Will the 05 Mustang Take my Glory!!!
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Each their own. Heck, it could be worse it could be a Civic. I do like the RX-8 but only the interior not the exterior. As for the 05 Mustang I'm holding out to see a model that I can touch and see. Only 1 wish I would like to see that car have, but it's not happening at least right now. Have the IRS as a option for the GT. To a earlier reply, this new chassis, was specifically designed to handle both the live axle and the IRS. Not like the old Fox Chassis. Which they just shoehorned the IRS into. Mustang, RX-8, 350z, could they be considered the same class, I guess, but to me each car is a totally different beast. Since the Jac Nasser era ended in Ford did anyone notice Ford is trying to upgrade the cars with better materials and workmanship. Mazda was itself affected a little by the Jac Nasser era (yuck). I give Bill Ford credit he's trying his hardest to get Ford up there again. Just for the plasticky statement, Nissan Maxima uses the same plasticky feeling material:D. Anyways I'm looking at a Mazda3 what do you guys think about that little car.
#52
I loved, loved, loved the Cobra convertible, it is so much fun to drive with that super-powerful engine that sounds sooo good. I almost bought it instead of my 8.
But the inside reminded me of a rental car, and the stick felt like I was doing arm exercises. The 8 fits like a glove. I miss the open air of my Miata though.
But the inside reminded me of a rental car, and the stick felt like I was doing arm exercises. The 8 fits like a glove. I miss the open air of my Miata though.
#53
Originally posted by Brian302505
To Each their own. Heck, it could be worse it could be a Civic. I do like the RX-8 but only the interior not the exterior. As for the 05 Mustang I'm holding out to see a model that I can touch and see. Only 1 wish I would like to see that car have, but it's not happening at least right now. Have the IRS as a option for the GT. To a earlier reply, this new chassis, was specifically designed to handle both the live axle and the IRS. Not like the old Fox Chassis. Which they just shoehorned the IRS into. Mustang, RX-8, 350z, could they be considered the same class, I guess, but to me each car is a totally different beast. Since the Jac Nasser era ended in Ford did anyone notice Ford is trying to upgrade the cars with better materials and workmanship. Mazda was itself affected a little by the Jac Nasser era (yuck). I give Bill Ford credit he's trying his hardest to get Ford up there again. Just for the plasticky statement, Nissan Maxima uses the same plasticky feeling material:D. Anyways I'm looking at a Mazda3 what do you guys think about that little car.
To Each their own. Heck, it could be worse it could be a Civic. I do like the RX-8 but only the interior not the exterior. As for the 05 Mustang I'm holding out to see a model that I can touch and see. Only 1 wish I would like to see that car have, but it's not happening at least right now. Have the IRS as a option for the GT. To a earlier reply, this new chassis, was specifically designed to handle both the live axle and the IRS. Not like the old Fox Chassis. Which they just shoehorned the IRS into. Mustang, RX-8, 350z, could they be considered the same class, I guess, but to me each car is a totally different beast. Since the Jac Nasser era ended in Ford did anyone notice Ford is trying to upgrade the cars with better materials and workmanship. Mazda was itself affected a little by the Jac Nasser era (yuck). I give Bill Ford credit he's trying his hardest to get Ford up there again. Just for the plasticky statement, Nissan Maxima uses the same plasticky feeling material:D. Anyways I'm looking at a Mazda3 what do you guys think about that little car.
But they have a lonnnnng way to go before I forgive them for the SVO....I still wake up screaming thinking about it.
I really like the new three, outside is racy, and interior is very nice...A 6 is not that much more, have you taken a look at it?
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: "The Rock", Alaska
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like Mustangs to some degree, and I like the exterior of this new one pretty well. But IMHO, they went way too far with the retro thing with the interior. Might pick one up in a few years and play with it. But you'll notice that even though I knew these were coming out, I still bought the RX-8.
Before seeing the RX8 back in May 2003. I have planned to wait for the 2005 Mustang.
I'm so happy I got the RX8.
Just look at the interior
#55
2010 Prius - Miss the 8
Saw the 2005 Mustang at the LA Auto show, and that car looks terrible in person. Interior was very "plastic" looking, and it was just cheap overrall. It's supposed to be priced similar to RX-8 pricing... but when it's all said and done, RX-8 will still catch people's attention.
