Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: 50tbrd88 on January 13, 2012, 10:33:20 AM
Wonder how long the HP ratings can stay up and still meet EPA mpg standards? Its like the 2nd coming of the muscle car era right now and I'm loving it!
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: nbzimmer on January 13, 2012, 12:11:12 PM
Sure seems like the Ecoboost is the future.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: thunderjet302 on January 13, 2012, 12:17:44 PM
What no "Ecoboost" 5.8 V8 for the Shelby GT500? That's where it should go. The power of a V10 with the gas mileage of a V8 ;).
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: T-BirdX3 on January 13, 2012, 02:49:48 PM
Quote from: nbzimmer;377622
Sure seems like the Ecoboost is the future.
Turbos have offered the best combination of efficient performance for a long time now. They just have the downside of being more expensive to purchase.
I can't help but to wonder how far the turbo cars would have come already if Ford had continued with the turbo four cylinders back in the late 80's.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: mcb82gt on January 13, 2012, 07:33:33 PM
Quote from: 50tbrd88;377614
Its like the 2nd coming of the muscle car era right now and I'm loving it!
I agree. I think it is even more so now, the HP ratings, retro styling, and much better MPG.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 13, 2012, 08:35:10 PM
i don't know why, but i'm not feeling the muscle car '2nd era' thing at all.. the mustang and camaro never struck me as muscle cars.. a muscle car in my mind is a big car with big power.. ie - torinos, chevelles, etc etc.. plus the whole gas mileage aspect of it doesn't fit in with it for me..
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: shame302 on January 13, 2012, 08:39:03 PM
The current "6" is decent but OMG, thank you for this Ford if it happens. I didn't think it would happen either, and I hope it does.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 13, 2012, 08:47:47 PM
Mustangs and cougars could have had more power stock then a chevelle, and not much lighter. I think in 1967 the mustang actually weighed more then the chevelle. More gas mileage is better. Why wouldn't you want it to be better?
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: T-BirdX3 on January 13, 2012, 08:55:05 PM
Quote from: Shadow;377679
i don't know why, but i'm not feeling the muscle car '2nd era' thing at all.. the mustang and camaro never struck me as muscle cars.. a muscle car in my mind is a big car with big power.. ie - torinos, chevelles, etc etc.. plus the whole gas mileage aspect of it doesn't fit in with it for me..
Personally I don't care if you call them muscle cars, sports cars, or super cars anything that pushes over 400 hp and can come with a 6 speed, from the factory, is awesome in my book. The funny part is these new performance cars are much better at everything compared to anything made in the late 60's early 70's.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 13, 2012, 09:10:15 PM
Quote from: Haystack;377681
More gas mileage is better. Why wouldn't you want it to be better?
it's not a concern to me.. call me spoiled or stupid, but i'd rather have a 600rwhp/10-12mpg pushrod motor than 500rwhp/25+mpg OHC motor.. i don't really care about gas mileage, never have and probably never will.. i'll only ever care if gas prices reach $5/gallon, which it's never even reached $4 around here.. if/when it does, i'll start mixing with methanol again, which i still do with my capri and blue bird anyway
Quote from: T-BirdX3;377682
The funny part is these new performance cars are much better at everything compared to anything made in the late 60's early 70's.
performance wise, of course.. 30-40+ years of innovation better have produced better numbers, or else they should have just hung it up.. but as far as styling, i'm sorry, but there's nothing about these newer cars that would ever make me want to own 1 over the original.. especially the disgusting camaro and ford's eff up on the redesign of the 'restrostang..'
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 14, 2012, 01:15:53 PM
Having paid over $4 a gallon, I even filled a 22 gallon tank just shy of $5 a gallon. I think your an idiot.
Methonal also uses about twice the amount of fuel as gas, so unless it costs less then half, you are wasting your time. Amd he more efficiantly your motor is running, the better power, and to an extent, the better gas mileage you should be getting. I kniw guys with 300hp carbs that are getting 25+. I also know several people that used to tune vw's that were getting 1.6 liters over 200hp, and over 50mpg.
If you can't get better power with decent mileage your doing it wrong.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 01:47:26 PM
300rwhp is a far cry from 600+rwhp, in terms of everything.. i don't know what the actual numbers are with the capri, as it's never seen a dyno in it's life, but it averages 14mpg with 1 gallon of methanol to 21 gallons of gas (running 22 gallon fuel cell).. i'm totally fine with the gas mileage it gets, as the power is incredible, both on the street and at the track.. i only pay $130 for a 55 gallon drum of methanol, when i buy more than 1.. i always buy at least 2, because the micros run on methanol.. at $130 for 55 gallons, it comes to about $2.36 a gallon.. usually, i buy 4 drums and sell it at the track for $4 a gallon, plus $3 for a pint of Benol (methanol 2 stroke oil), so it's making me money.. not costing me a cent
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: V8Demon on January 14, 2012, 02:04:57 PM
Quote from: thunderjet302;377624
What no "Ecoboost" 5.8 V8 for the Shelby GT500? That's where it should go. The power of a V10 with the gas mileage of a V8 ;).
