User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:34:05 AM EDT
Here's what I've gathered so far:
Flat plane crankshaft (those usually only go in race cars) that will enable it to hit an 8,000 RPM REDLINE. Holy wow. Over 600 horsepower NATURALLY ASPIRATED - no hot, heavy, unbalanced supercharger - how it should be. Price: around 50 Grand? If that's true, Ford is doing it right - making a high performance track vehicle for an unbelievable price. Artist rendition. The vents behind the front wheels are functional and supposedly going to be part of the package. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:49:22 AM EDT
[#1]
If what they're saying is true, I might have to trade my baby in:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:31:17 AM EDT
[#2]
No one really has any idea. It'll be announced this month though. They've done a good job at keeping quiet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:57:15 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If what they're saying is true, I might have to trade my baby in: http://s23.postimg.org/feiozplgr/boss.jpg Some nice stuff you have there. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 7:15:20 AM EDT
[#4]
What sized engine will kick out 600 hp naturally aspirated?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 7:51:00 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What sized engine will kick out 600 hp naturally aspirated? Well, if it's a 302... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 7:56:37 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, if it's a 302... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What sized engine will kick out 600 hp naturally aspirated? Well, if it's a 302... And you rev it to 8k. Won't have a stellar torque curve but it will have 600 hp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:00:14 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, if it's a 302... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What sized engine will kick out 600 hp naturally aspirated? Well, if it's a 302... Some speculation of an "odd" size. 5.2 or so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:09:41 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What sized engine will kick out 600 hp naturally aspirated? At 8000 rpm, that's only 394 lb-ft of torque. A stock 5.0 is 400 lb-ft. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:52:09 AM EDT
[#9]
Flat cranks have been made by many companies. They just don't sound 'murican, so uncommon here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:00:38 AM EDT
[#10]
If those numbers are true I would think about trading my junk in on one. Even though I would be giving up about 300 hp I think the rest of the package would be worth it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:15:05 AM EDT
[#11]
Sounds good, but thought they were going the other way, smaller 4 & 6 bangers with turbos, etc. NA is always cool.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:53:45 AM EDT
[#12]
Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials.
With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 11:00:05 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some nice stuff you have there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If what they're saying is true, I might have to trade my baby in: http://s23.postimg.org/feiozplgr/boss.jpg Some nice stuff you have there. Yes, very nice! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:33:59 PM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:38:00 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials. With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? EDIT: Screwed up this post when copying. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:41:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials. With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? Ford has, like most of the big volume brands, shied away from doing "one offs." Keeps production costs down, I would assume. It would be unlike a company as large as Ford to make a one-off, since it would require tooling and procedure changes, for what is likely to be a low volume model. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:41:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials. With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:42:50 PM EDT
[#18]
I'd drive that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:03:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They wouldn't have to ditch the mod in the other cars but to go to a flatplane crank would require a new block design, so it would be a completely new engine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials. With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? That sounds about right. From what I've read the new engine will be a 5.2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:46:18 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They wouldn't have to ditch the mod in the other cars but to go to a flatplane crank would require a new block design, so it would be a completely new engine. Why a new block design? "Flat" crankshafts don't need as much counterweight on the crank, so it is lighter, stronger and takes up less space in the block. It would need new camshafts, but for Ford, that would be no big deal. Firing order is different, but that is just a programming change. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:18:40 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why a new block design? "Flat" crankshafts don't need as much counterweight on the crank, so it is lighter, stronger and takes up less space in the block. It would need new camshafts, but for Ford, that would be no big deal. Firing order is different, but that is just a programming change. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They wouldn't have to ditch the mod in the other cars but to go to a flatplane crank would require a new block design, so it would be a completely new engine. Why a new block design? "Flat" crankshafts don't need as much counterweight on the crank, so it is lighter, stronger and takes up less space in the block. It would need new camshafts, but for Ford, that would be no big deal. Firing order is different, but that is just a programming change. The short answer is, it's just different. And honestly there's a reason Ferrari is really the only production car that regularly uses this crankshaft design, it's more of a racing application and will take some serious R&D to make it road worthy to Ford's NVH and reliability standards. I can tell you this, if it's under 3600 lbs, over 550 hp, and sounds even remotely like a ferrari....I will trade my shit in so fucking fast.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:29:06 PM EDT
[#22]
If Ford intro's a flat plane crank I predict lots of old Mustang fans to be butthurt with no TQ where they are used to it being. Likewise I predict lots of new Mustang fans coming to the scene. Ford is definitely going for the Euro vibe with the Mustang. First they went for the handling, which no doubt they will figure out and fine tune. Now a flat plane crank that offers less TQ in the "normal" ranges but is built more for carrying speed through the upper ranges of the RPM for track racing.