#57
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw it at the San Jose Auto Show. Man the rims on that car were huge. 19"? The car was on a pedestal so the rims were at eye level. Maybe that made them look bigger. Overall I didn't like the look of the car. I think the pictures of it look better than seeing it in person. Thumbs down for me.
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: So Cal
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DeNile'
Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.
S2000 never turned my head, that car is like a boxy lookin Miata, It sucks! Lotus Elise would turn heads just because its a lotus, the lines aren't better than the 8 and the interior definately isn't. The viper's interior sucks as well, but it will turn heads. And I hate the way the Z4 looks too, long @$$ hood. So that leaves the 911, Boxter, and NSX, I give you those.
I hate that S2000 though!!!
get a 8 then talk!!
Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.
S2000 never turned my head, that car is like a boxy lookin Miata, It sucks! Lotus Elise would turn heads just because its a lotus, the lines aren't better than the 8 and the interior definately isn't. The viper's interior sucks as well, but it will turn heads. And I hate the way the Z4 looks too, long @$$ hood. So that leaves the 911, Boxter, and NSX, I give you those.
I hate that S2000 though!!!
get a 8 then talk!!
Take a look at these pics they may change your mind lol (at least im drooling lol)
http://www.puresportscar.com/gallery...ry.php?cat=519
Dont get me wrong I love my 8 to death but if I could get any car in the world it would be the lotus and id do it in a heartbeat. Its al little out of my price range however so ill have to pass at this point.
#60
I would love the Lotus as well, I saw it on a trip to the UK last year and flipped otu after seeing it in person.
I also really liked the Mustang conceprt car I saw at the NY auto show almost a year ago, when I went there to specifically see the RX8. I loved the Mustang, but was in the market for a car sooner than the 15 months Ford was mentioning, and got the * (which I then did the buyback for a few weeks ago) I saw pics of the Mustang that is acually going to be released- and to me they look nothing like the concept- so I'm getting another 8- hopfully with better gas milage.
I also really liked the Mustang conceprt car I saw at the NY auto show almost a year ago, when I went there to specifically see the RX8. I loved the Mustang, but was in the market for a car sooner than the 15 months Ford was mentioning, and got the * (which I then did the buyback for a few weeks ago) I saw pics of the Mustang that is acually going to be released- and to me they look nothing like the concept- so I'm getting another 8- hopfully with better gas milage.
#62
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who already are hating on the car before it is even released... even though BOTH the RX-8 and Mustand are Ford group cars... wait until you read the end of my post before commenting.
Yep and the 2005 Mustang weighs around what the auto RX-8 does...3300 if I remember correctly (and I may not be!). In addition this IS an entirely new platform. Not the 1979 Fox plaform that has been the base of all Mustangs 1979-2004. Articles on the subject say that Ford knows the Stang needs better handling... particularly with the demise of the Camaro/TransAm... compeition comes down between the Stang and the imports... for those with a mind open to buying whatever drives the best for them...
I did say in my post that a faster Mustang will cost more, and if it is cheaper it won't be that much cheaper. Currently the base MSRP for a Mustang GT is $24,000 - not too much cheaper than the RX8's base MSRP of $26,000.
Um... check out the Janurary 2004 Motor Trend. est. base price is $27,000 and the SOHC 4.6 V8 has found more power with the change to 3 valves from 2 valves... this has bumped hp to 300. The Stang is going to cook the RX-8 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile. Ford is going to make another higher performance Stang (Boss, Bullet, Mach 1) again... meaning likely 320-350 hp. The Cobra... it will be in excess of 400hp and still under $40k I'd imagine.
Ford has also been playing with an all aluminum DOHC V10 in a Stang body... hmm...
The only link I could find was http://www.mustangworks.com/articles...res/2003Mach1/
but basically Ford sells over 120,000 Mustangs a year --> 4x as many as the RX8. Plus, of course, there are already millions of Mustangs on the road while the oldest RX8s in the US are not even six months old.
Yep... and guess why Ford does? Because even if you hate it, think it's crap... apparantly your opinion is in the minority as Ford sold so many Mustangs, they pushed the Camaro/TransAm out of production.