The 2013 GT500 is already replete with V10 power.... http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/drives/2013-ford-shelby-gt500
As far as gas mileage they're saying no gas guzzler tax. Not bad for a 650 HP car that is capable of 200 MPH out of the box for an estimated 60-65K. If things play out right for me, this is on the buy list.
Quote
the mustang and camaro never struck me as muscle cars.. a muscle car in my mind is a big car with big power.
Considering at what these 2 particular cars tip the scales at nowadays I think it's safe to put them into that category as opposed to the older ones which were indeed "pony cars." Big difference is the new ones can actually negotiate the twisties.
Quote
but there's nothing about these newer cars that would ever make me want to own 1 over the original.. especially the disgusting camaro and ford's eff up on the redesign of the 'restrostang..'
To each his own with regards to style, but it's hard to deny the appeal of progress. Case in point: My 2005 has extensive powertrain mods and a decent amount of suspension mods. Bottom 12's/high 11's are where it sits at the moment. Right in line with a bone stock 30s Boss Laguna Seca.....
I just flipped though an issue of Car and Driver the other day. Road test of a Buick....it hit .90g on the skidpad..... A BUICK!
Me & the wife just purchased a brand new Focus with the 2.0. I;m actually bummed that we were in such need of a reliable commuter at the time because I would have loved to have waited the few months and got the turbo version.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 14, 2012, 02:26:47 PM
How is it much different? If I know 5 guys that can get 300 hp from a carbed 302 and 25mpg, why couldn't someone with a wideband and fuel injection get 600 out of a larger and more powerful motor? How are they getting 400hp and 30mpg out of the mustangs and camaros? The more efficent and engine runs, the better power it will get. You mixing in methonal just hurts gas mileage and changes your tune. You might get better power, but it kills your mileage.
Remember david claffin on sbftech. I think he is running 11's and getting 28mpg highway.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Thunder Chicken on January 14, 2012, 03:28:32 PM
Quote from: Shadow;377679
i don't know why, but i'm not feeling the muscle car '2nd era' thing at all.. the mustang and camaro never struck me as muscle cars.. a muscle car in my mind is a big car with big power.. ie - torinos, chevelles, etc etc.. plus the whole gas mileage aspect of it doesn't fit in with it for me..
Considering that a bone stock run-of-the-mill V6 (or 4-cyl turbo) midsize family car would run rings around just about any so-called "muscle car" from the 60's (at least everything except the ragged edge, barely even streetable, rare-as-hell-because-nobody-bought-them-back-then top-end big block cars like the Hemi Belvederes, 427 Galaxies, etc), in every category from straight line acceleration to skidpad to figure 8 to slalom to fuel economy to safety to reliability, and considering that if a ~280 hp family car isn't enough for you, you can always buy an SHO, 300C, Charger R/T, etc, and if that isn't enough you can step up to an SRT8 300C or Charger, AND considering that most of these are cars that aren't even considered fast nowadays (all but the SRT8's anyway) when compared to others that really are fast, I can only say this: I'm certainly glad that the automotive industry doesn't fret too much over the muscle car in your mind.
There is no doubt about it: The golden age of the automobile is right now. Cars are more powerful and perform better in every aspect right now than they ever have and will ever be (with looming CAFE sphincter clenching and more expensive fuel). Actually I shouldn't say that: Advanced technology means we will not see another Decade of Suck (known to car guys as the 70's). Back then it was a choice: Performance or economy/emissions (and unfortunately the government made that choice). Nowadays we can have both. Cars will likely get lighter and will perform better because of it, but they'll also come with smaller, more efficient engines. This has already happened - the Mustang is lighter than the Camaro and has a smaller engine, but eats its lunch performance wise. Ford has promised a lighter 2015 Mustang, as GM has promised a lighter Camaro and Chrysler has promised a lighter Challenger (or Cuda, whatever they call it)....
