Mustang 2006 Northstar Engine

Home  \  Domestic Cars  \  Mustang 2006 Northstar Engine

The 2005 Mustang uses a 4.0L 6V engine but I read somewhere they are getting rid of the 4.0L and replacing it with a new 4.5L Northstar engine for the 2006 Mustang models. Anyone know more about this?

posted by  zipper

What are you talking about?

First of all, the 2005 Mustang is going to have a 4.0 litre V6 not a 3.0. (Maybe it was a typo...) Secondly, why would Ford use an engine from Cadillac? And Lastly, the V6 used by Cadillac is a 3.6 litre and NOT a Northstar! Only the 4.6 litre V8 is a Northstar. Whoever told you that must've been half asleep because I've never heard any of that! :screwy:

posted by  moostang104314

Good job on being wrong in everything you just said...what a car NOOB!
:clap: I could tell you that I had a V-16 tri-turbo, twin supercharged Volkswagen GTi and you'd probably believe me! If you aren't knowledgible on the matter of automobiles, you should ask questions instead of making an ass of yourself...good work.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

to think he has such a nice stang in his sig...... :banghead:

posted by  Inygknok

This was definately on a car magazine. I forget which one, I think Road and Track. I just don't remember what exactly it said. Maybe I read it wrong. I'll try to find that article again. Sorry about the bad info's, I just wrote it off my head and I had the numbers screwed up. Sorry Sick88TBird, I will be more KNOWLEDGEABLE.

posted by  zipper

first of all, ford will never use a "Northstar" engine because they're cadillac engines. second...why would ford put a 4.5L V-6 in the stangs when 4.6L V-8's are going to be used in the GT models....doesn't make much sense. I guess they won't have an "econo" model? yeah right. The 4.0L is here to stay...regardless of what variation it will be. Starting with the '05 models ford will be using a new 3-valve cylinder head on the 4.6's which bumps up standard hp to about 300 ponies. If ford were using 5.4's in the new stangs then I'd say it may be a possibility that they were considering a pumped up version of the 4.0L but neither of those things are happening. Don't always go by what a 2-yr old mag has to say. Car and Driver as well as Road and Track usually publish rumors as opposed to waiting for a press release from auto makers. These magazines also have a tendency to publish pics and specs from concept cars which often change greatly before going into production.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

Well you never know, GM bought a bunch of SOHC 3.5L V-6's from Honda to use in the Saturn Vue Redline (250hp..but the same engine goes up to 265hp in the Honda/Acura line). I hear GM can't get power out of thier sixes :orglaugh:

posted by  thunderbird1100

True true. I was thinking of the same thing when I read this thread. Of course, in my opinion, it would be out of place to claim Honda/Acura as the main competitor to Ford Motor Co. I'd chalk that up to GM. Personally, I don't remember any article in Road & Track mentioning Ford using a Northstar engine. That would be totally counterproductive to everything that Ford stands for- which seems to be all about competing with GM. Utilization of the Northstar engine would be like holding up a flag that says, "Ford pays big bucks to #1 competitor in order to use Northstar engine since Ford can't make one themselves." Even if Ford were in diar straights- they'd never resort to sharing something with GM. :screwy:

posted by  Patrick

I agree, whilest GM sells the most cars out of all the automakers in the world. They also probably like to borrow a lot of engines because they can't seem to get enough power out of their OHV designs. Their OHC engines were always pretty unreliable. So what do you do? Get the OHC engines from one of the BEST reliable OHC engine makers in the world. Honda.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Over hear OHV engines went out in the 80's and early 90's, but then there is more need to extract power from smaller capacitys.

