Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2010 - 2014 Specific Tech' started by SS02, Sep 4, 2009.
I don't think Ford was ever known for their strong transmissions; mostly the rears, I think.
What do the Roush cars use? Their 427R is making much more than 360 hp.
The T-56 used in the 03-04 cobras has been succeeded by the Tremec TR-6060 transmission in many former T-56 applications, as well as applications requiring greater strength than the T-56 could offer.
The Termi Cobras were pretty under-rated and modded a lot and that tremec 6 spd in those seemed to get the job done.
Note: I just looked up specs on the Tremec T56 used in the 03 and 04 cobras, they were rated at 450 lb of tq. If it were my guess that would be the transmission to go with, seeing as how the new 5.0 will make about the same power the 4.6 did with the blower stock.
The 3650 weighs 120 LBS
The T56 weighs 130 LBS
10 LBS is not much to complain about there.
EDIT: The Tremec TR-6060 is rated at 600 LB FT, couldn't find the weight, but the internals are stronger.
Roush cars are rated not by RWHP only Crank HP. The Roush Supercharger is built for a V6 so it's a low boost supercharger.
It says adds 115HP (to a 300hp car is 415 - 15% driveline loss = 353 RWHP)
also says adds 65tq (to a 320TQ car is 385 - 15% driveline loss = 327 RWTQ)
thats only 25 foot lbs of crank torque over the rating, I am not 100 % convinced that the roush charger made that.. (Not a fan of the roush charger)
look at the dyno numbers here...
The mustang needs it's very own platform instead of borrowing one from a family sedan.
The car is just too big to began with. Owning both an sn95 and a s197 I can tell you I would much rather have the sn95's dimensions and weight. I don't need better ride quality and handleing if I have to add weight to get it.
Once you start adding larger motors, brakes, FI, intercoolers, etc, to an already fat ass car you end up with a REALLY fat ass car. I'll bet a DOHC 5.0 '11 will go right around 3700 lbs. Too heavy. The termi cobras weighed 3600 + but they had a supercharger/intercooler and beefier brakes,etc.
I love the retro s197 design and the 3v 4.6 but I would have rather had it on the sn95 platform. Maybe that's just me.
And what Ford would say is that it's not cost-effective to have a new platform for a single vehicle.
If I recall, Ford has a habit of keeping the Mustang on outdated platforms. It wasn't until 2005 that they replaced the Fairmont's platform. By that time, that platform was probably nearly 25 years old. The platform in use now is off of that Lincoln MKS or whatever it was called, and it's "only" about 13 years old.
I don't know what the problem is. The import cars pick up slight weight gains, but for some reason, every domestic gains 300 lbs with every generation. The Nissan 370Z actually lost 200 lbs, while picking up updated safety equipment and better all-around performance. I'm stumped as to why the domestics can't do the same.
The S197 platform is loosely based off Ford's DEW98 platform used in the Lincoln LS, and was originally designed to ride on the DEW Lite platform, however, production would have been more expensive. The DEW98 platform consists of 4 wheel independent double wishbone suspension whereas the S197 platform consists of macpherson struts and a solid axle = less money to build. The Mustang is the only car that rides on the S197 platform, and it is technically "new" since 2005, because the DEW platform was modified so heavily that there are few carry-over parts.
The SN95 platform was first used in the Mustang in 1979, so yes it was 25 years old, and this platform was shared with over 10 different cars, but after 1992, the Mustang was the only car still used on this platform, and as we all know 2004 was the last year for the Fox platform.
Honestly, having owned both, the S197 rides and handles much better than the SN95. And the 2010 really didn't have any significant weight gain over the 2005-09 Mustang, so when the drivetrain and brakes are upgraded that will be where any extra weight comes from. The 370Z is a great vehicle, but it's more of a niche vehicle being that it only has 2 seats and doesn't have a price range from 22k to 48k. And being that the 370Z is only a 2 seater with a V6, I'd say even it is heavy for its size tipping the scales at over 3,200 lbs, but it's lighter and smaller therefore more nimble.
Then it can be argued that Porsche 911s are only "niche vehicles" also, and they're 2-seaters. The 997 Turbo weighs in at 35xx lbs. The Lamborghini Gallardo weighs in at 35xx lbs. The Lamborghini Murcielago weighs in at 3900-4100 lbs. The Bugatti Veyron weighs 4400 lbs!
Anyway, yes, that's the vehicle I meant; the Lincoln LS (I couldn't think of the name of it...).
Well then I'll sleep better knowing my Mustang isn't the only fat girl in the club
They should keep the 4.6l instead of going with a 6cyl with 315hp and add the 5.0 to the lineup. Otherwise its going to be expensive to own a 8cyl mustang.
From what others have said on this forum is that the 5.0 is replacing the 4.6 and the 5.4 so it's not going to cost Ford any more money to build it, in fact their cost should go down since they're just building 1 engine for several applications rather than 2 engines.
This is true, but those fat girls have a little bit more "meat" under their tops.
yeah it is.. but this engine might not be heavier and could even be lighter we don't know yet.. just because the displacement is slightly larger does not mean it has to be heavier..
2011 Ford Mustang specs hit the Web
This link states the 2011 mustang kept up with the BMW M3, despite having a 200lb weight DISAdvantage. The BMW weighs 3704Lbs....Yikes..the Mustang may tip 3900Lbs !!
The current GT weighs in at 3553...is it possible that the new mustang is gaining nearly 350lbs !!!
Or was the wording messed up in the evaluation and ment to say the BMW M3 had a 200lb Weight disadvantage, although only weighing 150lbs more than a 2010 model GT. Better hope its the latter version.
BMW M3 Specs
Looks like I'll be buying a 2010 model. D@mned if I'm going to buy a 4000 lb Muscle Car. Not gonna happen.
The only thing this article does is speculate and say what we've all been speculating on this forum for the past 6 months. I'll wait until Ford releases specs, not someone from "the inside"
The 5.0 may very well be lighter, I have heard speculation of being 25-50 lbs lighter but can't remember where i read that info. It can be lighter simply because it is a whole new design. Using current finite element analysis on computers designs, material can be shaved off the block where not needed to save weight without sacrificing strength. However, i expect it to gain 50-100 lbs total on the new car. Still 3600lbs with 400 hp, I could live with that
I could live with that. I'd just remove the back seats, spare tire/jack, and get a fiberglass hood.
Ive been thinking of why the article I posted said that the mustang was so heavy, the only conclusion I can come up with is....maybe...just maybe the new mustang has finally encorporated IRS. I mean, the article says it was running the same times as the new BMW M3.... I mean just by adding a 85 hp and 75tq isnt going to shave such times down. Only handling and a good tire setup will accomplish this. We already know that Ford is going to offer "Stickier" Tires in the new Track pack....but maybe the big secret is an all new IRS setup..which would explain a 3900lb curb weight. What do you guys think ?