I can't imagine hearing a flatplane Mustang screaming at 7500 to 8000 RPM under load. That has got to sound like a slice of heaven.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:44:39 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because the older heavier larger crank just takes up more room, it wouldn't work to try and fit a flat plane where a cross plane crank used to be. I've already done research on this, you would not be able to swap the flat plane crank into a standard coyote block. They are developing a special harmonic balancer because flat plane cranks tend to cause more vibration, those could also be reasons for the new block design. Have to say I don't understand this part. The old part is bigger, so the new smaller part won't fit???? (If they did install a flat crank.) The short answer is, it's just different. And honestly there's a reason Ferrari is really the only production car that regularly uses this crankshaft design, it's more of a racing application and will take some serious R&D to make it road worthy to Ford's NVH and reliability standards. I can tell you this, if it's under 3600 lbs, over 550 hp, and sounds even remotely like a ferrari....I will trade my shit in so fucking fast. The vibration is an issue, and if they are looking at balance shafts or similar, then a new block makes sense. A few minutes of Googling did turn up some billet flat cranks for current Mod motors, but it sounds like the cams are the prohibitive cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 4:15:25 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Here's what I've gathered so far: Flat plane crankshaft (those usually only go in race cars) that will enable it to hit an 8,000 RPM REDLINE. Holy wow. Over 600 horsepower NATURALLY ASPIRATED - no hot, heavy, unbalanced supercharger - how it should be. Price: around 50 Grand? If that's true, Ford is doing it right - making a high performance track vehicle for an unbelievable price. Artist rendition. The vents behind the front wheels are functional and supposedly going to be part of the package. http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/25-cars-worth-waiting-for-11-2016-ford-mustang-shelby-gt350-inline-photo-585485-s-original.jpg Nice but I'll still keep my 65 GT350 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 4:32:32 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The vibration is an issue, and if they are looking at balance shafts or similar, then a new block makes sense. A few minutes of Googling did turn up some billet flat cranks for current Mod motors, but it sounds like the cams are the prohibitive cost. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Because the older heavier larger crank just takes up more room, it wouldn't work to try and fit a flat plane where a cross plane crank used to be. I've already done research on this, you would not be able to swap the flat plane crank into a standard coyote block. They are developing a special harmonic balancer because flat plane cranks tend to cause more vibration, those could also be reasons for the new block design. Have to say I don't understand this part. The old part is bigger, so the new smaller part won't fit???? (If they did install a flat crank.) The short answer is, it's just different. And honestly there's a reason Ferrari is really the only production car that regularly uses this crankshaft design, it's more of a racing application and will take some serious R&D to make it road worthy to Ford's NVH and reliability standards. I can tell you this, if it's under 3600 lbs, over 550 hp, and sounds even remotely like a ferrari....I will trade my shit in so fucking fast. The vibration is an issue, and if they are looking at balance shafts or similar, then a new block makes sense. A few minutes of Googling did turn up some billet flat cranks for current Mod motors, but it sounds like the cams are the prohibitive cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 4:56:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Not trying to be difficult, I just don't understand your point.