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 03:58:56 PM
Quote from: Haystack;377719
How is it much different? If I know 5 guys that can get 300 hp from a carbed 302 and 25mpg, why couldn't someone with a wideband and fuel injection get 600 out of a larger and more powerful motor? How are they getting 400hp and 30mpg out of the mustangs and camaros? The more efficent and engine runs, the better power it will get. You mixing in methonal just hurts gas mileage and changes your tune. You might get better power, but it kills your mileage.
Remember david claffin on sbftech. I think he is running 11's and getting 28mpg highway.
i used my desktop dyno to get a ballpark flywheel number on the capri.. mind you, it's a stupid computer program and not all too accurate.. with that said, it says my 408 at 18psi is pushing about 945 at the flywheel, over estimated by at least 100, i'd think..
anyway, we'll use 845 at the flywheel, subtract 100 for drivetrain loss and say 745rwhp (just for the example).. back that with a worked C6, 3500 stall (non-lockup) and 4.10's.. yes, the lack of OD and the 4.10's hurt, but i don't drive on the highway.. no need to, when 90% of the places i go are within 15 miles..
with straight gas, i got 15-16mpg at 12psi.. when i bumped to 18psi after the F.A.S.T. system and unmixed gas, i was averaging 10-12mpg.. when i started mixing and went for a re-tune, i gained mileage, due to the cooler burn of the methanol and the tune to adapt the mix.. between my lack of OD, gear rear and amount of boost, getting over 20mpg isn't possible.. especially since i'm contemplating 20-22psi, since she may be used as a 8.0 or 10.0 index car this year
would i gain mileage by switching to an OD trans? most certainly.. will it last as long as my C6 for the amount of money i put into it? never.. i'd have to spend double to make it hold up to what the C6 is rated at now.. do i need the OD? not 1 bit.. cruising at ~50mph, the rpm's sit around 26-2700.. do i ever drive it over 50 on the street? sure, but hardly ever and when i am, it's under full boost..
and as for the newer stangs getting great gas mileage with big power, it's purely all innovation, design and development.. if you think ford just put together a motor and threw it in a car and that was the end result, you're sadly mistaken.. i'm sure ford's development team spent months on a computer, designing the new coyote 5.0 to have more power than the mustang is known for, as well as the fuel economy of a 4 cylinder (obviously not current 4cyl standards, but take it back 3-4 years and the economy numbers are close)
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 04:10:35 PM
Quote from: Thunder Chicken;377725
Considering that a bone stock run-of-the-mill V6 (or 4-cyl turbo) midsize family car would run rings around just about any so-called "muscle car" from the 60's (at least everything except the ragged edge, barely even streetable, rare-as-hell-because-nobody-bought-them-back-then top-end big block cars like the Hemi Belvederes, 427 Galaxies, etc), in every category from straight line acceleration to skidpad to figure 8 to slalom to fuel economy to safety to reliability, and considering that if a ~280 hp family car isn't enough for you, you can always buy an SHO, 300C, Charger R/T, etc, and if that isn't enough you can step up to an SRT8 300C or Charger, AND considering that most of these are cars that aren't even considered fast nowadays (all but the SRT8's anyway) when compared to others that really are fast, I can only say this: I'm certainly glad that the automotive industry doesn't fret too much over the muscle car in your mind.
There is no doubt about it: The golden age of the automobile is right now. Cars are more powerful and perform better in every aspect right now than they ever have and will ever be (with looming CAFE sphincter clenching and more expensive fuel). Actually I shouldn't say that: Advanced technology means we will not see another Decade of Suck (known to car guys as the 70's). Back then it was a choice: Performance or economy/emissions (and unfortunately the government made that choice). Nowadays we can have both. Cars will likely get lighter and will perform better because of it, but they'll also come with smaller, more efficient engines. This has already happened - the Mustang is lighter than the Camaro and has a smaller engine, but eats its lunch performance wise. Ford has promised a lighter 2015 Mustang, as GM has promised a lighter Camaro and Chrysler has promised a lighter Challenger (or Cuda, whatever they call it)....
yes, the auto industry is in it's prime right now, but i still don't get that muscle car feel.. again, of course they're going to perform better and be more consumer friendly than the cars of the past, but it's just not the same feel.. i understand it's the second coming of the muscle car era and things will be 'better' in comparison, but they just don't strike me as the cars from the first era.. could it be the fact that i'm entirely anti plastic and paper thin sheet metal? most likely.. and the styling could be a little more desirable.. i also believe adding a 2nd performance model would really make it more of a muscle car era than it is, currently.. in the 60's and 70's, you didn't have 1 high performance car to choose from, you had several.. right now, GM is the only 1 with 2 performance cars, although i despise corvettes, no matter what year/body style.. plus the vette isn't a 'muscle car' by any means, as you all should agree.. it's a 2 seater sports car
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Thunder Chicken on January 14, 2012, 06:40:03 PM
Back in the 60's they weren't all muscle cars either. For every GTO, SS, Super Bee and Cobra Jet there were eleventy-two million six cylinder and small V8 (you know, the 289's, 273's, 327's, etc) Tempests, Chevelles, Chargers and Fairlanes. Back then they weren't "Muscle cars", they were "intermediates", and for the most part they were every bit as boring as my 2011 4-cylinder Sonata.
