WSsick

iTrader: (13)

i was hinting at the fact that a good amount of your posts are about Ford and their cars, motors, etc.

I was speaking of the 4.6 that goes in the GT, since the thread was about the new GT's motor, sorry i didn't make that more obvious. The Mach/Cobra motors differ from what i am talking about since they are 1-not in a mustang GT and 2-altered blower, compression, etc.

i wasnt trying to start anything either, just stating how the GT's 4.6 has been underpowered for too long. if you noticed, i said id consider buying one myself (if i was in the market).

no, its called money

fast

iTrader: (24)

if you read any of what the ford engineers are saying ... the new 5.0 is way more efficient (thermally and in volumetric terms) than the 4.6

it's quite a high-tech piece of work ... I'm no ford fan by any means ... but the 'stang guys have something to be excited about

and the '11 GT isn't that much lighter than the SS ... don't recall the exact #s but it wasn't as much I had been led to believe
I even kinda like the updated look of the '10 'stang

now lets see if the challenger can lose some weight or pick up a few horses to make this a true 3-way fight

unit213

Did I say anything about price? The guy clearly doesn't understand the capability of a small cube 4.6. It doesn't matter at all that it's Ford either.
The whole "there's no replacement for displacement" debate is what I was referring to and it's an archaic argument given the technology we have
today. My point was that Mihovetz has gone 6.30's with a small cube engine and we have people here with 13 second cars calling the 4.6 junk, which
is ironic in itself.

Ke^in

A good amount aren't about Fords too. I've owned one Ford in my life. I don't have any dedication to ford. Most of the 140 or so posts in my posts below aren't for the most part, about Ford. Not that it should matter..
Well the motor itself isn't bad. The heads could have been much better IMHO.
The Mach has no blower, but altered? It's just a 4v 4.6 DOHC.
Underpowered for what? The LS1 fbodies were faster than it at the time, yes, but that a lone doesn't make it underpowered.

Anyhow, it doesn't have much to do with the current 5.0 other than both are modular motors. Considering mod motors are very tight tolerance motors, that's not a bad thing.

Ford finally put decent heads on the production model GT. And it's about time.

I see that as mostly just ****-talk. I have GM friends and we joke back and forth about stuff. My small v8, and their crappy rear ends etc. it's all in good fun and not serious at all. Now if people are being serious when they make said comments, I am not sure what to say. I guess you can mark it up to fanboyisms.

ThoR294

iTrader: (6)

Agreed

My point exactly. No need to get all bent out of shape by one sentence.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

you are looking WAYYY too deep for faults here. let me lay it plain, IN MY VIEW, an ICON like the MUSTANG should be competitive in terms of power, whichever way that is achieved. i was not saying "the ls1 is better" because i know my car is slower than probably 95% of cars on here. i was simply saying that this new GT motor is finally one deserving on the mustang name. there never should have been a gap as which the LS1 and 4.6 have had. Ford should have stepped up their game a long time ago. i dont know why you keep bringing up the mach 1 motor not ebing different. it is different than a GT motor, and is not a mustang GT. if i wanted to talk special editions, i would say so. i am comparing the 4.6 IN THE MUSTANG GTs of old to the 5.0 IN THE NEW MUSTANG GT. GT to GT, apples to apples. not comparing motors from any other model, Mach, Cobra, whatever. so yes, it is altered from the motor that goes in the GT.

note: I never compared modding potential of either motor, as it is irrelevant since more $$$ always wins.

Ke^in

*shrug* both cars were capable of 13 second runs in the 1/4. There is always going to have to be a FASTER car of the two.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

very true and drivers can make the faster look like a dog. you would not believe how many bolt on S197s outrun bolt on or even cammed LS1 fbods over here at the local track. last year i saw a c5 run a mid 14 (dont remember exact time). autos make up for driver stupidity, so then each car is well represented. but we arent compaing those so back to the topic... i wanna hear some sounds of the motor in the car, anyone got videos of that? does it sound as good as the oldies did?


and on a random note, my gf wants a new msutang bc of the sequential blinkers.

Ke^in

I think the reason why Mustangs sound a bit different than the fbodies do is the dual muffler setup. As long as it has that..

jb7241986

iTrader: (4)

[QUOTE=Ke^in;12878280]Junk implies it's a bad motor. That's simply not the case. I don't understand the need for all the trolling. Not only that, you are wrong to boot.

nah you misunderstand me, i mean the 4.6 mod motor is junk unless its got 4 valves per cylinder and a supercharger such as the cobra or gt500. those motors are badass including the teksid blocks made in italy which can handle 1200-1500 horsepower. i have subscribed to muscle mustangs and fast fords for almost 5 years so i doubt im wrong. in fact i probably know more about you. the 2 and 3 valve 4.6 motors suck *****. later bro.

