Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by 98GTfromGA, Jan 21, 2004.
because its woefully unnecessary and i'm extremely happy with the car I'm getting...
It's necessary if you want the car to handle! "Good enough" just isn't enough for me. If Ford had deemed decent handling to be "good enough" in 69-70, we wouldn't be having a conversation about the Boss 302 today.
The difference between a live axle and IRS is substantial. There's two places that a live axle is more efficient - NASCAR and drag racing. NASCAR because it keeps weight down and there's no concern with handling (and hell, an IRS might even be illegal in NASCAR the way their rules are). Drag racing because it's easier and cheaper to build a live axle that'll withstand repeated high-rpm launches. However, on the street, road course, or track, IRS walks all over the live axle. If it doesn't have IRS, I won't be looking at it seriously unless it's a $27K car, and that ain't gonna happen. If you want to charge $33-35K for a Mustang, it better have IRS. A properly built factory IRS can withstand hard launches. The 03 Cobra IRS is the best thing ever from the factory in a Fox platform. But with the LS-derived platform, expect that the IRS, especially if SVT contributes to the development, should easily take the abuse of a 600hp motor launching hard.
Well it's one thing not to want the IRS standard on the base level V8 model i.e. the GT and to not want it on an entirely different beast who's heritage is a superbly handling road car.
Which is the main reason I wish Ford would build 3 special editions. The Mach 1 to cater to 1/4 mile crowd with better gears a big forced induction engine(perfect candidate for the 03 Cobra engine), the Boss to cater to the guys that want speed and handling(maybe the N/A 3v 5.4 or the prototype 5.8 V10 and IRS) and the Cobra to cater to the guy that wants it all and has the pockets deep enough to pay for it(supercharged 5.4 out of the GT, IRS and an interior that would make a Benz owner cringe in envy).
I don't think that we will see a 3.70" bore mod motor, factory installed, anytime soon. From what I've heard the motors will not meet Ford's reliability requirements with that large of a bore. Since the bore centers are 3.937" that leaves less than 1/4" between the cylinders. So if you're using individual cylinder liners they are only 0.1185" thick at the point the bores meet!
The Shelby Cobra V10 uses 3.66" bores, so I wonder if Ford has figured out a way to make the bores that large and have the engine last.
Now if we took a 91.5mm bore & 94mm stroke (same stroke as on the Shelby Cobra V10) it comes out to 301.75 CID.
That's not entirely true!
You do not need an IRS to make a car handle good, specially a Mustang. Here is evidence #1: Maximum Motorsports
Naturally you can make a Mustang have good handling with a solid rear. But I want the car to not only be good, but to be as good or better than the competition, and also have good street manners. No one else uses a solid axle, and there's a reason for that. With a solid rear, you can get good handling on the track, but it doesn't translate well to the real streets that the average Mustang spends 99% of its time on. And even on the track, IRS has a small advantage.
Then again revisit their website...
The only deal with solid axles. You can not argue with me or anyone that knows about maximum motorsports that they are not competitive cause you will loose. They have proven that a car with a solid axle can be made to handle as good as an IRS car on the track and on the street.
I have had both IRS and solid axle. True, the IRS will be a strong performer out of the box, but also look at the disadvantages of the IRS, especially power loss... in My cobra is was more than 15 hp at stock levels...
I did not say that MM was not competitive. MM-equipped cars are awesome on the track, but to get them to IRS-like performance, you lose street manners. My SVO has great handling, but if there's a bump in the corner I'll go flying off the road in a hurry. And even when you go all-out with suspension setup, IRS is better. Why do you think every sports car out there has IRS? Do you think the Ford GT would be better as a solid axle car, but they made it IRS because GT buyers want a cushy ride? I didn't think so.
My guess/hope would be a Boss 281/460/4.6/whatever they want to call it with:
4V VVT 4.6 with 350+hp (5.0 would be interesting, but not being a production motor, more expensive and thus, unlikely)
6 spd, close ratio MTX
performance suspension upgrade, including IRS, like that even needs to be said
Unique though subdued trim enhancements -- make this a serious performance piece, not the circus come to town for the visual braggards.
