He did seem to really like the car inspite of that stuff though. Clarkson also says in the episode that it has the "X-factor" and puts it under "cool" on the Cool Wall.

Japan8

I don't disagree with you. I've read several articles on the GM's LS engines vs Ford's modular engines. I still think Ford should have stuck with the 351 and 302... just refined them further. Maybe the modular engines would be better for Lincolns, SUV's and maybe even the new trucks. Both the Mustang and the Ford GT would have done better with the 302 or 351. Saleen's S/C 351 Stangs have so much torque that they can't get traction off the line with their much larger tires/wheels and improved suspension... supposedly it takes until 3rd or 4th gear before the rear end hooks up. Launching it for the times the mags got was supposedly VERY difficult because of this. Anyway the point is simply that the 351 "Windsor" engine was the bomb and smaller than the 5.4 "modular" V8. I also agree with you on the low redline with the modular engines... what's up with that?!! Come on Ford!! Screw it... just bring back the 351, make it aluminum block and heads, direct injection FI and Ford will start seeing some much better numbers with the Mustang... lower weight, lower cost and more power.

Japan8

And that's why Clarkson is a moron. As if Ford really gives a **** what he or even all of England thinks? Who are the main buyers of the Mustang? Americans. Particularly the southern, NASCAR, drag strip types. So you're CEO of Ford... are YOU going to build an RX-8 and put the Mustang name on it? That's been tried... it's called the Ford Probe. It became the Probe instead of the Mustang because the Mustang's die hard fans (who are all repeat buyers) had a fit over a front wheel drive turbo I-4 Mustang... FF being the biggest issue. OBVIOUSLY pandering to idiots like Clarkson DOES NOT make any sense. Even if he says that he kinda likes the car at the end, his assessment of it is flawed. He is basing it upon things that the car is not trying to be... so obviously it falls short. He also misses the most important thing about the car.... the HUGE aftermarket.

The car doesn't feel fast? Well it turns a damn good 1/4 mile stock. Wanna see better? Pick up a cat-back, intake, better tires, springs and the SCT ECu re-flasher. For $2k of bolt-ons you'll drop the 1/4 to the low 12's. How slow is that? You want more? Grab a Vortec S/C or ProCharger for $3-4k and up your power to over 400hp. Want still better? Wait for a Kenne Bell S/C to come out for this engine... those always seem to produce some of the fastest cars.

German cars? For f&%$'s sake... what kind of a price difference are we talking about for any of the German V8 cars? BMW... 5 series. Audi? A6. Mercedes? S class. Not cheap cars. The Mustang is NOT competing with these cars. So it doesn't have variable valve timing or as high quality an interior. On ther other hand the 3 series gets eaten for much less money and even the 5 (not counting M). Handing complaints? You're paying about half the price... cheapskate. Go buy some coilovers, strut tower braces, rims and tires. Come back and tell me how badly it handles now. You still have plenty of change for a FI too.

Antiquated suspension? I bet he complains about the GM LS engines still be OHV instead of OHC. Marketing, cost and effectiveness... live axel is best for drag racing. Much of the Mustang core uses it for this. Cost. live axel is needed to keep the cost inline for the V6 Stang to be affordable. Effectiveness. Ford had originally promised to changed the live axel to IRS on the next SVT Mustang... quotes from the VP himself. The SVT Shelby GT500 keeps the live rear axel. Why? It's proven itself in racing situations on the current platform. So if it's winning races, why change it?

therm8

They also surveyed Mustang owners, who had a fit over the rumored IRS for the '05 model. They gave the customers what they wanted.

A little on the rear suspension:

By all other accounts, the car handles fairly well. But then anyone who has not driven a 93+ F-body wouldn't believe that they handle well too. People just assume that solid rear axle cars are for the dragstrip only.


And the variable cam timing:

Japan8

therm8, thanks for the info. I actually did know details about the suspension changes on the '05 Mustang, but that's good info for others to see. I also agree with you. The '90 Mustang wasn't the greatest handling car, but coming from an '89 Prelude Si and a '91 Sentra SE, I felt it handled much better than I expected. Sure the rear end would get crazy during high speed trailing braking, and because in wet weather (or snow), but on normal days... I couldn't complain much. Of course you also had to love the sound of the V8 with a cat-back on it... and that rush of torque. Passing was never more fun.

Speaking of engines... I probably have read the VCT info before, but forgot. Thanks for the correction.

BaronVonBigmeat

At one point, Ford was going to develop a next-gen pushrod motor to compete with the LS# and Hemi engines. The development program was called "hurricane", I'd post a link but google is bringing up nothing but Katrina stories. I guess they are going to just shrug their shoulders and be content while using 4 valves, 4 cams, superchargers, etc. to match what GM does with a 2 valve n/a pushrod motor. :p

rx8wannahave

You just gotta love that Chevy V8!!!

BlueEyes

Yes, yes you do

Japan8

As much as I'm a "Ford man"... you really do have to love that Chevy V8.

BaronVonBigmeat... yep.. Ford is being run by some fools. Imagine if a new 305 or 351 was in the 2005 Mustang instead of the 3valve 4.6. Lighter, cheaper, smaller and the 351 would definitely put out more than 300hp N/A. Instead of $25k for a base GT with 300hp... $20-22k and 400hp? The Shelby GT500... S/C 351 or bore it up... 550hp? $40k? Oh well.

There was this one article I read about a "toy" that the engineers built in the back room. They made a "modular" V10 from a couple engines and dropped it in the body of the last gen Mustang. It ran a custom dual ECU (one for each cylinder bank) and both the engineers and the magazine guys LOVED it! The sound and performance was awesome.

Ford has engineering potential. It's just managed by idiots.

Overport

Oh really? And I sppose thats why he has a Ford GT sitting in his driveway?

Though, maybe I misunderstood you.

124Spider

Finally, something you and I can agree on. The new Corvette, and especially the Z06, is spectacular.

But Clarkson is pretty funny, and his show is very entertaining. Just sit back and enjoy it, but don't take it too seriously.

BlueEyes

ummm, I just found out these are now road legal in Canada because they're 15 years old....::droooool::

Japan8

I've ridden in one. Pretty quick, but damn... they look like ***

BlueEyes

They look incredible IMO.

BigOLundh

iTrader: (1)

I just read the original article in this thread about European vs American cars... very awesome.