Ke^in

Again you are wrong. I don't care what magazine you are subscribed to. What I think you mean is "slower than a 4v"

An engine "sucking *****" usually means it falls apart. The 4.6 is a stout engine.


ps. no need for the condescending pretentiousness.

ThoR294

iTrader: (6)

If you want to talk about engines sucking ***** as far as going fast... that would be the 2v and the chevy 305 pieceofshitturd motor

unit213

I had a 305 in my 3rd gen T/A...and it was a definitely a POS.

ThoR294

iTrader: (6)

boat anchor... thats all they were good for. What a fail attempt at having a "gas economy" v8. lololol. I love when guys are like YEAH MAN IM GONNA LIKE SOUP THIS HERE 305 UP ITS GONNA BE SWEET. Such fail

chasgiv3

iTrader: (1)

I really don't care who the manufacturer is. I'm always looking to be impressed. I was hoping for a forced induction motor producing some 1000HP. Hell I can spin my motor to 8K no problem but if it didn't get the car down the track it's boring to me. I was bored waiting for that thing to spool up. I may be jaded but man I don't remember stock motors taking that long to spool up.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I believe the Mustang will be roughly a full 200-250 pounds lighter, coupe versus coupe.





I don't see any weight reduction coming but there is talk of a new 6.4L Hemi coming in the SRT-8 models, which are also much more expensive than the base Camaro SS and Mustang GT. The mildly slower R/T model is closer in price to those two.

Ke^in

Compared to the LS1? Yes most definitely. But compared to teh LS1 most v8s do suck as far as making power from them.

As sucky as the heads on a stock 2v, that motor isn't that bad. I don't think any stock V8 that has the ability to hit 13s as being "sucking *****"

Not too long before with a LT1s etc it was normal for a stock V8 to be in the 14s. I don't recall anyone calling stock TransAms with a LT1 slow. They were seen as DAMN FAST. And had MAD potential.

When the LS1 fbodies came out, all of a sudden they became they BASELINE for what muscle cars should have according to certain people. Even though in the real world market, said car had more HP than any other domestic pony car. It had more than average.

To someone that doesn't take their cars on the 1/4 runs a car that can hit 13s IS fast. It's more HP than someone that is using it for a DD needs. And if someone wants more, it can be easily done. Is it as mod friendly as a LS1 fbody? No. But not many cars are.

I remember when the NewEdge came out. People were talking about how much faster it was than previous Mustangs (even the coveted 5.0).

However, when the 4v Mach1s and Termis came out, all of a sudden they were "slow" and "junk"

If I was planning on using a car for the track I'd probably have gotten a LS1 based car, or a Mach1 etc. But it's my daily. And it has more than enough power for that, and then some.

Is it slow to someone used to driving boosted or modded V8s for years? YES! Having said that, a stock LS1 fbody would feel slow as well to these people.

It's all relative.

I haven't once regretted the decision to buy this car.

Having said that, if it's not too hard to do a modular 4.6 to modular 5.0 swap I might even do that.

Stay N/A and get the same power level (almost) as a boosted 4.6.

Who knows. That may be overdoing it for what I use the car for.

That new 5.0 is sure a beast though. I am anxious to see one in person when they are available.

violent_celerity

no, its the OHC setup compared to a pushrod. the OHC motors just sound smoother, and deeper. and for you 305 haters, i know a guy that made 300hp to the wheels through all the smog equipment and a 200r4 in an 86 monte ss.. oh and thats NA..

just saying

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Good points.
Just because the LS1 cars were so exceptionally fast (in stock or modded trim) it doesn't automatically make everything else slow. Even the high 13 second 1999-2004 Mustang GTs were still relatively fast cars in the grand scheme of things, especially when compared to the average family car/truck of the time.
Today we have Z06s and ZR1s that can run high 10s in stock trim...but that still doesn't suddenly make a high 11/low 12 second C5 Z06 slow in my opinion. In it's day (and even still now) it was among some of the fastest cars in the world.

88blackgt

youre kidding right?

most stuff when you get that fast is entirely aftermarket whereas mihivovetz's car has a lot of factory parts(worked factory heads, stock iron block, cobra crank, some stock parts in the valvetrain).

to sum things up:
4.6s are POSs yet he runs 6s w/ factory parts
SBC, BBC, whatever, are entirely aftermarket yet they are godly