In Japan, Mazda is just a minor an auto maker as they are in the US. I wouldn't expect their sales to be phenomenal
Suprise for all of you... Honda is just another Mazda... minor in Japan. But for some odd reason they sell like crazy in the US. JDM is mostly Toyota and Nissan. Then Mitsubishi , Honda and Mazda. Then Kei-car market is a bit different... we'll leave that out for now.
Some of those cars look sweet, and a lot of them are tremendously fast and would blow the RX8 away, but I think it looks better than all of them.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
Now all of that being said...
I had been waiting and waiting for years for this Stang to come out... a return to what is really the Mustang. The oil crisis lead to the ugly POS in 74-78. 1979 saw Ford make a half-*** attempt at coming back with a real sports car, but based it off the Ford Fairmont's fox platform?! So that bodystyle with no relation to the car's soul was produce from 79- 04. And now for '05 on a new plaform, Ford returns the car back to the evolutionary lines it should have been on. On paper... great power, and better handling than the previous generation.
And then I saw the RX-8.
I have loved the RX-7/rotary engine since the first RX-7 in 1979 (I think it was). So this return was a great thing for me... Taking it out for a test drive just confirmed... I_WANT_THIS_CAR! The clencher... well with kids coming up in the 2-3 year range... I need backdoors on my car and a useable backseat. Frankly... the 2005 Stang's backseat looks like the Camaro's... useless (I sat in it before and would rather not again) and she's only got 2 doors. So it'll be an RX-8 for me... although I'll be certain to run the hell out of Stang or two on test drives at the dealer...
Originally posted by FamilyGuy
True. Handling is more than weight distribution.
True. Handling is more than weight distribution.
I did say in my post that a faster Mustang will cost more, and if it is cheaper it won't be that much cheaper. Currently the base MSRP for a Mustang GT is $24,000 - not too much cheaper than the RX8's base MSRP of $26,000.
Ford has also been playing with an all aluminum DOHC V10 in a Stang body... hmm...
The only link I could find was http://www.mustangworks.com/articles...res/2003Mach1/
but basically Ford sells over 120,000 Mustangs a year --> 4x as many as the RX8. Plus, of course, there are already millions of Mustangs on the road while the oldest RX8s in the US are not even six months old.
In Japan, Mazda is just a minor an auto maker as they are in the US. I wouldn't expect their sales to be phenomenal
Suprise for all of you... Honda is just another Mazda... minor in Japan. But for some odd reason they sell like crazy in the US. JDM is mostly Toyota and Nissan. Then Mitsubishi , Honda and Mazda. Then Kei-car market is a bit different... we'll leave that out for now.
Some of those cars look sweet, and a lot of them are tremendously fast and would blow the RX8 away, but I think it looks better than all of them.
Now all of that being said...
I had been waiting and waiting for years for this Stang to come out... a return to what is really the Mustang. The oil crisis lead to the ugly POS in 74-78. 1979 saw Ford make a half-*** attempt at coming back with a real sports car, but based it off the Ford Fairmont's fox platform?! So that bodystyle with no relation to the car's soul was produce from 79- 04. And now for '05 on a new plaform, Ford returns the car back to the evolutionary lines it should have been on. On paper... great power, and better handling than the previous generation.
And then I saw the RX-8.
I have loved the RX-7/rotary engine since the first RX-7 in 1979 (I think it was). So this return was a great thing for me... Taking it out for a test drive just confirmed... I_WANT_THIS_CAR! The clencher... well with kids coming up in the 2-3 year range... I need backdoors on my car and a useable backseat. Frankly... the 2005 Stang's backseat looks like the Camaro's... useless (I sat in it before and would rather not again) and she's only got 2 doors. So it'll be an RX-8 for me... although I'll be certain to run the hell out of Stang or two on test drives at the dealer...
#63
Interesting post...I was under the impression that mazda was ranked number 4 in japan ever since the mitsu fiasco (hiding compliants, not doing needed recalls, ect..) but you would know better then me, since you live there..
The strong point of all the 'pony' cars has always been thier low price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.
The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..
and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.
Oh, I also think most of us here like to forget there is any relation between mazda and ford..
The strong point of all the 'pony' cars has always been thier low price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.
The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..
and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.
Oh, I also think most of us here like to forget there is any relation between mazda and ford..
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by klegg
price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.
The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..
and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.
price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.
The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..
and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.
I don't think there are any other cars you can buy new with that much power at that kind of price.
