If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"RichA" > wrote in message
... > On 6 Jul 2005 06:04:07 -0700, wrote: > How come when the Mustang v8 sported about 210hp (1986?) it ran a > second faster 0-60 than the "210" hp v6 does now? That 210 (I'd say) > is highly optimistic. I'm sure both cars make ~210 HP. The engines probably have comparable HP levels, but the thing is that the 6 banger is a torqueless wonder. It takes toqque to move cars. 6 bangers don't have the torque of a V8, which is why you will often see base model V6 cars have lower gearing than V8 cars, either in the rear or as a first gear ratio in the transmission. They need that additional torque multiplication to maintain reasonable performance. The V8 cars have more torque to begin with and can therefore do without the lower gear ratios. This is why many V6 and V8 models only have a couple MPG difference. In some cases you will find V6 cars get a more MPG in the city while V8 cars get a more MPG on the highway. To get back to the particular topic at hand, fuel economy for the '05 Mustang between the V6 and V8 models with automatics transmissions is negligible, with what might amount to a noticeable difference between the manual transmission versions on the highway. V6 auto: 19/25 V8 auto: 17/25 V6 manual: 19/28 V8 manual: 18/23 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 00:04:45 -0400, RichA > wrote:
>Terrible performance for a six in this day >and age. Ford has clearly decided to not take >the Japanese route and provide real power >(I don't even believe the current rating for the >6 at all) only to the V8. >-Rich > Which Japanese Manufacturer & Model has a higher rated (HP&TQ) then the base Mustang at the same price point? -- Please Don't Steal - The Government Hates Competition ZommbyWoof (take the dogs when replying via e-mail) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
> Terrible performance for a six in this day > and age. Ford has clearly decided to not take > the Japanese route and provide real power > (I don't even believe the current rating for the > 6 at all) only to the V8. > -Rich I think you're missing the whole point of what the Mustang is supposed to be if you think it should be competing with a Japanese FWD car. As others have said, what other car offers as much hp and TORQUE in a RWD package at the Mustang's price. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> RichA wrote: > >> Terrible performance for a six in this day >> and age. Ford has clearly decided to not take >> the Japanese route and provide real power (I don't even believe the >> current rating for the >> 6 at all) only to the V8. >> -Rich > > > I think you're missing the whole point of what the Mustang is supposed > to be if you think it should be competing with a Japanese FWD car. As > others have said, what other car offers as much hp and TORQUE in a RWD > package at the Mustang's price. There really isn't one with a base price anywhere close to the Mustang (just a tad over US$19k). If you want something with more torque and more power, it's not that big a deal (and still not that expensive when you compare it to any Japanese car with similar power/torque numbers) to slap a supercharger on the 3.8L. For $6-7k more than the Mustang you could get something like the base Subaru WRX and have 20hp more than the Mustang, but 20+ ft/lbs less torque. Supercharge the 3.8 and you're at 275hp and 285 ft/lbs and still a few grand cheaper than the Subaru. For import sedan fun, I'm actually partial to the Audi 2.7L twin turbo. With a cheap chip upgrade, that's good for 320hp and 380 ft/lbs of torque. In my big heavy A6 w/6sp, I routinely smoke kids in Mustang GTs. All that torque + all wheel drive is a wonderful thing. Of course, that's a lot more expensive than a Mustang, but it just shows that forced induction + a V6 can be a real stump puller if set up properly. Cheers, |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Ritz wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote: > >> RichA wrote: >> >>> Terrible performance for a six in this day >>> and age. Ford has clearly decided to not take >>> the Japanese route and provide real power (I don't even believe the >>> current rating for the >>> 6 at all) only to the V8. >>> -Rich >> >> >> >> I think you're missing the whole point of what the Mustang is supposed >> to be if you think it should be competing with a Japanese FWD car. As >> others have said, what other car offers as much hp and TORQUE in a RWD >> package at the Mustang's price. > > > > There really isn't one with a base price anywhere close to the Mustang > (just a tad over US$19k). If you want something with more torque and > more power, it's not that big a deal (and still not that expensive when > you compare it to any Japanese car with similar power/torque numbers) to > slap a supercharger on the 3.8L. For $6-7k more than the Mustang you > could get something like the base Subaru WRX and have 20hp more than the > Mustang, but 20+ ft/lbs less torque. Supercharge the 3.8 and you're at > 275hp and 285 ft/lbs and still a few grand cheaper than the Subaru. The new Mustangs have a 4.0L SOHC V-6 that makes 210 hp and around 240 ft-lbs of torque. Install a blower and it will make 300+ rwhp and 350+ rwtq. Plus for $6k-$7k more you can get a Mutang GT with 300+ hp. > For import sedan fun, I'm actually partial to the Audi 2.7L twin turbo. > With a cheap chip upgrade, that's good for 320hp and 380 ft/lbs of > torque. In my big heavy A6 w/6sp, I routinely smoke kids in Mustang > GTs. All that torque + all wheel drive is a wonderful thing. Of > course, that's a lot more expensive than a Mustang, but it just shows > that forced induction + a V6 can be a real stump puller if set up properly. Nothing beats a factory engine built for forced induction to squeeze out cheap hp/tq. