This engine will also be going on the F-150 and Australian's Ford Falcon.
Being that it will be DOHC 32V and the 6-speed expect the Mustang's weight to go up, I'm predicting about 100lbs, worst the weight is going to be shifted up front. We'll see what Ford will do.
As of now it looks like it getting 400+HP/390+ TQ. The new 5-liter powerplant will be built at Ford’s Essex Engine Plant in Windsor, Ontario.
When Ford makes a public anouncement on this with details, I'll post it out.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
and with less displacement the potential for better fuel economy should be there, plus theres just something that people connect 5.0 with when they think mustang
im not sure why theres such an uproar about it being DOHC, most engines are, its a superior design, joe redneck just needs to work a bit harder when servicing it thats all
thats like ripping off fuel injection and putting on a carb, you making things easier for yourself but your losing efficiency just because your too dumb to learn something.
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
Rodimus Prime wrote:and with less displacement the potential for better fuel economy should be there, plus theres just something that people connect 5.0 with when they think mustang
im not sure why theres such an uproar about it being DOHC, most engines are, its a superior design, joe redneck just needs to work a bit harder when servicing it thats all
thats like ripping off fuel injection and putting on a carb, you making things easier for yourself but your losing efficiency just because your too dumb to learn something.
Small does not always mean better economy. DOHC is not always the best option. There is nothing wrong with pushrods other than people getting all butt hurt that old technology sometimes is better.
alot of mustang guys are still stuck in the pushrods/carburetor phase of motoring
like cicra 1960
but these are a super small percentage of the people that would actually be buying this car. I 100% support this motor. I have been thinking for a while they should be putting 4v motors in the mustang GT's. I doubt it will be the old 5.0's 4x3 bore/stroke but my main bitch about the mod motors was that they only had a 3.55 bore. a motor in a car like this needs more bore for more valve area IMO.
and as mentioned in the forum link that I posted I would slap and old school 5.0 badge on that fender in a heartbeat
http://www.myspace.com/yourfavoriteprofile
I think you'll be seeing a lot more of this in years to come from all manufacturers, or at least whichever ones are left by then... With the new emission/economy regulations going into effect, they're going to need DOHC structure to facilitate things like individual cam-phasing. Thats why, as much as most people bitch about the enviro regs, if you think about it, some of the greatest leaps in automotive technology have come as a result of damn-dirty-hippy legislation. Would we have had things like individiual coil packs, fuel injection, variable cam timing/phasing, etc, were it not for automotive engineers being forced to figure out ways to make powerful engines that also run clean? I think you're going to be seeing a lot more small-displacement turbo motors in small cars now as well.
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
Hasn't GM been doing this for years now with LS series motors ?
My Cav
I give up...
i'm buying a VW those people love trees, so they should love eachother too... "Andy"
I was just referring to the power output. ALSO mileage is DAMN respectable out of them....... I also believe the LS2+ Generations have Variable Valve Timing no ?
My Cav
I give up...
i'm buying a VW those people love trees, so they should love eachother too... "Andy"
mitdr774 wrote:Rodimus Prime wrote:and with less displacement the potential for better fuel economy should be there, plus theres just something that people connect 5.0 with when they think mustang
im not sure why theres such an uproar about it being DOHC, most engines are, its a superior design, joe redneck just needs to work a bit harder when servicing it thats all
thats like ripping off fuel injection and putting on a carb, you making things easier for yourself but your losing efficiency just because your too dumb to learn something.
Small does not always mean better economy. DOHC is not always the best option. There is nothing wrong with pushrods other than people getting all butt hurt that old technology sometimes is better.
The current mustang does not have pushrods - they haven't had pushrods since the early 90's IIRC. 4.6 was a SOHC or DOHC engine...
Agreed that this is as much about a redesign with new technology as it is pushrod vs OHC. Variable valve timing is a great thing
NUTCASE . wrote:no
LS motors are all pushrod, 2valve, UN-variable cam, no direct injection
but they are damn effective I will give them that......
new camaro direct injection what?
gm had DOHC V8s in the early 90s with the ZR1, caddys use them now
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
oldskool wrote: The current mustang does not have pushrods - they haven't had pushrods since the early 90's IIRC. 4.6 was a SOHC or DOHC engine...