Plus, the platform for the new Mustang is the same one for the Lincoln LS. The handling won't set the world on fire, but it should be an improvement over the previous generations.
Japan8,
To answer some of your comments:
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.
- I wasn't saying that the Mustang was bad because it's more common than the RX8. I just meant that an RX8 is automatically more unique because it is a less common car. "Unique" does not mean "better", just less common. If you want a really unique car, drive a Ford Pinto. Everyone will notice because you will have one of the only Pintos on the road - but nobody will claim that it is a great car.
#65
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by FamilyGuy
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.
fascinated with the power, and just the popularity, i slowly came to realize that mustangs actually aren't all that special as sports cars, at least not since the 1960's.
now that i look at the architecture, i see that their engines are really quite, umm... not good.
being ignorant, i related displacement to engine size, and figured that V8's, especially those of the American flavour, were junk. but it's slowly become evident to me that the Chev small block, while it could still use a whole lot more development and still isn't my favourite, is vastly superior to Ford's 4.6L DOHC (which is a real lump of an engine, pushing 400hp or not).
if they made a V10 engine, ha... i dunno, i just don't know if a car big enough to hold that enormous SOB would be slick enough to be called a sports car, unless they got smart and stopped trying to play the stupid displacement war with the other two big boys.
#66
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting post...I was under the impression that mazda was ranked number 4 in japan ever since the mitsu fiasco (hiding compliants, not doing needed recalls, ect..) but you would know better then me, since you live there..
Back to topic... I suspect that Mazda has moved up. The Atenza (M 6) has been selling pretty well and hell... there are two RX-8's in my apartment building and a guy at work had one too. I suspect the Axcela (M3) will sell decently as well... as the S-Wagon (P 5) seemed to have started a new trend of small sporty wagons... HOWEVER... Mitsubishi also has Mitsu Heavy Industries which makes contrsuction, etc. machinery and Mitsu's work truck is probably the leading one on farms. Mazda's I've seen once maybe. I think Toyota makes one.... but I don't think Honda does. Outside of Mitsu this LARGE market is run by Daihatsu... but then we are getting into the kei-car market... and Suzuki and Daihatsu are king here.
The strong point of all the 'pony' cars has always been thier low price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.
The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..
and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.
[QUOTE]
Oh, I also think most of us here like to forget there is any relation between mazda and ford.. [QUOTE]
That'll never change, so I'd suggest for people to get used to the idea. As a matter of fact, where do you think that intergrated stereo/climate control console came from? Smells of Ford Tarus...
#67
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Ford makes most of the reasonable options (AC, LSD, CD, decent sound system, ABS, etc...) part of the standard package and not expensive add-ons, they got the pricing just right. The price I read was $17,000 for the 202 horsepower V6 model and $24,000 for the 300 horsepower GT.
I don't think there are any other cars you can buy new with that much power at that kind of price.
Plus, the platform for the new Mustang is the same one for the Lincoln LS. The handling won't set the world on fire, but it should be an improvement over the previous generations.
Japan8,
To answer some of your comments:
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
To answer some of your comments:
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/time...5/05/index.htm
So we are looking a decently quick car.
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.
Dropping the DOHC V8 would be dumb... I doubt they have that in mind, as the Cobra will need to top 390hp. If the demand is there for the V10 in the Cobra... I think Ford will do it. But I dunno about having enough demand for it.
- I wasn't saying that the Mustang was bad because it's more common than the RX8. I just meant that an RX8 is automatically more unique because it is a less common car. "Unique" does not mean "better", just less common. If you want a really unique car, drive a Ford Pinto. Everyone will notice because you will have one of the only Pintos on the road - but nobody will claim that it is a great car.
#68
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
unless they got smart and stopped trying to play the stupid displacement war with the other two big boys.
unless they got smart and stopped trying to play the stupid displacement war with the other two big boys.
When I started at this forum, I was really disappointed in the 159 ft*lb rating for the RX8. I had no idea about open differential vs. limited slip differential. I didn't know about the final drive ratio, weight distribution, torque curves, gearing, and the all important horsepower to weight ratio. There are still people here that think the upcoming Lotus is a joke because it only has 180 horsepower - they just haven't been taught to consider that 180 horsepower in an 1800 pound car equals hell on wheels.