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> The new Mustangs have a 4.0L SOHC V-6 that makes 210 hp and around 240 > ft-lbs of torque. Install a blower and it will make 300+ rwhp and 350+ > rwtq. Plus for $6k-$7k more you can get a Mutang GT with 300+ hp. Vortech claims 65hp gain and 44ft/lbs. And that's at the crank. I haven't been able to find any numbers that jibe with your numbers above. I doubt you could boost a stock engine that much without other (expensive) work to the internals and fuel system. >> For import sedan fun, I'm actually partial to the Audi 2.7L twin >> turbo. With a cheap chip upgrade, that's good for 320hp and 380 >> ft/lbs of torque. In my big heavy A6 w/6sp, I routinely smoke kids in >> Mustang GTs. All that torque + all wheel drive is a wonderful thing. >> Of course, that's a lot more expensive than a Mustang, but it just >> shows that forced induction + a V6 can be a real stump puller if set >> up properly. > > > Nothing beats a factory engine built for forced induction to squeeze out > cheap hp/tq. Nope. 8-) Cheers, |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Nice car! Even in the looks department I like it.
I'll happily line up against your modded A6 at the drag strip though =).. in a Mustang GT that looks like the rest you've "smoked". It's a 1998 Ford Mustang GT... one or two mods. FRPP 3.73 gears, Flowmaster exhaust running dumps, cold air intake (pfff...), subframe connectors, wider rear tires (255/60R-15)... and a Zex dry nitrous kit (75 shot). On a dyno it managed (bottle pressure 1200psi) 273rwhp and 370rwtq (which equates to roughly 314hp & 426 ft-lb torque at crank). I was happy with the results. Car weighs 3,250lbs factory... 3,470lbs roughly with me driving it. When just piddling around on the streets it's been more than enough to tear into a "factory" Camaro SS & way more than enough to tear into a stock or near-stock Camaro z28. Ford did pretty good on these little 281's... 75 shot on the stock motor & no problems. There's an 03 SVT Cobra my buddy Tommy owns... he just recently put an NX wet kit on it (75 shot) after the pulley & chip upgrade.. cold air intake, etc.. putting out 545rwhp and 600rwtq... he runs low 11's all day long... but I'm pretty sure if he would learn how to launch he'd be in the 10's =). Obviously.. motors built from the factory for F/I devour all =). -Mike |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Ritz wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote: > >> The new Mustangs have a 4.0L SOHC V-6 that makes 210 hp and around 240 >> ft-lbs of torque. Install a blower and it will make 300+ rwhp and >> 350+ rwtq. Plus for $6k-$7k more you can get a Mutang GT with 300+ hp. > > > > Vortech claims 65hp gain and 44ft/lbs. And that's at the crank. I > haven't been able to find any numbers that jibe with your numbers above. > I doubt you could boost a stock engine that much without other > (expensive) work to the internals and fuel system. IMHO, it could do it. I've run 16 psi on a 150K stock short block 302. That 65 hp claim from Vortech is probably for 6 psi of boost. No self respecting blower fan runs less than 9 psi. >>> For import sedan fun, I'm actually partial to the Audi 2.7L twin >>> turbo. With a cheap chip upgrade, that's good for 320hp and 380 >>> ft/lbs of torque. In my big heavy A6 w/6sp, I routinely smoke kids >>> in Mustang GTs. All that torque + all wheel drive is a wonderful >>> thing. Of course, that's a lot more expensive than a Mustang, but it >>> just shows that forced induction + a V6 can be a real stump puller if >>> set up properly. >> >> >> >> Nothing beats a factory engine built for forced induction to squeeze >> out cheap hp/tq. > > > Nope. 8-) > > Cheers, |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mustang Kicks GTO Butt | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 14 | April 21st 05 01:34 AM |
2007 Shelby GT500 Mustang | Dan | Ford Mustang | 30 | March 25th 05 12:35 AM |
FORD TO INCREASE MUSTANG PRODUCTION TO MEET RUNAWAY CONSUMER DEMAND | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 1 | March 23rd 05 11:08 PM |
Mustang Returns to Sports Car Racing | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 0 | January 29th 05 05:39 PM |
21st Century Goat vs Mustang Shootout | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 1 | January 15th 05 06:09 PM |