Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-24-2005, 02:18 AM   #46
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
The V6 model is still not worthy of any praise from me. Basically it's still a slow POS as they didnt really improve anything power wise by just dropping in the Explorer/Ranger 4.0L V6 with a whopping 210hp...Brings me to my next point. Why cant Ford get ANY damn power out of this 4.0L V6? Nissan's Frontier has a 4.0L V6 pulling 265hp and 284tq while Toyota's Tacoma is pulling 245hp with it's 4.0L V6. I thought Ford would at least put an engine in the V6 stang to bring it in the 240hp range. Like possibly take Hondas 3.5L V6 (w/250hp) like GM did and put it in there.

Here we go with this arguement again. First, it'll be a frosty day in hell before Ford turns to an import manufacturer for engines in the 'Stang. Second, it wouldn't make sense to make it that powerful. They want an economy version for people who may not be able to afford the gas or insurance or even the larger car payments. Plus if they build a 240+ hp 4.0, then few people will buy the 300hp GT. It's quite simple...the world doesn't work the way you want it to.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2005, 07:03 AM   #47
Pythias
CF Extraordinaire
 
Pythias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ohio, U.S.
Posts: 1,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
Here we go with this arguement again. First, it'll be a frosty day in hell before Ford turns to an import manufacturer for engines in the 'Stang. Second, it wouldn't make sense to make it that powerful. They want an economy version for people who may not be able to afford the gas or insurance or even the larger car payments. Plus if they build a 240+ hp 4.0, then few people will buy the 300hp GT. It's quite simple...the world doesn't work the way you want it to.


Very well put, I was going to say that about fewer people buying the 300hp GT when you can have a 240 hp V6 and a much cheaper price.
Pythias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2005, 02:48 PM   #48
SlipKnoT
The Ultimate Maggot
 
SlipKnoT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
First Mustang worth buying since the Mustang I left us in '73 IMO. The exterior is actually attractive again, the interior looks just fine (finally)...although they still are cheap interior happy in areas (coughCHEAPFORDcough).

As for performance I can say the GT needed the 40hp boost to 300hp as family cars were catching up to the 99-04 GT. Handling seems to improved a little, not a lot as expected and the biggest disappointment to me is the weight which increased 100lbs to 3450lbs (on the GT deluxe coupe) and it was supposedly supposed to decrease (yet it still weighs over 300lbs less than a GTO... take note GM). The V6 model is still not worthy of any praise from me. Basically it's still a slow POS as they didnt really improve anything power wise by just dropping in the Explorer/Ranger 4.0L V6 with a whopping 210hp...Brings me to my next point. Why cant Ford get ANY damn power out of this 4.0L V6? Nissan's Frontier has a 4.0L V6 pulling 265hp and 284tq while Toyota's Tacoma is pulling 245hp with it's 4.0L V6. I thought Ford would at least put an engine in the V6 stang to bring it in the 240hp range. Like possibly take Hondas 3.5L V6 (w/250hp) like GM did and put it in there.
Dont you mean cheap General Mistakes
__________________
1990 Plymouth Laser RS Turbo [Projekt Redline]
Mods: Airbox delete w/ K&N cone, hollowed cat, Fidanza short throw.
HOW FAST!?...we'll find out this summer.

SlipKnoT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2005, 02:51 PM   #49
SlipKnoT
The Ultimate Maggot
 
SlipKnoT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 1,066
I think the new Musang is beautiful. In every way. They have brought the Mustang back to its roots, and thats one of the best things any car manufactuar could ever do. The engine is a work of art, just like all the other 4.6Ls. I think if Ford wanted to they could make that car have 350hp with just a couple of simple adjustments, such as bigger exhaust, and a better camshaft. The compression could also be bumped up IMO.
__________________
1990 Plymouth Laser RS Turbo [Projekt Redline]
Mods: Airbox delete w/ K&N cone, hollowed cat, Fidanza short throw.
HOW FAST!?...we'll find out this summer.