Same thing goes in that "New Dart" thread. Some have said that Chrysler is blashpeming the "Legendary" Dart name by pasting it onto an economy car. I say bullshiznit. The new Dart will fill the exact same slot in the automotive landscape that the originals did: The bottom feeder in Mopar's lineup. The original Dart was never meant to be a performance car, and probably 90% of them left the plant with slant 6's and 318's. And the few 340 and Big-Block Darts that were made will undoubtedly be echoed in modern times by a 4-cylinder turbo Dart that will blow the doors off of any original version except maybe the exceedingly rare Hurst-built Hemi and 440 race cars.
And styling is subjective. Back in the 60's and 70's nobody thought any more of those designs than people think of current ones now. Rarely is a car built to become a classic; it happens retroactively. Lord knows what cars will look like in 2052, but whatever that year brings, people may just look back on the plebian cars of 2012 with fondness...
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 06:45:28 PM
i'm afraid to see what cars will look like in 2052.. i forsee a bunch of retarded looking electric vehicles like GM's concept car.. i forget what it was called, but it was an ugly, wannabe sports car looking high tech.. 'thing'
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Thunder Chicken on January 14, 2012, 08:49:05 PM
Quote
but it was an ugly, wannabe sports car looking high tech.. 'thing'
...Which is probably what the original owner of a Stutz Bearcat or Cord 810 would have said about a '68 Chevelle, or '64 GTO, or '69 Torino, or '68 Charger, etc had they shown such a "concept" at the 1929 auto shows...
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 09:13:36 PM
this thing takes the cake on ugliest thing i've ever seen.. some people may think it's 'cool' or 'neat'.. but i see no appeal what-so-ever :barf:
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 14, 2012, 09:55:51 PM
or, you could get a gear splitter, giving you 3 overdrive gears, or switch to a higher gear. Just because you can't get good mileage out of a car doesn't mean no one can.
If you remember right, our cougars and birds were cutting edge and thinking outside the box when they came out.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 10:02:23 PM
Quote from: Haystack;377751
or, you could get a gear splitter, giving you 3 overdrive gears, or switch to a higher gear. Just because you can't get good mileage out of a car doesn't mean no one can.
If you remember right, our cougars and birds were cutting edge and thinking outside the box when they came out.
the mileage isn't a concern, so a gear splitter would be a complete waste of my money. that i could be spending on something i actually do want.. likke putting it towards a lemco for my black car ;) .. the car is all about power, nothing else.. i don't even care how it takes corners, it's built to go balls to the wall in a straight line.. it's mainly a streetable race car with a full interior
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 14, 2012, 10:26:46 PM
To me, streetable means you could drive it on the freeway without doing 50 or blowing up the motor, in most places, pass emissions. A race car you can drive on the street is much different from a streetable car.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 10:43:33 PM
she passed emissions ;) .. LEGALLY! i can do 65 on the highway, but i don't like cruising with the RPM's above 3k.. but that's not an issue, as the car doesn't see the highway, ever.. never will, as i will never let the car go.. there's too much blood, sweat and tears of joy wrapped into the car to ever let someone else even drive it.. plus it's the first car i've ever owned that went under 10.0, so it's sentimental value in a dollar amount is more than bill gates could afford.. it's my baby
but it's very streetable, or else i would have made a couple changes including gearing and psi to make it that way
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 14, 2012, 11:02:05 PM
Every streetable car I have seen people drove for hours straight on the freeway. Maybe that's why people are buying the newer "retro" cars that get good gas mileage. They musy actually own newer cars to drive them.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 14, 2012, 11:10:44 PM
i could, but i won't.. no need to
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: xjeffs on January 15, 2012, 09:57:50 AM
I don't really see the point. 247hp for a 3600 lbs car, undoubtedly with small low end torque sounds like a poor performer and a waste of effort to me. 300 hp and 30mpg sounds like a tough combo to beat. The 247hp would have to be around 38mpg and $5k less to draw away from the current base model, and I don't see that happening.