If the stroke is the same, the only portion of the crank that is 'more compact' are the counterweights. Bore spacing, stroke, etc. all remain the same. There have been flat cranks for small and big block Chevys and for small block (Windsor or Cleveland) Fords. All using the original blocks. What makes putting a flat crank in a Mod motor so much more difficult? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:08:11 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That sounds about right. From what I've read the new engine will be a 5.2. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone been able to find anything other than Internet hearsay about the flat-plane V8? This rumor has been flying about for a couple years at least, and nothing has been leaked or reported. Sounds like vaporware that traces it's roots back to a "Ford Insider" with dubious credentials. With the success of the 2nd gen Mod it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ditch it for something else. I don't follow automotive stuff much, so excuse what may be a dumb question. Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? That sounds about right. From what I've read the new engine will be a 5.2. You mean a 318? Neva been done befo!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:12:11 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not trying to be difficult, I just don't understand your point. If the stroke is the same, the only portion of the crank that is 'more compact' are the counterweights. Bore spacing, stroke, etc. all remain the same. There have been flat cranks for small and big block Chevys and for small block (Windsor or Cleveland) Fords. All using the original blocks. What makes putting a flat crank in a Mod motor so much more difficult? It's just different dude, do some googling.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:13:07 PM EDT
[#29]
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine.
Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:46:29 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's just different dude, do some googling. Never said it wasn't "different". I asked why a flat crank could not be used in the existing block. I did Google. You can buy a Mod motor flat crank. It can be done. Bore and/or stroke would change if they go to 5.2 with the current style crank. That isn't a reason a flat crank wouldn't work. Flat crank vibration tends to be more annoying than requiring additional strength in the block even at higher RPM due to lower rotating mass. (that's what Google said) Google.... turned up 9000 RPM flat crank small block Chevys with two bolt mains..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:09:49 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:16:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They said this Mustang was their push to go more global. High reving NA engines are all the rage in Europe. Look at every M3 prior to the F80 bodies. I think they're going after the M3/M4 segment, which I don't necessarily agree with. Even though the Mustang is always pitted against the M3 in the reviews, they people usually don't cross shop the two. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. Europe has moved on to less pistons and forced induction awhile ago. If that was their aim it's a day late and a dollar short. There's been plenty of talk over the years that the move to a V8 for one generation of the M sport 3-series vehicles was a inner company politics. The way they programmed the DME in the N54 kinda proves they were playing with big power with their first turbo I6 (N54). The load tables within the DME scale to 22lbs of boost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:01:55 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never said it wasn't "different". I asked why a flat crank could not be used in the existing block. I did Google. You can buy a Mod motor flat crank. It can be done. Bore and/or stroke would change if they go to 5.2 with the current style crank. That isn't a reason a flat crank wouldn't work. Flat crank vibration tends to be more annoying than requiring additional strength in the block even at higher RPM due to lower rotating mass. (that's what Google said) Google.... turned up 9000 RPM flat crank small block Chevys with two bolt mains..... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's just different dude, do some googling. Never said it wasn't "different". I asked why a flat crank could not be used in the existing block. I did Google. You can buy a Mod motor flat crank. It can be done. Bore and/or stroke would change if they go to 5.2 with the current style crank. That isn't a reason a flat crank wouldn't work. Flat crank vibration tends to be more annoying than requiring additional strength in the block even at higher RPM due to lower rotating mass. (that's what Google said) Google.... turned up 9000 RPM flat crank small block Chevys with two bolt mains..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:05:38 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Europe has moved on to less pistons and forced induction awhile ago. If that was their aim it's a day late and a dollar short. There's been plenty of talk over the years that the move to a V8 for one generation of the M sport 3-series vehicles was a inner company politics. The way they programmed the DME in the N54 kinda proves they were playing with big power with their first turbo I6 (N54). The load tables within the DME scale to 22lbs of boost. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. Europe has moved on to less pistons and forced induction awhile ago. If that was their aim it's a day late and a dollar short. There's been plenty of talk over the years that the move to a V8 for one generation of the M sport 3-series vehicles was a inner company politics. The way they programmed the DME in the N54 kinda proves they were playing with big power with their first turbo I6 (N54). The load tables within the DME scale to 22lbs of boost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:09:20 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They aren't making a flat plane swap crank for a coyote, they're making a new engine. Hence why the crank won't be compatible. That is an answer to a question not asked... 
