New Mustang GT an Underachiever?

[Mgrad92]

The 2005 Mustang GT is coming out with the 4.6 liter 3 valve modular engine. And Ford is proud of the fact that it generates 300 horsepower.
Now maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm not that impressed. When I look at other engines from other manufacturers, 300hp from 4.6 liters isn't that fantastic. In fact, in 1998 Honda produced a 3.0 V-6 with 200 horsepower. That's 66hp per liter on 87 octane gas. Almost exactly the same specific output as the 2005 Mustang. But Honda did it 6 years ago and it was designated as a low emissions vehicle!
This year, GM is putting a 3.5 liter Twin Cam Honda V-6 in the Satrun Vue. It makes 71hp per liter, for a total of 250 hp and 242 pound feet of torque. It makes the Ford engine look anemic.
Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that Ford is wringing out more horsepower out of the 4.6, but other manufacturers are building engines that are smooth, dependable and put out a lot more horsepower.
Is Ford really putting enough resources into their engine develpment?

Please Note:I bring up the subject because I think it will generate an interesting debate. Unfortunately it could also elicit some strong responses, so please maintain a mature demeanor.

[vger]

Ditto!!!! Ford should be kicking some serious butt. But they seem a little too conservative. In due time they (hopefully sooner than later) will be there. Look how long we waited for a Cobra like this or the other SVT products.

[CIVICKLR]

Well you are right,.. take for instance the 350Z which produces 287HP out of an engine with 2 less cylds. and 1.1 liters less in size,..
On the other hand Ford is still way ahead of chevy,.. The New GTO Boasts 350HP better than the mustang??? some would think so,.. but the Chevy 350ci. makes 1HP per ci. while the 281ci ford (4.6L) makes 1.06 (not alot but better than chevy) not to mention the mustang is less expensive, lighter and one more thing,.. No Matter how many times you wash it,.. it still wont have a bowtie on it,.. which in my opinion counts for alot



one.

[RMitchell12]

Originally posted by CIVICKLR
Well you are right,.. take for instance the 350Z which produces 287HP out of an engine with 2 less cylds. and 1.1 liters less in size,..
On the other hand Ford is still way ahead of chevy,.. The New GTO Boasts 350HP better than the mustang???

Comparing the new GT to the GTO is a bit misleading, I think, given the disparity in price of $7-9K. That extra money ought to get you some additional performance.

Now, thake that same money and spend it on a GT. It should run and hide from the GTO.

[deactivated]

GM doesn't want to get into another war it can't win. That's why it taunts both the new GT and the Cobra with the GTO, but competes with neither.

Ford on the other hand has went for the jugular with the Cobra pitted against the Z06.

Ford has played a smart strategy. Get everyone's resources hooked big time into making SUVs, get the customer used to paying SUV prices, then switch to similarly priced performance cars with no competition.

Look at it this way, the new GT is putting down more than what Cobras did a few years ago.....natural evolution if you ask me.

[CIVICKLR]

True that intellar,.. Looking at the 5.0's making 225 in 87 was huge, when the SN-95 came along to compete with the newer F-bodies it lost HP,.. now the 4.6 is screaming into the 300 mark,.. WONDERFUL,.. I think it is becoming alot more technology than raw power now. I-4's are now making 200+ HP giving the 80's V8's a run for the money (to say the least)



one.

[Mgrad92]

Point well taken, civicklr, but if the 4.6 is becoming more technology than raw power, why don't they use the technology to wring more HP from it?
Ford isn't getting as much as they can from 4.6 liters. And don't tell me it's because they can't do it. It can be done, and because the 4.6 is used in so many Ford vechiles, they could justify the additional development costs by spreading them over all the cars/trucks that use the engine.
I look at it this way: The new F-150 cost Ford a ton of money to develop, but everyone agrees it is the best in it's segment. If Ford put that kind of commitment into it's engine develpoment, they could make the most powerful, dependable, and refined engine out there. But will they?
Like I said, they did a good job, but to deliver a knock out punch to all their competitors, they need to do a better job.

[CIVICKLR]

True indeed,.. the 4.6 is a multi-platform engine which is used in their sports cars, trucks, sedans etc,.. To modify the engines in all of them is probably not "cost-effective'



one.

[Instance]

Horsepower is by no means the end-all stat to evaluate in a motor. For one thing, Mustangs are muscle cars. Look at the torque numbers, and the performance pulled from the 'only 300 hp' motor. My '99 is only 265 horses, but it does 0-60 in 5.5 bone stock with relatively [shallow] 3.27 gearing in the back. Oh, and let's not forget it's a 3250 lb car that gets 17/26mph sticker (iirc). Compare this to most of your "high horsepower output per liter" motors that are notably smaller, and you'll see that JUST looking at horsepower per litre leaves you racing around town in my dad's four-door escort.

Don't oversimplify :) Just because it's "only" 300 horsepower (note: bone stock, leaving tons of potential for cheap mods, as compared to 200 horsepower naturally aspirated motors of considerably less displacement) doesn't mean it's not impressive performance, nor unimpressive all around for all the uses of the motor.

[wibled]

First off, the Honda motor you mention is a 4-valve not a 3-valve engine.

Second, Ford had a 3.0L V-6 in 1997 that had the same peak output (200 hp) as the Honda (the 3.0 Duratec in the Taurus).

Third, peak horsepower and torque does not tell the whole story. Most engines spend very little time at this RPM. If you want to compare engine power, look at the whole horsepower and torque curves (the area under the curve).

