RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

I had to go digging, but these are actual pictures of the crank in my cars current motor.

The above photo was a stock image from Callies.






I actually touch this stuff in real life, and that is where I got my opinion of quality, not just spewing out internet rehash, but to be fair I have not touched a Ford Voodoo crank, and have only seen pictures. Typically, if someone is going to show off there new top dog motor parts, you take the best and most flattering pictures to present.

Anyway, not hating, just observing compared to my personal, hands on experience vs the pictures of the parts from Ford.

I am glad Ford is building it,as it forces GM and Mopar to step up.

I like Mopars and drive them to the limit too. Tracking the daily.



As for previous Mustangs handling, I have not raced since 2010, but will be out again soon, when we did joint F Body and Mustang club autocross events, not once did the Mustangs crack the top 3 cars. It might just be the drivers, and likely is, but it sure did not vouch for the better or as good handling. Any tire was allowed too, and some of the Mustangs ran the same tire I did. I was always in the top 3.

redbird555

iTrader: (14)

Yes thats actually exactly what I'm saying. You can argue the whole ci thing but then again it has 4 cams and better heads. The argument there becomes moot. The ls7 will also fit about anywhere whereas the voodo is quite large.

I like the engine, its a cool design and different. I want to do something different with my 66 eventually and the voodoo just might be it. BUT in 2 two cars with equal weight the ls7 which is 9 years its elder beats it in every area of the curve as shown below. An 8300 rpm rev limit is cool but who cares? Gear the cars accordingly as they should be and the rev limit falls out of the equation.

I just expected more from ford with what they've been doing lately. They built an engine that still loses to its competitor in every hp/tq category more or less. I hope and still think the gt350 will be n par or edge out the z28.
And ya a lot of people have been complaining about the z06. Purists were up in arms at first because it was S/C. Then people got upset because the tune really chokes the car, then the blower was small and was having overheating issues, then people got pissedd because the A8 had cooling issues on track days. Now there are 10 or so of brand new Z's that have shot rods through the side of the block, my buddies included.

So ya I wouldn't call people "happy" yet I imagine in a year or so the z's will be just nasty but for now they are far from perfect. The m7 is a little disappointing from what we were led to believe but the A8 is in fact a quick machine. Both still wicked fast just not what people were expecting

NW-99SS

iTrader: (6)

I too am concerned about the compression and 93 Octane (not available where I live).

I am still impressed by this offering for enthusiasts from Ford. A flat plane, 8200rpm, track car, with available carbon fiber wheels, and mag ride. That's a lot to offer, even fully optioned out for the GT350R. I say excellent job by Ford for pushing the envelope.

GM does have the option of using the 5.5l revver from the C6R & C7R program (and don't say they can't, the LS7 came from the C5R program). This would make the most sense, IMO. Keeps it NA, lighter than S/C, get the rpms and going into a Camaro that is finally on par or very close in weight to the Mustang. I would say the LT4 will be a ZL1 variant, but who knows as they could have easily put the LS9 in the 5th gen to compete with the GT500 in a straight line.

-Ross-

iTrader: (2)

I want one with a Whipple on E85.

RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

The same source for the Ring times said no V8s for Ford Mustang and F150 after 2017.

They have deleted it, but the links linger.

http://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/6-...er-2017-a.html

They are a BS car gossip site. Trust nothing from them.

Ford made sure to make that stories truth be known as it did not serve them well.

It'llrun

I'm not arguing for HP K at all and have made no reference to them here.

I like that idea... lighter, more rpm. HOWEVER... if they use the 5.5L, then EVERYONE will know that CI creates torque, not OHV in and of itself. I'd be happy to see a 5.2L high end Camaro... just to see what GM can do with a small small block. To me, millions of people are misled to believe that OHV engines inherently create more torque than OHC when in reality, torque is aided by cubic inches far more than the main differences between those two designs.