Ford knows that the big displacement, big numbers car buyer still exists, and they're capitalizing on it. More power to them. Me? I've been corrupted. I probably never will be able to afford anything more sporty than a station wagon.... but if I can, I will definitely test drive a Mustang but almost certainly instead pick a Miata, or RX8, or S2000.
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
big displacement wars? that's funny, ford's engine has actually gotten smaller since 94. The big *** 7.5l v8 is now a 6.8l v10. the 7.3l diesel is now a 6.0l diesel. their 5.8l v8 went down to 5.4l. their 5.0l v8 is now a 4.6l. the only engine that has gone up is the old i6 which was a 3.9 now a 4.3 or 4.2. dodge and chevy have all gone up, though they do offer smaller block engines.
Last edited by visitor; 01-21-2004 at 02:09 AM.
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by visitor
big displacement wars? that's funny, ford's engine has actually gotten smaller since 94.
big displacement wars? that's funny, ford's engine has actually gotten smaller since 94.
I just meant to point out that the Mustang is the only sub $30,000 performance car you can buy with more than 6 cylinders or 3.8 liters of displacement. I imagine Ford could get the same performance from a turbocharged smaller engine and it probably would have been lighter too. Ford probably never even considered that option because the name Mustang is synonymous with V8 and a deep rumble from the exhaust, regardless of the performance advantages of a different engine configuration.
#71
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
[Bnow that i look at the architecture, i see that their engines are really quite, umm... not good.
being ignorant, i related displacement to engine size, and figured that V8's, especially those of the American flavour, were junk. but it's slowly become evident to me that the Chev small block, while it could still use a whole lot more development and still isn't my favourite, is vastly superior to Ford's 4.6L DOHC (which is a real lump of an engine, pushing 400hp or not).
[/B]
[Bnow that i look at the architecture, i see that their engines are really quite, umm... not good.
being ignorant, i related displacement to engine size, and figured that V8's, especially those of the American flavour, were junk. but it's slowly become evident to me that the Chev small block, while it could still use a whole lot more development and still isn't my favourite, is vastly superior to Ford's 4.6L DOHC (which is a real lump of an engine, pushing 400hp or not).
[/B]
I'm not picking a fight, just asking. This stuff is fun to learn
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by FamilyGuy
Ford probably never even considered that option because the name Mustang is synonymous with V8 and a deep rumble from the exhaust, regardless of the performance advantages of a different engine configuration.
Ford probably never even considered that option because the name Mustang is synonymous with V8 and a deep rumble from the exhaust, regardless of the performance advantages of a different engine configuration.
#73
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the cobra's 4.6l is not vastly inferior to the chevy small block. granted it's supercharged, but the internals alone are good up to 800hp. it's basically the american skyline engine. you could drop 3g's on the ls6, get header and cams and you ve got a mid 10 second car. you could spend half the amount and be in the same area with the cobra. now the cars that the 4.6 sits in may not be quite as good as what chevy has to offer, but if you're comapring engine to engine, the modular is pretty damn nice.
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by visitor
88 Mustang SVO. 2.3 turbocharged engine. Ford even released a very limited run of it's special DOHC 2.3T engine that was supposedly put in the Merkur's. That engine stock was rated at 250 at the flywheel. The SV0's 2.3T was somewhere around 200-250. Tuners can put 300 to the wheels without many mods.
88 Mustang SVO. 2.3 turbocharged engine. Ford even released a very limited run of it's special DOHC 2.3T engine that was supposedly put in the Merkur's. That engine stock was rated at 250 at the flywheel. The SV0's 2.3T was somewhere around 200-250. Tuners can put 300 to the wheels without many mods.
#75
Originally posted by FamilyGuy
I would bet the '88 SVO with the 2.3T was a damned good car. I would also bet that Ford went back to using V8s because lots of Mustang enthusiasts would not buy it, no matter how good it was. For better or worse, most American muscle car enthusiasts like big engines in their vehicles.
I would bet the '88 SVO with the 2.3T was a damned good car. I would also bet that Ford went back to using V8s because lots of Mustang enthusiasts would not buy it, no matter how good it was. For better or worse, most American muscle car enthusiasts like big engines in their vehicles.
All in all, I look back at my SVO as a huge mistake by ford, and a real nightmare for me!!