[CIVICKLR]

Right on,.. Perhaps because the 2K5 is "all new" the following years will have some step ups in the engine in creasing to 320-335HP,.. who knows,..



one.

[mchedd]

CIVIKLR has hit of the reason.

"To modify the engines in all of them is probably not "cost-effective'"

Ford can deliver the Mustang GT to the public in a price range that is affordable.

They've designed the platform and produced a vehicle that we can, if so inclined (and with small or large investments), build to produce the HP #'s each of us feel we need.

On a personal note.... I'd just like to sit in a Mustang GT on some busy boulevard and watch the reactions from all the other folks.

[Instance]

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying, Wibled. There's a lot more to it than just peak horsepower. I don't remember where I saw it, I think on the turbododge forums, but some guy has a signiture that reads something like 'horsepower sells cars, torque wins races', which is very very true. Also, people look at peak numbers solely and tend to ignore through-the-range numbers, which leaves them quite unaware over all.

So yeah, longwinded way to say "I agree completely, that's exactly what I was saying."

I still think the Mustang GT is right on par from factory, leaving a few cheap mods, and tons of room for heavier, more financially brutal mods. They do a great job.

94,700 miles on mine, still reliable, and still running like a raped ape. (Another quote I got from my friend who reads the turbododge forums, among others).

[CIVICKLR]

Well folks,.. the new mustang is priced in many different ways,.. the V6 coupes and conv. are more for the women who just want the look, dont care about the speed, and when a 5.0 drives by they complain about the noise,.. (Which reflets the value,.. )Now the new Mustang GT is probably somewhere around 25-30K (correct me if I'm wrong i'm not certain) which keeps the stang true to it's roots of fast, american, cheap V8,.. Now compare it to the new Honda V6 accord coupe and see what we get,. it's around 5k-8k more with comparable options (leather, audio etc.) and you get a very nice quick 240HP vehicle. however it still is not an Acura CL, or even the type-S. Ford is doing a grand job figureing out this new pony, I am sure that HP will go up in the years after it's launch. Bringing up the SN-95 gt's with their anemic headers making less hp than the 5.0's that tore up the late 80's,..


Also as I was saying before from a business stand point people like us are far and few between, the chicks want the looks and don't care about the hp, I would imagine they sell many more V6 conv. than GT's. B/c a stang performance lover doesn't mind having a 1990 LX 5.0 with primer on it,.. if it runs 12's hah, we're in it for the sport,.. they are in it to sell more units and make money,..

Ending note: It's 5:14 in the morning, i'm getting my hangover so forgive my ramblings and what not,.. LOVE FORDS, LOVE STANGS and the COBRA is the fastest car for 35K (imho)



one.

[ELINORSTANG]

THAT MIGHT BE TRUE, BUT I PUT A WHIPPLE CHARGER , INTERCOOLER, AND CHILLER, NOW I'M PUSHING 525HP...NO MATTER WHAT FORD DOES TO THEIR CARS, I WILL BUY ONE BEFORE I GET A HONDA, TOYOTA, NISSIAN, ECT... :beer:

[latenite]

The 2005 Mustang GT is coming out with the 4.6 liter 3 valve modular engine. And Ford is proud of the fact that it generates 300 horsepower.
Now maybe I'm a cynic, but I'm not that impressed. When I look at other engines from other manufacturers, 300hp from 4.6 liters isn't that fantastic. In fact, in 1998 Honda produced a 3.0 V-6 with 200 horsepower. That's 66hp per liter on 87 octane gas. Almost exactly the same specific output as the 2005 Mustang. But Honda did it 6 years ago and it was designated as a low emissions vehicle!
This year, GM is putting a 3.5 liter Twin Cam Honda V-6 in the Satrun Vue. It makes 71hp per liter, for a total of 250 hp and 242 pound feet of torque. It makes the Ford engine look anemic.
Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that Ford is wringing out more horsepower out of the 4.6, but other manufacturers are building engines that are smooth, dependable and put out a lot more horsepower.
Is Ford really putting enough resources into their engine develpment?

Please Note:I bring up the subject because I think it will generate an interesting debate. Unfortunately it could also elicit some strong responses, so please maintain a mature demeanor.

You are right.
Click to read. (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=104572)

[mchedd]

The Edmonds article shows it's a win-win situation. I had the pleasure of talking to several engineers in Motown and they professed that to keep cost down they design a vehicle that alot of folks want, keeping in mind that with a few simple "inexpensive" modifications a person can create the ride they really want.

I just wish I had 50 large. :knock:

[mustangman9550]

You are right.
Click to read. (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=104572)
that thing would smoke dam near any german or italian sports car on the planet. WOW, 'tear', makes me proud to be an American......

[46 Cobra]

Although I agree that Ford could provide better HP with the 4.6 it is important to remember that the car is intended for a broader market that the slightly HP obsessed individuals who frequent this forum. In fact, Ford at present has more Mustang orders than cars. Tweaking the engine for more HP means a more costly engine and hence more costly car, significant additional costs for EPA certification, a reduction in MPG, and likely higher fuel costs for the customer. I have a 97 Cobra which makes only 5 HP more than the new Mustang GT but those extra ponies required a special assembly line, 8 extra valves and other costly complexities, and it burns only premium fuel. Awesome car but the cost of building a similar engine for the Mustang GT would add more than a couple dollars to the selling price.