While I think a 5.2L(or even 5.5L) could be able to match the 5.2L in most areas, I stand convinced it could never best the better design of OHC. To that end, it is impressive what Ford has done with the 5.2L V8 and for all those who claim otherwise, show us what you can do by starting w/ a 4.8L and bumping the CI to all of 317 ... and blast out 500+ hp and 400+ lb-ft naturally aspirated and drivable. In short order... fat chance anyone ever will take up that idea.

Dang... that actually sounds brutally capable.

It'llrun

I hadn't... but it says this on the last line... "However, if the reality is as the company has quoted, than this powerhouse model should have the ability to tackle Nordschleife with aplomb." and that fits in directly with what I've been saying.

There's a clear and obvious difference... the use or lack of use concerning V8 engines affects the brand. What happened on a road course 3,000 miles away... doesn't.

Bottom line is simple: Talking trash about track prowess is easy, but had nothing to do with production and little to do with sales, particularly sales of V8 powered pickup trucks. The F-series is Fords bread & butter, so it makes perfect sense to address that. The Mustang is merely the top seller in its class... Ford sells more of many other models.

Irunelevens

I've been wanting them to do that for YEARS.

RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

With the logic that because it might or could it is true. Then the sub 7 sec run claimed by the same site for the Z06 is true. Even though GM said it was false. The purpose of quoting that story and the Z06 is to prove that Horsepower Kings make **** up! Ford and Gm related.

All I am saying is do not quote a site that was the only one to make this GT350R lap time claim. Lots quoted Horse Power Kings, but they were the only ones to say they had a "source". It is like quoting the Onion website as factual.

The Gt350 is a cool car, but do not quote that lap time as it is utter crap from a crap source that makes **** up all the time about lots of car related stuff.

Let us see the 2016 comparo in a magazine that brings a 2015 Z28 to go at the GT350 and or R. It should be good. I expect the GT350R to edge it out, but it will be close.

As for tires we have had this chat before. The Z28 out preforms an 1LE tire for tire in grip and braking. The cars handling is more than the tires. The shocks, yes the shocks are a much bigger part of the performance. Blah blah Magna Ride. Multimatic shocks are far superior for overall handling. MR is not active handling, not the same thing, in fact not even close. They are handling/comfort shocks. Active handling can lean into a corner, the only way an MR equipped car could lean into corner is a big healthy driver just leaving an Old Country Buffet and turning left.

As mentioned before, the $300k Ford GT will have the same design shock as the Z28. The reason? They are one of the best, if not the best shock available.

SSCamaro99_3

iTrader: (1)

How much is the price differential between the GT-350R and Z/28? THey are the only comparable vehicles. The base GT-350 is a nice bargain for people that are willing to give up the brakes. As much as I like the carbon brakes, I could see bypassing them if you knew you were not going to track the car heavily.

Just FYI - the LS7 is for all reasonable purposes dimensionally identical to any othe rLS series engine. It just has a displacement advantage. I believe GM stated the LS& was 8000rpm capable, but the cam.intake to get it there was not emissions compliant.

It'llrun

You're the one who said they can't be right.... then they are. Again, it seems you're fine with whatever you choose to believe, but you don't want anyone believing what you don't.

Fact is, they add it together like most of us... the specs of the car speak for themselves and if knowing the car has nearly every known advantage to the other isn't enough for you to believe it's most likely also quicker and faster... you're all done because we can't tell you anything.

Don't bother saying... I never quoted them, you did. I had nothing to do with that.

The site I'm quoting is the track site... what else can we tell ya.

I don't expect there to even be a 2016 Z/28. If there is, it will be closer than the 2015 for sure... lighter car, similar(at least) power and torque, stiffer chassis, bigger tires expected. No 2016 Z/28 was considered though, anywhere.

Then why is it, most of the world agrees... including you, the GT350R will outperform the Z/28? Why do so many people w/ the Corvette and MR also praise it? Those with the ZL1? The slew of Cadillac models? There's much more to going fast on track than we'll cover here, but it's hardly "all about" DSSV.