There are very few SOHC engines in new models except comman rail diesels, most petrol engines are DOHC and there is a big push to VVC now.

posted by  cinqyg

Actually there are probably more SOHC engines still than DOHc. Although I'm not going to count each one's from each manfacturer...Honda relies on SOHC heads for it's J30 Accord (v6), D17 civic, J35 Pilot and Odyssey, J32 TL, whatever 3.5 is in the RL and J35 in the MDX. Honda's only DOHC cars are the following

K24 - Accord (I4),CR-V,TSX,Element
K20 - Civic Si,RSX
f22c - S2000
C32 - NSX

A lot of those DOHC engined cars are low volume like the NSX/S2000/Civic Si/TSX/Element. All the SOHC one's are considered high volume except possibly the RL.

posted by  thunderbird1100

To say that GM can't make decent hp out of their 6cyl's is total crap. 85-87 Grand Nationals and Regal T-Types for example. How about the Supercharged 3800 series??? Yeah I know, those are both examples of forced induction...but how about the 3.4DOHC? Not by any means a monster...but it still makes decent horsepower and responds quite well to mods. the 4.3 was also a good engine...again no power-monger but it was a 350 with the back 2 cylinders chopped off, good torque and decent hp. Now there is the 4.2 straight six...advertised 275hp. So, to say that GM can't make power out of their six cylinders isn't true. But, GM is searching for new alternatives and being as sales aren't very good right now(at least Chevy), it makes more sense for them to buy engines off someone else. By doing this, they save money on research and development of a new engine. It's a wise financial decision for GM, but it shows the public that all is not well.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

To me the GM 3.8 has mostly been joke considering they only have made power out of it with forced induction. The Monte Carlo SS and Impala SS have a Series II s/c'ed 3.8 and make a measly 240hp...Whilest Honda has the Accord J30 which makes the same 240hp (with a rather old SOHC head) with a n/a 3.0L V-6 (while the Accord can run mid 14s EASILY and the other two are stuck at flat 15s). That's when you know you arent making enough power when your supercharged engines that are bigger in size the ones that are n/a and make the same power. Now I know you're screaming 'what about the series III s/c'ed 3.8 in the GTP, that's 260hp'. My rebuttle? The same engine from the Accord (the J30) makes 270hp, n/a still, in the new TL while only being a bit larger in displacement at 3.2L (so, yes, it's still SOHC). That makes even the 3.4 OHV from GM look puny with it's measly 185hp and 210ft lbs (the J32 in the TL makes 240ftlbs..30 more ft-lbs but has .2L less displacement). What 3.4 DOHC engine from GM are you talking about? I know they make a 3.2 DOHC and 3.6 DOHC (rated at 225hp and 255hp). The OHV 4300 is just another 'blah' engine (190hp? who cares..although tuned more towards torque..it still doesnt make anything spectacular for that size of an engine). The 4.2 inline six has been acclaimed to be overrated by GM. Every-place I see they test it in the trailblazer they all say 'does this thing really have 275hp?'. I even have a comparison test somewhere where a 240hp FWD Pilot smoked it (BTW- they have a A-spec version of the J32 making 300hp n/a, yup, still SOHC...gives up a liter in displacement but has '25' more hp {more like 40-50}). There's only one reason why GM borrowed the J35 from Honda. What on earth engine would they stick in a small SUV that's supposed to be quick? Can't do a supercharged four, not enough power. Can't throw in one of their clunky old v6's with 200hp. Certainly not going to throw in the top of the line CTS 3.6 DOHC in there. So what do you do? Borrow an engine that makes power from one of the best power/displacement manfacturers in the world.

posted by  thunderbird1100

The 3.4L DOHC engine I'm referring to showed up primarily in W-bodied GM cars as early as 94(as far as I can remember)...i.e.- later model Grand Am GT's, Grand Prix GT's, 94-until the current model Monte Carlo SS(two door lumina) as well as select Oldsmobile cutlass models. The 3.4L dohc was nothing to sneeze at, rated (in the monte's) at 200-220hp...these cars were quite light and capable of smoking new mustang gt's with nothing more than a good exhaust system and cold air intake. GM is doing a damn fine job of making horsepower when you consider(with the exception of the ohc engines) that they're doing it with an engine straight from the mid-70's(3.8L). The shortblocks for the 3.8L engines have been the same since the 70's, the cylinder heads have remained unchanged through the years also. You're apparently an import fan, so you're opinion is probably a little biased. When you compare the Trailblazer's inline six with the Pilot's 240hp v-6, keep in mind that suv's aren't designed to be "fast"....the trailblazer is a fat bitch, but it could easily out-tow your little pilot and that's what it was made for, as well as reliability(as far as the shortblock is concerned).

