Michael Yount
Mustang Master
I'll admit I skimmed through and must've missed the piece you quoted above - I'll go back and take a closer look. Be back in the thread in a minute....
Does SVO = FRPP?
- Thread starter JimBowy
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Michael Yount
Mustang Master
I don't see anything in the site that I think conflicts with the perspective presented. They are tracking the history of these entities - and, just as I concluded when I read it before, they define very different roles for each of the entities. And when they say SVO/Ford Motorsport is now FRPP - I believe that change (which happened a while back) signaled the new structure which has FRPP more removed from the manufacturing/development arm of things.
Also, when you say SVT is 'merely' marketing - well, not sure how to put it - the marketing arm of that outfit has at least equal if not much more pull about product than the engineering staff does. SVE designs/builds in RESPONSE to the marketing arm - not the other way around. That's why they restructured things the way they did - they needed the marketing and dealer training to make a success of this product development arm.
But, I suspect we've spent enough of each other's time on this one....
Also, when you say SVT is 'merely' marketing - well, not sure how to put it - the marketing arm of that outfit has at least equal if not much more pull about product than the engineering staff does. SVE designs/builds in RESPONSE to the marketing arm - not the other way around. That's why they restructured things the way they did - they needed the marketing and dealer training to make a success of this product development arm.
But, I suspect we've spent enough of each other's time on this one....
89MustangGX
I have nothing productive to add!
Michael Yount said:
Now THAT, I agree with.
I get the feeling if we ever got together we'd still butt heads like crazy but get along real well.
I have to hand it to you -- you always seem to have a different perspective on things and you're quite persistant. I truthfully admire that. I can only hope I annoy you as much as you do me.
(Just kidding on the last part.)
(Well, sort of.
)No, really I was -- I do have a lot of respect for you and your opinions, and I enjoy our little "discussions."
LOL
Well I enjoyed watching you two battle it out anyhow... so is there a short conclusion.... to my question?
is an SVO trans for example a weak part because it was intended for a 2.3 or is it just a trans made by ford... racing...??
Well I enjoyed watching you two battle it out anyhow... so is there a short conclusion.... to my question?
is an SVO trans for example a weak part because it was intended for a 2.3 or is it just a trans made by ford... racing...??
Michael Yount
Mustang Master
Jim - I don't think there is a short conclusion to your question. You need to know the specifics of the part and what it was intended for in the first place, and you can't necessarily glean that from the brand/name that it's marketed by. You can count on this though - Ford Racing "makes" virtually nothing they sell. Others do and they put the FRPP label on it/box it up as FRPP.
Like Michael said, you have to know which SVO you're talking about. The Mustang SVO transmission or the FMS SVO/FRPP transmission? Two different animals there. You can't just say "SVO" and expect us to to answer what the parts is from and or what's it's intended to be used for.JimBowy said:
The Mustang SVO had a four-cylinder T-5 made by Borg Warner (now TTC/Tremec). The gear spacing is different (wider) and the torque capacty is lower than a V8 T-5 (non WC and WC alike).
The FMS SVO/FRPP T-5 is a "Super Duty" (FMS SVO/FRPP nickname) version of BW's original "World Class" (BW nickname) V8 T-5.
FoxChasis said:
excellent, well it must be the 2nd one because with 400 ft/lbs of torque for 60,000 miles there's no way the weaker four-cylinder t-5 could have survived.
thanks!
Similar threads