SlipKnoT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2005, 07:51 PM   #50
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
Here we go with this arguement again. First, it'll be a frosty day in hell before Ford turns to an import manufacturer for engines in the 'Stang. Second, it wouldn't make sense to make it that powerful. They want an economy version for people who may not be able to afford the gas or insurance or even the larger car payments. Plus if they build a 240+ hp 4.0, then few people will buy the 300hp GT. It's quite simple...the world doesn't work the way you want it to.

I dont believe your thought. You still have a 60hp gap in power in my idea (and a lot of torque) between the V6 and GT plus all the extras the GT comes with that the V6 doesnt... I'm not saying make a 260-280hp V6 stang. But at least make it competitive for the market. It's always funny when an automatic V6 03-05 Accord pulls up to to a 5spd 3.8 stang (and now a 4.0L stang) and blows its doors off. Is it that difficult to get power out of such a large V6? Ford, like Daimler Chrysler and GM have done, will eventually pull some engines/trannies from some import manufacturer. Just a matter of time. GM did the right thing in taking Honda's 250hp SOHC 3.5L V6 for Vue Redline. Honestly, you think they could of thrown a 200hp 3.8 and try and market that? " You can still be as fast as a...well... stock Equinox in your new 3.8 Vue Redline... "

You can still get great economy with more power. In fact I'd go to bet any of Honda's J series V6's would get better gas mileage than that old 4.0L Ford would in a Mustang yet still have more hp and torque. I'm just glad you didnt use the argument of "well the Tacoma and Frontier use DOHC 24v V6's and the 4.0L Ford is SOHC 12v"... Because then I'd just say Honda has a version of the J series (3.5L V6 in the RL to be exact) making 300hp and 260tq with SOHC heads...still has 24v as Honda would never make anything below a 4v/cylinder head these days.

All I'm saying, it just would of been a smarter move on Ford's behalf. They would of sold even a lot more Mustangs than they already have. In the end I still love the new 05-up Stang. It was long awaited, and they delivered...at least in the styling and V8 camp.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~


Last edited by thunderbird1100 : 07-26-2005 at 04:19 PM.
thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 06:09 PM   #51
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
It IS competetive for the market. How many other RWD, 200+ hp V6 coupes are there under 20k?

it's supposed to be about that for hp, so that the car can remain an insurance bargain. But just becaeu it was released at 210 hp (about 5 hp down from teh Fox chassis Mustang GT, BTW) doesn't mean that that's all that can be easily had out of it. That would be like saying that '80s Fox Mustangs are only going to be slow POS because the stock ones only had 225 hp...

The V6 Mustang is about the only 6 cyl RWD coupe on the market, and the only one in anything close to it's price range it doesn't HAVE to be fast, as the GT is supposed to be the fast one. And unless you've driven the new one, understanding it's place in the market, I'd say you need to reserve comments.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 07:19 PM   #52
SlipKnoT
The Ultimate Maggot
 
SlipKnoT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
I dont believe your thought. You still have a 60hp gap in power in my idea (and a lot of torque) between the V6 and GT plus all the extras the GT comes with that the V6 doesnt... I'm not saying make a 260-280hp V6 stang. But at least make it competitive for the market. It's always funny when an automatic V6 03-05 Accord pulls up to to a 5spd 3.8 stang (and now a 4.0L stang) and blows its doors off. Is it that difficult to get power out of such a large V6? Ford, like Daimler Chrysler and GM have done, will eventually pull some engines/trannies from some import manufacturer. Just a matter of time. GM did the right thing in taking Honda's 250hp SOHC 3.5L V6 for Vue Ion Redline. Honestly, you think they could of thrown a 200hp 3.8 and try and market that? " You can still be as fast as a...well... stock Equinox in your new 3.8 Vue Redline... "

You can still get great economy with more power. In fact I'd go to bet any of Honda's J series V6's would get better gas mileage than that old 4.0L Ford would in a Mustang yet still have more hp and torque. I'm just glad you didnt use the argument of "well the Tacoma and Frontier use DOHC 24v V6's and the 4.0L Ford is SOHC 12v"... Because then I'd just say Honda has a version of the J series (3.5L V6 in the RL to be exact) making 300hp and 260tq with SOHC heads...still has 24v as Honda would never make anything below a 4v/cylinder head these days.