posted by  Sick88Tbird

i am very good friends with an engineer at General motors, we started talking about the v-6 and ecotec motors, the motors he is part of the design team of. these are the power numbers he gave me for the new 3900 series V-6 260hp naturaly aspirated and 310hp supercharged. he said that on dyno mules they are also getting 240 hp out of the supercharged 2.2 ecotec motors. (though he says that seeing that as a production motor probobly isnt going to happen)

one thing also to consider is that my father was a crew cheif durring the 80's in ASA stock car racing, they ran a 4.3 liter v-6 with more than 600 horsepower, the 4.3 isnt built for horse power. gm doesnt want to. although there are special 4.3 forced induction motors such as that in the typhoon and cyclone that rocketed those 4000lb trucks into the 13's... just some food for thought

posted by  hardcore86MCSS

Guys, GM has no problem designing decent engines. In fact, teh Honda/GM deal was so that Honda could buy diesel engines from GM-owned Isuzu. Honda had been looking for diesel and large engines for a few years before inking the deal with GM.

So, as typical, the opinionated little boys on message boards go off on how GM can't make small engines, so have to get them from Honda. :banghead:

posted by  ChrisV

I agree with you on this one , the 3.4 litre dohc that GM produced from 90 -97 was originally designed and qualified at 280 HP and about 285 ft/lbs torque , but GM in thier invinite wisdom couldn't come up with a FWD trany at the time to handle the power , so they did the unthinkable they de-tuned it . There are lots of guys who think this is a crap engine , mostly cause they blow them up by not changing the timing belt , but these engines , although being somewhat tempermental , where the proving ground for the entire "Northstar" series of engines .
And where built to be almost bullit proof , Read Forged Crank , Rods & "hemispherical " pistons , which means anyone with a tune computer and some very minor cams adjustments can get over 300 Hp and Torque out of it !!!!
I have one and have personal blown away a number of things like twin turbo stealths , Z-1 vettes , 911's (yes I said 911's) , etc , etc . Regards ARG :2cents:

posted by  Rythim034

GM LY7 V6
Used in the Cadillac CTS, STS (255hp), and SRX (260hp).

The initial offering is in the 3.6L displacement, though variants will be manufactured in 2.8L, 3.2L and 3.8L sizes. Power ranges from 200 to 370 hp, while torque runs from 200 lb-ft to more than 350 lb-ft. The 3.6L in the CTS and STS provides 255 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque. A lesser version will be made available to Buick.

- all-aluminum construction
- dual overhead camshafts (DOHC)
- 4-valves per cylinder
- roller-finger follower valvetrain
- continuously variable cam phasing
- electronic throttle control
- forged-steel crankshaft
- piston-cooling oil jets
- Oil Life System
- 32-bit microprocessor (a state-of-the-art 32-bit, 25 MHz microprocessor, the most powerful in use in the industry)
- coil-on-plug ignition
http://service.gm.com/gmtechlink/images/issues/feb04/TLfeb04e.html#story7

Potential?
Lund Performance engineering has supercharged a 3.2L V6 CTS to 1100hp and set the world land speed record for it's class at the Bonneville salt flats.

Don't say that GM can't build a world class V6...

posted by  Gothicaleigh

Thank you for continuing to prove my point. GM can build power from their six cylinder engines, hands down.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

WOW! THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!! A NORTHSTAR ENGINE IN A MUSTANG!! WAIT, I KNOW SOMETHING BETTER!!! AN ELECTRIC CAR!!! For one, The Northstar is a 4.0L in the Olds and a 4.6L in the Caddy. Which brings me to my next point the Northstar is a GM engine. That makes no since for FORD to buy from GM!!!!! Good try on trying to start a conversation about cars though!

posted by  inyourface

Good job of reviving a dead thread :screwy:

posted by  99integra

You took the words right out of my...well...keyboard?

posted by  Sick88Tbird

Your Message