I honestly would not have a problem with that. Keep it around 30 grand...and I'm sold. Otherwise...fugget about it.
You really go flying off the road when you hit a bump? Either you are driving way too fast on city streets. Or you and others are exagerating enough to lower credibilty. I realize people have a hang-up with wanting the IRS. And that's fine. I would have liked it as well. But I have not yet personally seen 1 mustang that was going legal speed limits or slightly above (10-15 mph) go off the road when hitting any bumps or potholes (Unless driving in snow which IRS really isn't going to help).
I guess that's why Steeda's live axled Mustangs dominate the 24 hours of daytona and sebring in their classes, and kick the crap out of everyone else in SCCA and other road type events, and how a Maximum Motorsports equipped fox bodied stang whipped up on everything including a full race prepped car. Why, I think even 5.0 had an article about a crippled chick that yanked the IRS from her Cobra because, AND I QUOTE..."the live axle was more predictable."
The IRS might be better on the street or on rougher roads, I will give you that, but from a performance and handling perspective...I beg to differ.
IRS is overrated, and most people that squall about it are doing nothing more than impressing themselves with the hot air that they spew.
Although I do think it is relevant to a speculatory "BOSS 302" for 2006+. There is a thread open that is there for the soul intent of discussing the pros and cons of IRS.
Must we continue to waste bandwidth and server space with one more thread with the exact same arguement?
Just becuase it has 302 cubic inches, doesn't mean its got the soul to be called a Boss 302. I might be the only one here that thinks that, but everytime I lift the hood of my push rod 5.0L I am awed by how cool it looks compared to the present 4.6 or 5.4 offerings. I can at least still work on my car in the drive way and I don't need Ford's permission to play with my engine.
I think the new '05 Mustang looks awesome--I've seen it with my own eyes here at the LA Auto show. The Boss photochop looks even better. But even the Boss 351 has a V-10, its cool and all, but still--its not a true 351. Not to bring up the new Hemi, but, how the hell can they call that a Hemi. Where is the car world going?
Just my 0.02.
Ummm how about evolving. No offense but you should really reasses current tech. What did the 351 put down stock? Like 340-350 horses and like 380 lb/ft? That new 351 kicks out 430 horses in the same size displacement with probably a lower compression ratio. I applaud Ford for taking steps forward and trying to figure out more inventive ways of making power that would be plausible in today's market of restrictive emission standards low octane gas.
There are plenty of people that can work on mod motors in their driveway. I think the soul of a boss 302 or 351. Is more in how it performs. Rather than what kind of engine is in it.
I like it alot two
What's in a name? Ah yes an old question. In this case we are back to the standard problem that afflicts all of the Modular engines...lack of bore space. We will see how long this engine series stays in production considering the F150 is getting sand kicked in its face by Dodge and Nissan. Off topic you say, hardly. If you can't bore it and you can't stroke it then what exactly can you do with it? How do you squeeze blood... oops I meant 302 CI out of a 281 with the stroke longer than a 351? Yes the aftermarket can help, but the factory can't because it won't go the distance in reliability tests.
It would make a heck of a lot more sense to add 1.5 to 2 inches to the length of a standard V8 block than to engineer a completely seperate V10 to make the same dispalcement. Oh well, the chance to make that decision sailed back around 1990. All because it had to fit in the front wheel drive Continental.
Sorry for the rant. A Boss 302 is highly unlikely. A Boss with no numeric in the name might work.
the Boss 302 was more like 350HP stock, insurance comp is why it was rated at 290.
The Boss 351 was really 440HP+, but once again insurance comps forced Ford to rate it low at 330HP. If one ever looks at the spec's on the 71 Boss 351, theres no way that motor only made 330HP.
Boss 429 another way underated motor,
67 427 WAY under rated
427 Cammer w/ 6' timing chain
and the list goes on.....