Agreed that this is as much about a redesign with new technology as it is pushrod vs OHC. Variable valve timing is a great thing
I was referring to the comment about DOHC being superior to pushrods. It has its place but The GM LS based engines have had no problem making power and having decent economy at the same time. The LT5 was neat but very expensive to produce and rather complex compared to a "low technology" pushrod design. Ever work on a Northstar while it was in a car? They are massive and can be a giant pain in the ass to work on. In real world driving the 5.3L will out perform the 4.2L in every aspect in the GMT 360/370 platform. It has more displacement, more cylinders, pushrods, and is "old technology" yet with only a slight advantage in power it propels the vehicle better, has better fuel economy, and sounds a hell of a lot better. Even with its cam phasing technology the 4.3L just cant do what the pushrod V8 can, make usable torque without reving the piss out of the thing. I will take pushrods in my V8 please.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Friday, May 22, 2009 9:22 PM
Rodimus Prime wrote:and with less displacement the potential for better fuel economy should be there, plus theres just something that people connect 5.0 with when they think mustang
im not sure why theres such an uproar about it being DOHC, most engines are, its a superior design, joe redneck just needs to work a bit harder when servicing it thats all
thats like ripping off fuel injection and putting on a carb, you making things easier for yourself but your losing efficiency just because your too dumb to learn something.
Funny that GM makes 505hp N/A out of a 427ci
pushrod engine. DOHC is nice for 4-cylinders, but i'll take a 346+ci pushrod V-8 engine over any DOHC(thats 5.7 liters).
"Project 69'"
1969 Chevrolet C/10, 1/2 ton, 2wd
-Boosted LS1?
-Richmond ROD 6-speed(will get sometime)
-Posi 12-bolt(built w/eaton posi unit and richmond 3.73 gears)
-Disc brake and 5 lug swap
+little extras
One of the (MAIN) reasons that GM's V8 are doing great MPGs is the sheer fact they carry tall overdrive gearing on their trannies. When at highway (80+mph) speeds, they loft over at a 2000 rpm range. Yes, OHV vs a comparable DOHC with the same tune/tranny/car, the OHV will do better in efficiency simply because it has a lot less crap/load to move.
But DOHC engines are not only generally heavy, but also top heavy too. That top heaviness raises the center of gravity and affects the car's handling.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Quote:
the OHV will do better in efficiency simply because it has a lot less crap/load to move.
But DOHC engines are not only generally heavy, but also top heavy too. That top heaviness raises the center of gravity and affects the car's handling.
do you know how many times I have been laughed at when saying that about OHC engines in public
its true, but people refuse to grasp the concept.
kinda like the monoleaf rear in the vette. alot of people would rather just believe it has a "leaf spring rear like a truck and therefore its junk"
http://www.myspace.com/yourfavoriteprofile
all this over something m,ooders have been doing for a while you can bore a 4.6 dohc out to 5 litre specs.you can buy the kit to do it
Trevor Mullins wrote:all this over something m,ooders have been doing for a while you can bore a 4.6 dohc out to 5 litre specs.you can buy the kit to do it
agreed. This is not a huge deal in general, but all those guys in their early/mid 20's when the original "5.0" reigned will now have a boner for this car.
Somehow JBO turned it into a ohc vs pushrode debate?
Vincent Morris wrote:NUTCASE . wrote:no
LS motors are all pushrod, 2valve, UN-variable cam, no direct injection
but they are damn effective I will give them that......
new camaro direct injection what?
this is true.. Also the L92 IS a LS motor with VVT.= variable valve timing.
.
member 1244or55
.
http://www22.ocn.ne.jp/~cavalier
Trevor Mullins wrote:all this over something m,ooders have been doing for a while you can bore a 4.6 dohc out to 5 litre specs.you can buy the kit to do it
iirc the kit takes the bore out to 3.75. at one point you could also get a complete 5.0L 4v mod motor from frpp but the cost to benifit ratio was not there.
Quote:
but all those guys in their early/mid 20's when the original "5.0" reigned will now have a boner for this car.
>guilty<
I have owned 3 5.0 GT's. my first car was a 83(not an official "5.0" but it did have the 302) an 89' and a 92'.
then when the mod motors came out I never really had intrest for those and thought they were a stupid idea for a car like a mustang. great truck/van/suv motor, but not for a sports car (4v cobra motors both N/A and SC withheld). I was never even really a believer in the 3v motors. all that technology and advancement and a 5.7 LS1 from 1998 could still rip its balls off in a heavier car while getting better gas mileage.
http://www.myspace.com/yourfavoriteprofile
. finally forced the blue oval guys to get serious with the mustang. 