MR isn't active? Okay then... whatever you say. You say active handling can lean into a corner, but the better capability is that it can prevent some lean... w/ pressure.

The key difference between MR and DSSV is, MR can change while driving and DSSV cannot.

The GT is expected to start @ 397k, not 300... that said, the car is light enough that it wouldn't benefit from MR and... it's probably against the class rules of Le Mans.

Ford - "The state-of-the-art chassis is suspended by an active racing-style torsion bar and pushrod suspension, with adjustable ride height." That's a bit different from what we've come to see as DSSV.

The suspension can make the shock perform better.

It'llrun

GT350R starts under 62k.

I'd give up those brakes too, knowing I have no interest in regularly racing anything these days, to drop 13k ... or 9... some rather large number which also extends to maintenance expenses. I'd pass.

The LS7 can surely see 8k, but nobody tries without heavy mods and if it's not going to be legal, the manufacturer is never going to entertain the idea for road vehicles. That's the beauty of a DOHC ... great rpm isn't as difficult based on many things, including the law. GM could move with a Northstar replacement...

RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

It is not the track site!

The server is in Scottsdale Ar. The website was registered with Godaddy.

http://www.ip-adress.com/whois/nurburgringlaptimes.com

My god you believe everything you see on the web! You realize there are jokes about people who believe all they read on the internet right? Do not be that guy.

They quoted a time that came from Horse Power Kings. They state if it is true, they do not say it went that time or is true. That time came from a bogus site that has claimed V8s ending, Z06 going sub 7. All 3 stories are crap!!!!! The site you quoted is not the official track site. Lots of mainstream sites quoted that time, but it all came from Horsepower Kings and some where some guy is laughing his *** off, so is Ford!

Even the Mustang guys say it is BS.

If the car did it, who was driving it, what day was it on?

Try Wikipedia, guess what no GT350R time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...eife_lap_times

Anyway, you never commented on the pictures of the crank vs the LS1 or a Callies, you have to admit, it does not look all that great.

Here is an factory LS7 crank to compare to the Voodoo's.



Here is the Voodoo crank shaft pictures from Ford.





Please tell me which casting/forging looks to have been better made? Best finish machining? Best quality on the forging? This is why I made the comment about quality in the appearance, not being a hater.

I doubt you will admit anything, but I have backed it all up.

Cheers!

I do like the GT350, hate the R because of the wheel style and the wing, but appreciate the price and the specs. Yes a cars style matters to me too.

JD_AMG

Depends on how you are comparing them.
If you want real world results then you need to use weight and physical size, and we all know how that goes...
Why? What would be the point? Does making 500hp from 317 ci some how make the car faster than if it were a higher displacement with the same power?
No?
Wait, using a higher displaced OHV engine making the same power would be lighter, cheaper and smaller and make the car actually FASTER all around! That is technology old man... HP/L is once again proven useless.
Ill be impressed when they can make an engine that isn't the size of a big block, the cost of a new car and only make as much power as something almost a decade old...

It'llrun

Just look up ... 12611649 LS7 Forged Steel Crankshaft and you can find pictures easily. Looks pretty normal.

For me, PRETTY doesn't matter when it concerns a crankshaft... how well it holds together does. Since the 5.2L makes more power than the LS7, I expect it will hold together just fine.

Here's a supposed LS7 crank which doesn't appear quite as shiny as the one you showed... http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...cUq6Hm9GeEh3xA

Here's another... http://i00.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/239/1...134239_722.jpg

and another... http://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.racingjun...ods-excell.jpg

For the record, blow up the photo of that one and it looks rather normal.

There's no fault in any here regarding quality... after all, can you point out what's broken? Nope.

Does that factory manifold look like it's missing something? They look more like LS6(or even 3) than 7 to me, but I'm not LS guru. I thought the LS7 has a much larger exit. Maybe the Z/28 is different... not my thing.

