Anxiously awaiting some truth. I need a new car fix soon!!!
Anyone else frustrated with Ford over the next GT500?
- Thread starter biminiLX
- Start date
Your friend did not happen to mention the number 808 did he?
QUOTE OF THE DAY! hahaha
as far as Im aware DBK's track record is pretty spotless both in what he says is incorrect and the occasional hint/confirmation given
I'm just speculating here but it seems twins on a V8 presents a packaging nightmare. The development cost difference between a supercharger and twins would be enormous. So that makes it unlikely to begin with. That's before even considering DBK's input, which has been pretty damn clear.
Moving along...the GT500 and the modular Cobras before (previous top dog) had a highly unique engine not offered in the GT. This is why the engine for this new GT500 coming in with a Coyote-block with a blower on top might not be an absolute. We all know the Voodoo didn't need a flat plane to rev to 8K but it made for great marketing hype and that's the level to which FP went to differentiate the engine. Which is why I'm still holding out hope for an engine block we haven't seen before in a Mustang. Either way I don't think Ford will disappoint even the deepest of skeptics. I think the power-to-weight ratio will be right there with the Demon.
Moving along...the GT500 and the modular Cobras before (previous top dog) had a highly unique engine not offered in the GT. This is why the engine for this new GT500 coming in with a Coyote-block with a blower on top might not be an absolute. We all know the Voodoo didn't need a flat plane to rev to 8K but it made for great marketing hype and that's the level to which FP went to differentiate the engine. Which is why I'm still holding out hope for an engine block we haven't seen before in a Mustang. Either way I don't think Ford will disappoint even the deepest of skeptics. I think the power-to-weight ratio will be right there with the Demon.
DBK probably won't share much of his thoughts on what it will be because he knows what it will be and is an ethical person that doesn't want to cause mischief by talking about it.
There is a weird desire some people have to try to be oracles. Ford will release what they release. Forums are for discussing ideas. People get annoyed when "facts" and "guarantees" and so on get thrown around.
Make no doubt of it, DBK knows what he's talking about.
There is a weird desire some people have to try to be oracles. Ford will release what they release. Forums are for discussing ideas. People get annoyed when "facts" and "guarantees" and so on get thrown around.
Make no doubt of it, DBK knows what he's talking about.
It would be nice to know when some ACTUAL ****ING INFORMATION will be released. All the threads on this upcoming car are useless and full of nothing but trolls who are just looking to irritate those of us looking for real information. Everyone's an insider who knows a guy that blew a guy and got his oil checked while overhearing a conversation about the 'hummingbird' or whatever other code named BS they'd like to purport. The only solid information is that there have been several different HEAVILY camouflaged mules spotted with huge brakes, tires, and what seems to sound like a CPC v8 rowing through a traditional standard slushbox. That's literally it. Guys like the turdPill are all over here and 6g. The people that actually know anything are keeping it as tight lipped and leakless as Ford was prior to the FGT coming out and knocking everyone's socks off; just sayin'.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2017
- Messages
- 216
Other than the 96-98 cobra parts of later svt Cobra engines were shared i.e. Terminator heads and cams and block in the aviators and marauders and machs which also used a forged 4.6 crank.
Previously the 302s used the same bottom end but with iron GT40 heads and a cobra intake manifold.
MHO the 5.2 is "special" enough for svt. It would be nice to see a killer R motor as we have seen in the past with 5.4 and 5.8 but even variants of those were used in the f series.
I've all but given up hope for twins. Oh well, it was a long shot a domestic manu would go so far.
Your friend did not happen to mention the number 808 did he?
No, I don't know thePill, nor is he my source (pretty sure he doesn't work on the project like my source). Check my previous posts if you really need the numbers I mentioned...I never mentioned final numbers though, just numbers gained during testing and an estimate on final numbers.
You're pretty knowledgeable about engines, what are your thoughts on the rumor from YoloDB that FPC 5.2s were failing at over 9-psi? Legit or a rumor spread intentionally to throw people off? (by Ford, not Yolo)
The rumors are just Russian propaganda.
Derailed
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2017
- Messages
- 216
9psi from what? Did anyone elaborate? That matters a lot as 9psi from say twin 57s will equate to a different, and in this case, greater total mass of air moved as say 9psi from a 2.3 tvs.
Due to the old 4.6 based architecture there's really not a ton of room between bores to seal a coyote and even less to do the same with a voodoo with extra 2mm of bore.
Honestly if the goal was 2600hp @ 44psi with twin 72s with FI I'd take a 4.6 just because at those HP levels meat between bores or sealing area is a prized commodity, and because it's been done to prove the design works.
The vastly improved higher flowing with better velocity all around than any 4.6 head coyote and voodoo heads become much less of an advantage as soon as we figure boost into the application. Boost is an outstanding band aid for short comings in design such as a small bore, small shrouded valves and small valve seat and curtain area.
Also mitigating the port angle factor.
Basically a longblock is to a FI app what a short block is to a NA app--its job is no longer to make power the blower or turbo does that, just has to hold together.
Anyway to answer your question apart from the answers already given... 9psi I don't see an issue with. That said if the car came with twins I'd personally much prefer a 5.0 to a 5.2 for these reasons even if it meant having a less unique power plant.
Any chance it's smaller than a 5.0 v8 in a bi turbo like BMW AMG Ferrari Audi have done?
Sure hope not. Majority of Euro builders have to comply with size restrictions on displacement. Hence 2.0L fours, 3.0L sixes, 4.0L V8s.
Here in 'Merica we can go big
As above, I would prefer 5.0 to 5.2 if boosted for rigidity/integrity of the bore/block.
-J
First I heard of this size restrictions. I don't really believe it either as AMG had the 6.2 v8, 5.5 v12, 6.0 v12, Bentley 6.0 v12.
A quick check said that there is no size restriction but the is an extra tax on the size.
A quick check said that there is no size restriction but the is an extra tax on the size.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2017
- Messages
- 216
What Bimini said, thank Chiiina.
. One of the most appealing aspects of domestic cars like this is and hopefully always will be that they come with a quasi unique modern larger displacement v8.
The big three euro 4.0l-4.4l euro V8s can make 700-800+hp with software which is great, but I can think of quite a few engines I'd rather spend time with.
Can't imagine a GT500 that had an engine that had to lean on the stereo for help either.
Thanks
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2017
- Messages
- 216
FWIW, and not to add to the speculation, but the GT500 is a ZL1/Hellcat Competitor in terms of straight line performance. ZL1 uses a 2.3L TVS as does the Z06, the Hellcat a 2.4 IHI, it's entirely possible the next GT500 will rock the same 2.3L TVS That would leave the 2650 open to a KR which would historically speaking be a much better comparison to a Demon, and more importantly Ford Racing. /end speculation.
?
C7Z uses a 1.7L?
C7Z uses a 1.7L?
Users who are viewing this thread