Edit- in retrospect, this has to be a replacement for the 3.7L with a ~300+hp Ecoboost four cylinder with 35mpg and about 100lbs less curb weight. No way they are keeping both. They will soon learn that with the Explorer.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 15, 2012, 01:31:31 PM
Its just like back in the 80's with the 4 cylinder turbo, v-6 and v-8 in the cougarbirds.
Honestly, I think the i-4 is to perform in other car classes. For some reason kids are inlove with turbo 4's.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Thunder Chicken on January 15, 2012, 03:31:08 PM
If the 4-cyl is anything like the 6-cyl ecoboost (which produces more torque across a flatter curve than the 5.0 in trucks) torque will not be an issue. With twin-scroll turbos, direct fuel injection and modern engine management most small turbomotors make loads of torque. Even BMW is equipping the 3-series with a turbo 4 that makes slightly less horsepower but more torque than the 6. And the torque curves on modern turbo 4's are flat as a table from 1500 RPM to redline.
That being said I doubt the ecoboost 4 would only make 247 in the Mustang. I'd expect it to at least match the 3.7, and probably exceed it. At any rate it'll at least match the 274 horses coming for the 2013 Genesis 2.0t. Still, I'd rather see a turbo 3.7 belting out ~400 horsepower...
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Ether947 on January 15, 2012, 07:49:10 PM
Hell, even if it makes 247hp stock (which seems low), it won't for long. Flashing a map takes all of 5mins with opensource software these days. Now if it has a low ceiling... then I'll be disappointed.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Shadow on January 19, 2012, 12:56:39 AM
Quote from: Haystack;377794
For some reason kids are inlove with turbo 4's.
i assume is the power to mpg ratio they've been known for all these years.. i know a few import nerds who only got into their rice boxes because they could make gobs of power and still see 25+mpg on a daily basis.. all of the tuner guys i know, would rather be driving something with a full heart-ed small/big block under the hood, but they can't afford the gas because of only working part time while they're still in school or whatever.. i turned a couple of them on to the turbo coupe's mpg and power capabilities and 1 of them is currently trying to sell/trade his sh*tbox boosted 91 integra for 1 lol
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: Haystack on January 19, 2012, 03:21:19 AM
8 know a kid with about 60k into a subaru. Thinks the car is the shiznit, passes emissions, really fast, has a cosworth block ext.
He gets 6 miles to the gallon. He is convinced its because he put in the 3" exhaust, so now he is going to swap it out for 2.5" cat back because he doesn't think he makes back pressure.
It dyno's 397whp on a 4 wheel dyno on the lowest tune and over 600 in it highest tune.
Its a cool car, but in my opinion, the way it sits, its useless. This I assume is all in the tune.
I was getting 30mpg with my thunderbird. I used to get even better out of other 5.0 cars I had. Guy at my work was driving a turbo'd eclipse and got right around 20mpg. You can throw all the money you want into your car and not be able to drive it. The trick is getting one car that you can drive, get good gas mileage, and have it reliable.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: V8Demon on January 19, 2012, 11:22:45 PM
Quote from: xjeffs;377785
I don't really see the point. 247hp for a 3600 lbs car, undoubtedly with small low end torque sounds like a poor performer and a waste of effort to me. 300 hp and 30mpg sounds like a tough combo to beat. The 247hp would have to be around 38mpg and $5k less to draw away from the current base model, and I don't see that happening.
Edit- in retrospect, this has to be a replacement for the 3.7L with a ~300+hp Ecoboost four cylinder with 35mpg and about 100lbs less curb weight. No way they are keeping both. They will soon learn that with the Explorer.
I suspect it will have a rather broad torque range as compared to a normally aspirated engine of comparable peak power. Example: The Ecoboost V6 in the new F-150 as compared to the larger V8's in the same chassis. Harken back to the 2005 S197 and the V6 which displaced twice as much volume. Don't forget that this new mill has direct injection as well. More power than our beloved turbo coupes with comparable weight and more gears.....It's no Laguna Seca, but will be more than adequate for the average person.
Quote
The original Dart was never meant to be a performance car, and probably 90% of them left the plant with slant 6's and 318's
The old man had a '76 with a slant 6. That motor would not die. He sold it and shortly thereafter it caught fire due to an electrical issue that had popped up.
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: jcassity on March 05, 2012, 02:07:29 AM
i wonder why the slant 6 motors do live so long....... ?
Title: Ecoboost Stang coming soon!
Post by: V8Demon on March 05, 2012, 05:24:53 PM
Quote
he doesn't think he makes back pressure.
Oh God.....Those of you who've been around for a bit know my stance on this..... Backpressure = BAD /rant.