You're also saying those w/ obvious burn marks look better. I think both were fine, but the point is, you just don't have any set pattern as to what you believe "quality" actually is. Conversely, the crank with fewer machining marks also looks better to you... it's just better... because it's more shiny in certain lighting?

As for the website, I should've worded it differently. I didn't mean that the site was OWNED BY the track... just that it's all about that tracks ET's.

I don't just believe in Wikipedia either. Sorry.

Still, you used the exact same website to bolster your argument, but are telling me it's unqualified to bolster mine... obviously it's just different when you're the benefactor. Way to think it through.

proxemics

526hp no big deal

-Ross-

iTrader: (2)

It could look like an old dead dried up rat in a dusty corner of a basement for all I care. If it spins to 8250 rpm and holds up, who gives a crap what it looks like?

Jeezus, now we are picking cars apart based on the visual aesthetics of internal engine components? lol...allrighty then

It'llrun

Exactly. It's like being upset that your wife of 30yrs is starting to look old... if she still does it for ya, looks don't matter.

Felix C

I see the "Track Car" trend is a negative as the concomittant buy-in price vs DD benefits too limited for average good wage earners. Seems there are a great deal of unsold Z/28s on AutoTrader.

GT350 obviously an impressive vehicle but that much better than a PP 5.0 for everyday use? Is the tech that much more noticeable outside of a track?

RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

The LS7 exhaust in the Z28 is different than the old Z06. It is sort of a compact Tri Y.

The crank pictures you posted were either used, from Alibaba (import no name stuff) or a 200 x300 that shows nothing. I showed a stock picture from Part Performance World. Is it shiny, yes, it is new not used. Same as the Ford media picture.

As for what I do not like in the one from Fords picture is the pits in the casting, these are stress risers. As in potential weak points. For the power being made, yes, but at 8250rpm, these become bigger issues. If you want to tune it and make more horse power, which only comes two ways, more torque or more rpm. No other way to add hp.

HP= RPM x TQ/5252

The 5252 is a constant and can not be changed. So you have two things to make power, thats it.

You can add torque with compression, better flowing heads to an extent, cam but it affect emissions, displacement, or forced induction. RPM, requires giving up some bottom end torque but you move the power band up. So the biggest tunning mod you will see imo is going to be adding rpm, which stresses the crank a lot more.

RPM, needs a light valve train, which is a big advantage of the DOHC, the valves are tiny, just more of them. The rpm stresses all the parts though.

See the picture shown, as to why I commented on quality, this thing sees rpm and will likely see more with tuning.



It'll Run you asked me to point them out.

Maybe it is my engineering eye that attracts my attention when I see flaws that are an obvious weakness. Is it weak enough to fail, likely/maybe not, but if it does, these are where it will happen. The red circle show forging pits or nicks from machining in bad spots, causing stress risers close to journals where the load is. The blue is actually a very nice to see design feature, a radius on the nose, I do not think GM has done this before. That lowers friction through the oil, adding a little hp. You see the same on high end cranks like my Callies. If you look at my Callies it smooth with no pits or nicks from machining. If I saw the finish on it that the Ford has, I would not be happy, in fact would have never have bought it and doubt any one would, as it makes it weaker.



I guess any one with any knowledge of mechanical engineering knows what I am talking about. The rest just look and go look shiny parts!



The design looks great, the machining and forging quality looks iffy. This is from 30 years of designing and building high speed automation. Not being a "I read the internet hero".


And here is the internet hero that knows nothing about engineering. It is not the aesthetics, it is the quality/execution that creates stength. As said the design looks great, not so much on the forging or machining. I like there to be more than just barely enough.


Why does the Callies look smooth, just to be pretty? No to be strong and a quality finish matters to strength of a crank. Obviously not from an engineering background are you?

I made an observation based on my education and experience. If it is beyond your level of understanding move along and look at graphs and shiny pictures that you have no comprehension of.