Google provided the answer. If you have enough cubic dollars you can get a flat crank and cams for an existing mod motor. Nevermind, the rest. I thought you were saying there were technical reasons that it couldn't be done. It can. Will Ford? Doubtful, but we'll all know in the near future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:13:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree with you whole heartedly. I'm just going by what Ford was saying about this Mustang up to its release/reveal. And universally, almost everyone loves a high revving NA V8... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. Europe has moved on to less pistons and forced induction awhile ago. If that was their aim it's a day late and a dollar short. There's been plenty of talk over the years that the move to a V8 for one generation of the M sport 3-series vehicles was a inner company politics. The way they programmed the DME in the N54 kinda proves they were playing with big power with their first turbo I6 (N54). The load tables within the DME scale to 22lbs of boost. Yea a high revving NA V8 is a thing of glory I agree. It almost seems like ford is in a similar spot that BMW was in when it came time to design the successor to the S54. Ford even has some real world knowledge with the ecoboost engines but they obviously feel they're not quite ready to unleash their top engines as smaller turbo engines but it is neat it is on the menu when it comes to pick an engine for the new stang. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:38:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? You can't see the benefit of having an extra 1,500 RPMs (than say a GT500) at your disposal? That's an interesting point of view. Also, from what's being put out, the new GT350 is supposed to be something of a spawn of the Boss, a track-capable M3 killer at nearly half the price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:01:31 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can't see the benefit of having an extra 1,500 RPMs (than say a GT500) at your disposal? That's an interesting point of view. Also, from what's being put out, the new GT350 is supposed to be something of a spawn of the Boss, a track-capable M3 killer at nearly half the price. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? You can't see the benefit of having an extra 1,500 RPMs (than say a GT500) at your disposal? That's an interesting point of view. Also, from what's being put out, the new GT350 is supposed to be something of a spawn of the Boss, a track-capable M3 killer at nearly half the price. If rpms were the only part of equation I would agree with you, my views of engine output has changed since playing with turbos. An NA engine has no choice but to either raise displacement or up the revs to make more power. Doing the latter with NA will adjust the power curve to the higher revs and make it weak down low. All I'm saying is thats not the trend in engines these days for many obvious reasons. I will say it's pretty cool if they decide to make this setup, I have nothing against it if that's what people want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:30:58 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is an answer to a question not asked... Google provided the answer. If you have enough cubic dollars you can get a flat crank and cams for an existing mod motor. Nevermind, the rest. I thought you were saying there were technical reasons that it couldn't be done. It can. Will Ford? Doubtful, but we'll all know in the near future. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They aren't making a flat plane swap crank for a coyote, they're making a new engine. Hence why the crank won't be compatible. That is an answer to a question not asked... Google provided the answer. If you have enough cubic dollars you can get a flat crank and cams for an existing mod motor. Nevermind, the rest. I thought you were saying there were technical reasons that it couldn't be done. It can. Will Ford? Doubtful, but we'll all know in the near future. Of course someone could make a retrofit crank for a coyote but why? They're making an engine meant to have a flat plane. Not converting a coyote. You won't be able to take the crank from the new engine and drop it in a coyote. Not sure why this has baffled you.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:39:26 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
You won't be able to take the crank from the new engine and drop it in a coyote. Not sure why this has baffled you. It clearly has baffled YOU. I never asked about the new engine. I asked if a flat crank could be used in the current mod motor. My original question: Quoted:
