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 07-05-2004, 11:02 PM   #1
zipper
CF Newbie
 
zipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US
Posts: 76
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?
__________________

Last edited by zipper : 07-06-2004 at 02:42 PM.
zipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 03:29 AM   #2
moostang104314
the guy you wish you were
 
moostang104314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 532
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!
__________________
moostang104314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 03:53 AM   #3
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by zipper
The 2005 Mustang uses a 3.0L 6V Northstar engine but I read somewhere they are getting rid of the 3.0L and replacing it with a new 3.5L Northstar engine for the 2006 Mustang models. Anyone know more about this?

Good job on being wrong in everything you just said...what a car NOOB!
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.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 07:42 AM   #4
Inygknok
El del Supra
 
Inygknok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,863
to think he has such a nice stang in his sig......
__________________


Supra: To surpass or go beyond.
Inygknok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 02:40 PM   #5
zipper
CF Newbie
 
zipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US
Posts: 76
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.
__________________

Last edited by zipper : 07-06-2004 at 02:47 PM.
zipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 04:03 PM   #6
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
Quote:
4.5L Northstar engine for the 2006 Mustang


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.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 04:09 PM   #7
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
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.

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
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 07:31 PM   #8
Patrick
CF Addict
 
Patrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Louisville, KY. We don't wear shoes, and it would be a shame to see someone with a full set of teeth.
Posts: 196
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
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

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.
__________________


"Treat man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

"A man's health can be measured by which he takes two at a time-- pills or stairs." ~ Joan Welsh
Patrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 08:00 PM   #9
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick
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.

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.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 12:37 AM   #10
cinqyg
CF Freak
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Midlands, England
Posts: 851
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.
cinqyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 02:17 AM   #11
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinqyg
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.

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.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 03:26 AM   #12
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
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.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 02:48 PM   #13
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
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.

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.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 07:11 PM   #14
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
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).
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2004, 07:47 PM   #15
hardcore86MCSS
CF Newbie
 
hardcore86MCSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lapeer, Michigan
Posts: 1
Fyi

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
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.

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
hardcore86MCSS 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 07:48 PM.

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