mustang GT vs G35
The V6 mustang is actually really quick around a track because if the new suspension work. And being that its lighter and more balanced, it actually outperforms the GT on the tarmac, pulling .96 Gs around twisties. That's cray cray
Man this is an old thread.
New ecoboost 2.3L should be an interesting addition. Over 300HP from a 4-cylinder in a Mustang that should be lighter than past years...and no more solid axle
New ecoboost 2.3L should be an interesting addition. Over 300HP from a 4-cylinder in a Mustang that should be lighter than past years...and no more solid axle
Like with the vette, you could put a TT 3.8L, put some stout gearing in it, have it weight 2700lbs and running low 11s stock and people would never buy it. Corvettes have V8s and that's that for now. I think the same thing goes for most muscle cars.
I don't think it will go over. I had this convo about a vette awhile back. Putting a 4-banger, turbo or not, in a muscle car is gonna be seen as sacrilege. V6s are still laughed at in muscle cars even tho they get 306hp. America still has has the "bigger is better" idea, and I don't think its going away for awhile.
Like with the vette, you could put a TT 3.8L, put some stout gearing in it, have it weight 2700lbs and running low 11s stock and people would never buy it. Corvettes have V8s and that's that for now. I think the same thing goes for most muscle cars.
Like with the vette, you could put a TT 3.8L, put some stout gearing in it, have it weight 2700lbs and running low 11s stock and people would never buy it. Corvettes have V8s and that's that for now. I think the same thing goes for most muscle cars.
New 3.7L N/A with 305HP will start around $25K for a base model but for $26K you can get the Ecoboost model. The base model 5.0 starts at $33K.
The reason the SVO 2.3L of the 80's failed was because it was more expensive than the 5.0 at the time. You could buy a 205HP 4-cylinder, or a cheaper 200HP V8 and most went for the V8. Here, its the opposite situation where the turbo 4 is cheaper, and not that much more expensive than a N/A V6 model. Given the choice, financing an extra $1K for a turbo engine might be more appealing than financing $8K.
But you are right, the appeal of a torquey V8 is hard to overlook.
BTW...a fully loaded 2015GT convertible with all options...over $50K.
http://wot.motortrend.com/1406_2015_...sts_50475.html
On a sort of related subject, The numbers ford is getting out of the 3.5L TT ecoboost are pretty darn surprising. The V6 puts down a flatter torque curve and more torque than the 5.0 in the F-150!
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/04...8-engines.html
I own a '12 F150 supercrew FX4 with an ecoboost. That motor is a beast, and would keep the truck on pace with my G.
I wonder if ford will put a modified version of the v6 EB in a mustang.
I wonder if ford will put a modified version of the v6 EB in a mustang.
I dunno about that. The only truck I know that could beat the G is the srt10 RAM. Even the raptor f-150 is considerably slower than the G.
You know you would get so much **** for driving a TT 4 Banger. There is no way around that in the USA. I am loving all these efficient 2.3-2.7L T cars coming out... Just saying. But that's my views.
The raptor is slower than the ecoboost on paper btw. 0-60 6.0...for a full size truck that isn't bad.
No, not bad at all in a relative sense.
F150 Lightning?
I have the same ecoboost turbo 4 banger in my range and it definitely is no sports car, but it isnt a slouch either. I dont see it as sacrilege in the Mustang because the V8 will always be an option for the purists.