Which engine you rather have in the next Mach 1/ BOSS?

Discussion in '2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by Z28x, May 5, 2004.


What would you rather have in the next Mach1/BOSS

  1. 375HP 5.4L 3v V8

    40 vote(s)
  2. 375HP 5.0L 4v V8

    47 vote(s)
  1. 351CJ knows his stuff, that's all good and accurate info. To compare an FE in a truck (trucks typically ran a de-stroked 390, the 360 V-8) to the 427 in an original GT-40 is just about as noteworthy as the guy comparing the 5.4 in his mom's Navigator to the 5.4 in the new Ford GT. Of course, the FE does have one noteworthy trate that stigmatizes it as a "station wagon motor". "FE" stands for "Ford Edsel" ;)
  2. Id rather have the 4V because my first mod would likely be a turbo or supercharger. What are the compression ratios on these two 375hp engines?
  3. I don't want to scare you guys and tell you how old I am, but in my day I took apart and built up enough FE's to still remember them inside and out. :eek::eek::eek:
  4. With age comes wisdom.

    As far as being on topic, I just really don't see Ford putting that $15,000 engine in ANY car they sell. As for the 5.4, I LOVE that motor (have one in the family Excursion, yes, we didn't get the 6.8 like I wanted, damn gas prices) so I would love to see in in a Mustang.
  5. i don't think the extra torque of the 5.4 is enough to justify it over an engine like the cammer, if there is a choice between the two. Its not that much torquier, and the extra rpm and high-tech nature of a VVT, 4v 5.0 Cammer might attract more customers.
  6. the darn 5.4 is unersquare
    meaning it cant rev
    5.0 all the way
  7. Nice thread :)

    5.0 sounds nice to me, as long as it is modular and reliable... but I would think it would be cost effective to place the 5.4 in the car... tune it for the mustang.... it will do to the mustang like it does to the lightening...

    Also, there wasn't a mass produced 351 in a mustang in the 90s... it was a cobra r, very limited edition, much like the 2000 Cobra R.

    I like the 5.4 3 valve... it feels right in the awesome new f150.
  8. one thought to bear in mind.... the 5.0 would just about be a new engine..... the 5.4 is tested well.... I am sure a good tune will have it snappy in a stang...
  9. Everybody knows that, nobody said that a 351 was mass-produced in the 90's, so what was your point?

    Oh yeah, while we're talking limited production, don't forget that Saleen produced the S351 between 1994 and 1999, a total of 297 copies, supercharged and non-supercharged combined. Considering that these cars were sold new, through Ford dealerships, with warranties, qualifies them as 351 powered Mustangs in the 90's, IMHO.
  10. How many of you think that the next special ed. stang will just have the same 4.6L DOHC supercharged engine that is in the current STV Cobra's?

    Anyway, If I had to decide between a 5.4 SOHC 3v, and a 5.0L DOHC 4v, I think I would go with the 5.4 since low wnd torque is where the fun is, for me at least. I love jabbing the throttle at 2500 rpm in my '94 5.0L (which, I know, has way less hp & tq that either of the two engines in question), and feeling the torque do it's thing. While it is fun to wind it out to 5500 rpm, I rarely do that just driving around town.
  11. It is VERY unlikely that the next special edition Mustang will have the same 4.6L DOHC S/C engine that is in the current SVT Cobra.

    Ford has already said that production of that engine has ended and it will NOT be used again.

    There might be a new 4.6 S/C engine, like a 3V - aluminum block version, or possibly an updated 4V S/C version with an aluminum block, but the 03 / 04 SVT Cobra iron block engine is now history.
  12. I thought for sure the 5.4L would have won. The 5.4L was very desired for the SN95 Stang
  13. I think, a lot of people see the 5.4 as too cumbersome. The 4.6 already has the external dimensions of a bigblock. The 5.4 is taller and wider than the 4.6. Unless Ford has made some provisons for the added size, it may not even fit in the new chassis.
  14. the 5.4 lightning engine will fit in a SN95 fine except for hood clearance so Im guessing the basic 5.4 fits fine.
  15. That's an awfully big guess to take on a completely redesigned car. Looking at the engine compartment of the new stang. I am not sure there is enough room for the 5.4. Yet we know that the 5.0 is basicly the same external size. I personally would rather have the 5.0. But it's partly because the 5.0 name was associated with teh mustang for so long. That to me it just sounds better. Now if it was something like a Boss 429 limited edition or A mach 351. Then the story might be a little different. But the most produced Boss was the 302. Which would put more influence on people to choose the 5.0. At least that is my feelings on the whole subject.

  16. It is kind of Funny how Mustang fans are so nostolgic of displacement numbers, No one on the Vette and Camaro forums is shedding a tear over the loss of the 5.7L for the new 6.0L :D
  17. That;s true. But I personally don't think the C6 looks anything like the 63 corvette. Or any other past corvette. So they don't have the retro design theme to stand on. And I think the Camaro fans are too busy lamenting the loss of the whole car. To be worried about the size of the engine. :D
  18. seeing as how the C6 vette is going to have a 400hp 6.0L, the next (2007?) Camaro will most likely use the same LS2 engine. If this is so, the Mustang GT will be getting spanked up and down the streets by Z28's all day, just like it has been since 1993, and the introduction of the 275hp LT1. :( Hopefully by then Ford will have introduced a 400hp+ engine option for either the GT, Boss or Mach 1 version for under $35,000.

    The 5.4L 3v in the F-150 makes 300hp and 365tq, so I would imagine a Mustang tuned version of the same engine could realistically push 350hp and 400tq. I was serioulsy hoping the 5.4L would be the standard (or at least optional) engine on the 2005 GT. Why Ford wants to give GM a 90 cubic inch advantage is beyond me. Maybe eventually someone on the Mustang design teams will decide it's time to reintroduce the 428SCJ :D
  19. I bet you that 3V would rev just as high as the 4V. Hell, right now my 2V revs to 6500 safely. Also dont forget that the 3V's are supposed to have a sort of variable valve timing that will make the low end torque with the big displacement, yet make top end power as well. It's like the perfect compliment to the modular motor, no matter what the displacement. Just my .02 cents.
  20. Anyone who (if given the choice) would take a 5.0 over a 5.4 for the same price deserves to be given the 5.0 instead of the 5.4. The 5.4 could produce a reliable na. 400hp with less rpms than a 5.0 and would produce better torque numbers at a lower compression. (no premium gas needed)

    I wont even go into what throwing a novi 2000 on it would do.....but with forged internals you could crank this pup upto 600 rwhp easily. thats whats good about bigger displacement, its easier to get more power.

    But make both.........whoever wants the 5.0 can have it.