All I'm saying, it just would of been a smarter move on Ford's behalf. They would of sold even a lot more Mustangs than they already have. In the end I still love the new 05-up Stang. It was long awaited, and they delivered...at least in the styling and V8 camp.

I dont think Ford would want to start putting import engines into their sports car. They really only do those things with their economy cars like the Escort, and Contour. Putting an engine from Mazda in their Mustang V6 would be like commiting suicide on their part. What Ford SHOULD do is make that 4.0 V6 a 24v.
__________________
1990 Plymouth Laser RS Turbo [Projekt Redline]
Mods: Airbox delete w/ K&N cone, hollowed cat, Fidanza short throw.
HOW FAST!?...we'll find out this summer.

SlipKnoT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 10:51 PM   #53
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlipKnoT
I dont think Ford would want to start putting import engines into their sports car. They really only do those things with their economy cars like the Escort, and Contour. Putting an engine from Mazda in their Mustang V6 would be like commiting suicide on their part. What Ford SHOULD do is make that 4.0 V6 a 24v.

i like the 4.6 but it would have been nice to see a more pwerfull 5.0 in the new mustangs.
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 10:59 PM   #54
99integra
CF's Florida boy
 
99integra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 6,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72firebird
i like the 4.6 but it would have been nice to see a more pwerfull 5.0 in the new mustangs.

But why, the 4.6 in the new GT is perfect, displacement isn't everything
__________________
Current whip: walking
99integra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:03 PM   #55
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99integra
But why, the 4.6 in the new GT is perfect, displacement isn't everything

nothings wrong with the 4.6 i think itd just of been nice to see the 302 back with the mustang. itd of made the retro theme a little better.
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:06 PM   #56
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
just like there was nothing wrong with the previous gen corvettes engine. but its still nice to see the new 427 in the zo6. just like the stingrays and there 427s and a few with 454s.
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:07 PM   #57
99integra
CF's Florida boy
 
99integra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 6,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72firebird
alright whatever. first off. i never said it wasnt bad. again its like the 289 and 302. both good motors. some prefer the 302 some the 289. all i said was itd of been nice to see the 5.0 back since the 5.0 is the 302. and displacement isnt everything so stop being a dick, dick.

Now that I have your unedited post, let me say, why are you telling me that displacement isn't everything while I was the one that said it and after that you called me a dick. Now the thing is that made no ****ing sense what so ever.
__________________
Current whip: walking
99integra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:09 PM   #58
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99integra
Now that I have your unedited post, let me say, why are you telling me that displacement isn't everything while I was the one that said it and after that you called me a dick. Now the thing is that made no ****ing sense what so ever.

i kinda read your post quick. and didnt see the why at the begining and took your post as if it was negative. and replied. once i saw that it said why and that it was more of a simple question i went back and changed it cause the nice person i am. but your still being a dick now. next time dont open your mouth so soon
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:10 PM   #59
99integra
CF's Florida boy
 
99integra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 6,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72firebird
i kinda read your post quick. and didnt see the why at the begining and took your post as if it was negative. and replied. once i saw that it said why and that it was more of a simple question i went back and changed it cause the nice person i am. but your still being a dick now. next time dont open your mouth so soon

I was going to reply to the edited one but then you called me a dick, now whos the immature one now?
__________________
Current whip: walking
99integra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2005, 11:12 PM   #60
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99integra
Now that I have your unedited post, let me say, why are you telling me that displacement isn't everything while I was the one that said it and after that you called me a dick. Now the thing is that made no ****ing sense what so ever.

and i displacement isnt everything in the sense of agreeing with you. so actualy it did make sense. cause you said it like the only reason i wanted to see the 5.0 was the displacement. but the reason i wanted to see it was heritage dick.
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.