TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)


Specifications:
-5.2L Flat Plane Crankshaft V8 Engine
-More than 500 HP / Torque Peak above 400 lb-ft
-MagneRide dampers
-Brakes: 6 piston brembo calipers front / 4 piston brembo calipers rear
-19" aluminum wheels - 10.5 front / 11 inch rear
-Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires w/ GT350 specific sidewall construction, tread and compound
-Torsional stiffness increased 28% over previous model
-Cutting edge injection molded carbon fiber composite grille
-Optional lightweight tower-to-tower brace
-Unique Sheetmetal
-Cloth Recaros
-Confirmed redline of 8200 RPM (pictures don't lie)

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2014/11/17/shelby-gt350-mustang-the-legend-returns.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,134 Posts
This might sound odd but I'm tired off seeing all these cars coming off the line with 500hp! It makes our boats look like oversized go karts.. Have you seen the new Toyota minivan? 266hp 6 spd trans 0-60 in 8 sec? Family cars coming with 300hp... Our old 2vs look slower and slower everyday
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,044 Posts
Yeah but the good news is they are usually top dog engines that in reality sell in very low volume (think 90s Taurus SHOs VS their MUCH more common 3.0 and 3.8 counterparts), they're really just a way for marketing departments to call a dull appliance car 'BOLD' with a straight face. They also make our tanks seem like featherweights in the weight department (go ahead and look up the weight figures for a modern minivan, hell even a midsize sedan) and high powered N/A V6s, in my observations, are incredibly dull. I've had the chance to drive a few 2011+ base Mustangs, which as we know have 40 more(crank) horsepower than a stock PI 2V, yet it still accelerates like a damn ESSEX New Edge, blah....


Flatplane crank is pretty sweet, at 5.2 liters I bet it'll be pretty hardcore too(as in shaky lol), magnaride too should be pretty awesome with the new suspension. So who's going to be the first to put that crank in a 2V?:D The GT350 thing is meh though, I was holding out hope that Ford was going to bring the SVT Cobra back to light, rather than continue with faux Shelby tributes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
While I like that Ford did a Flat Plane I don't see it being a good thing for the company, unless it is balanced well and Lincoln is getting them too.

I know this is for the European market since the Mustang is now a "global" vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,134 Posts
Yeah but the good news is they are usually top dog engines that in reality sell in very low volume (think 90s Taurus SHOs VS their MUCH more common 3.0 and 3.8 counterparts), they're really just a way for marketing departments to call a dull appliance car 'BOLD' with a straight face. They also make our tanks seem like featherweights in the weight department (go ahead and look up the weight figures for a modern minivan, hell even a midsize sedan) and high powered N/A V6s, in my observations, are incredibly dull. I've had the chance to drive a few 2011+ base Mustangs, which as we know have 40 more(crank) horsepower than a stock PI 2V, yet it still accelerates like a damn ESSEX New Edge, blah....


Flatplane crank is pretty sweet, at 5.2 liters I bet it'll be pretty hardcore too(as in shaky lol), magnaride too should be pretty awesome with the new suspension. So who's going to be the first to put that crank in a 2V?:D The GT350 thing is meh though, I was holding out hope that Ford was going to bring the SVT Cobra back to light, rather than continue with faux Shelby tributes
Good point. I've heard the new 300hp v6 mustang isn't what it's made up to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,673 Posts
I dont bleed ford blue like some of you folks but i must say that this new GT350 soounds quite nice.

The most exciting part i see here is the flat plane crank. i'm curious to hear clips of this engine vs the Ferrari v8 and to find out exactly how much Ford will allow this engine to rev: 8K? 9K?

I ca only hope.
-g
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
8k is the lowest redline will be.

Reports of the engine easily doing 10k revs, but Ford might not to warranty such.

Here's a video of it going around the Nurburgring in Germany

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Video looks slow for 500 HP. I'm a newb though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,673 Posts
While clearly not in the same price range (unless Ford is really, really stupid) and while I'm hoping the Ford will be less likely to flambe itself, I dunno guys.

The Ferrari's whine just sounds stunning.

IIRC, the Espirit V8 also had a flat plane crank. Aside from the turbo whistle, the burbling sounds closer to the growl of the GT350 nurburging test vid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Mustang will be much throatier because most FPC V8s are well under 4 liters. The exception here is the 458 and the mustang, which come in at 4.5 and 5.2L respectively.

Ford has came out and said, it will sound like the "american interpretation of a FPC V8".

Ford just released this yesterday

 

·
Is something burning?..
Joined
·
712 Posts
I think I'm In love with this idea. Bigger bore, lighter crank. What could go wrong?
 

·
Beer and Cheese
Joined
·
7,386 Posts
I can't wait to see the GT500. I love the new Mustang. I'm begging the wife to get a GT vert when they come out.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,588 Posts
I find it funny that Ford redesigned the Mustang in 2005 and, much like the original 1964.5 Mustang, they worked and worked to make it uglier up through now (just like 1973). I can't wait until we see the all new 2018 "Mustang II" that looks like a cross between a Ford Focus and a Ford Fusion and performs worse than either.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,044 Posts
I'm not the biggest fan of the 2015's styling but I never saw the attraction to the 05 at all, it looked like whoever designed it also designed the New Beetle. Too fluffy and cutesy, not to mention too big, almost an alternate universe Mustang II(big rather than small, ugly 2000s styling compromises vs ugly 70s styling compromises). I still like the 99-04 better than all the recent years of Mustang stylistically and thought the 05 was a huge letdown coming off the awesome 03/04 Cobras, but then again I'd rather have a 69 or 70 over a 64-1/2 as well. Oh and a 67-73 Cougar to all of them :D
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,588 Posts
I'm not the biggest fan of the 2015's styling but I never saw the attraction to the 05 at all, it looked like whoever designed it also designed the New Beetle. Too fluffy and cutesy, not to mention too big, almost an alternate universe Mustang II(big rather than small, ugly 2000s styling compromises vs ugly 70s styling compromises). I still like the 99-04 better than all the recent years of Mustang stylistically and thought the 05 was a huge letdown coming off the awesome 03/04 Cobras, but then again I'd rather have a 69 or 70 over a 64-1/2 as well. Oh and a 67-73 Cougar to all of them :D
I think that the point I was making was that, in the original Mustang era, Ford started out with a very sporty car that was loved far and wide and they eventually transformed it into a big lumbering beast that took on the worst of 70's styling. While the 2005 didn't model after the 64, it certainly looked more like the ~68 or so. What they are producing now is looking more and more like the 73 which was god awful.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,044 Posts
The worst of 1970s styling was the Mustang II IMO, big bumpers, padded vinyl tops, ect. I just like to dispel the attitude many Ford fans have in that the Mustang should have undergone some sort of styling evolution akin to the Porsche 911, despite the "sacred cow" 64-1/2-68 lasting only 3-1/2 years. We as MN12 enthusiasts should know considering the Tbird not only abandoned most of it's original styling immediately, it completely changed segments.

I'd take a 71-73 over a 05-14 stylistically any day of the week. "Big" and "bloated" is subjective I guess...
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top