Why would they have to "ditch" the Mod for a flat crank? A change cams and firing order is "all' that is required. No? You continue to answer a question that wasn't asked. It's okay. Google wasn't as baffled as you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 11:11:11 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is the stroke going to be the same if the new engine is 5.2 and the old one is 5.0 liters? Bore spacing will probably be the same, but bore and stroke could change. Are the journals going to be the same diameter? Same main caps for higher rpm? Same webbing and casting reinforcements in the block for higher vibration and RPM? It's just different dude, do some googling. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not trying to be difficult, I just don't understand your point. If the stroke is the same, the only portion of the crank that is 'more compact' are the counterweights. Bore spacing, stroke, etc. all remain the same. There have been flat cranks for small and big block Chevys and for small block (Windsor or Cleveland) Fords. All using the original blocks. What makes putting a flat crank in a Mod motor so much more difficult? It's just different dude, do some googling. My guess is that the plasma bore technology, or whatever they call it, that allowed them to bump the GT500 displacement is coming to the coyote. They went 5.4 to 5.8 The Coyote is a pretty amazing engine. Reading about ford's development of that motor, i cannot help but wonder if they experimented with a flat plane crank. Could be much of the work was already done. The 5.8 for the GT500 was clearly Ford getting serious about making engines geared for a special/unique model. I am not sure ifthose castings for the 5.8 were the same as the 5.4. But from what I read it sounds like the basic blocks were the same castings before getting the treatment to turn them into 5.8s. 5.2 should not be any issue for the Coyote if same techniques can be used. I wonder if the 5.2 can use roughly the same casting and just have slightly revised machining for their purposes. What the after market does with the 4.6 blocks and sleeving them out makes me think that ford can go a LONG way with Coyote castings. I love the idea of a high reving road/track Mustang v8. The traditional way of getting a 700hp street machine with rediculous traction issues doesnt really hold my interest. Having really long winding gears through 2nd and 3rd does though. It is time for something different. People dont want it? Buy the damn 5.0 with performance pack, add blower or turbos, and whatever GT350 parts you like and go get stupid fast in the same way they have been doing it for decades. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 12:36:46 PM EDT
[#42]
just released today
5.2 FPC Voodoo. 500+HP NA high reving. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vANCA3piYgM |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 12:54:34 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
just released today 5.2 FPC Voodoo. 500+HP NA high reving. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vANCA3piYgM 
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php/new-shelby-gt350-6265.html?s=bb6477b50813849675a25e1a4dbb2266& Exclamation New Shelby GT350 Mustang Revealed! 5.2L Flat Plane Crank V8, 500+HP / 400 LB-FT Specifications: 5.2L Flat Plane Crankshaft V8 Engine More than 500 HP / Torque Peak above 400 lb-ft MagneRide dampers "Light weight 6-speed manual transmission 19" aluminum wheels - 10.5 front / 11 inch rear Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires w/ GT350 specific sidewall construction, tread and compound Brakes: 6 piston brembo calipers front / 4 piston brembo calipers rear Torsional stiffness increased 28% over previous model Cutting edge injection molded carbon fiber composite grille Optional lightweight tower-to-tower brace Upraded gauges with reduced chrome finishes Flat bottom steering wheel Unique Sheetmetal Cloth Recaros |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 1:19:43 PM EDT
[#44]
I think I just .... Dang, now I need to change my pants. Holy crap, that thing is hot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 1:29:19 PM EDT
[#45]
Do I even want to know the cost?
I must have one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 1:53:38 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do I even want to know the cost? I must have one. My guess is look at optioned 2014 GT500 prices. Magnetic dampers with wide ass front/rear tires, looks like the Z28 is gonna have something seriously chasing it. Cant wait for nurbergring times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 2:39:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Ew. Ford.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 4:58:09 PM EDT
[#48]
Going to cost more than 50k op. If it was around 50k, I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 4:58:28 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Magnetic dampers with wide ass front/rear tires, looks like the Z28 is gonna have something seriously chasing humiliating it. Hope you enjoyed a little time up near the top GM. Get back to the rear where you belong. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 5:18:08 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I'm not understanding this move to a high revving NA engine. Flat plane crank engines being in race cars aside, how is a high revving engine moving forward on the street? It will need to be spun to the moon to put out power. The little Ecoboost in the Focus can put over 400ft/lbs of torque on an E85 tune. 500HP 4.2L NA engine is how it is moving forward. the Mustang 5.0 is already turning 6500RPMs. The GT350 turning over 7000RPMs is no big deal. We should all be jumping for joy over this step forward in Ford engine technology. Over 500HP NA in an 5.2L engine which gets decent MPG and complies with emissions requirements is commendable. If RPMs scare you, stick to a GT. Imagine what this engine will do with a blower or turbo. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
