Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
Anyone else frustrated with Ford over the next GT500?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="93 347 Cobra" data-source="post: 15702287" data-attributes="member: 7047"><p>Exactly. A side benefit of the 6.2 architecture would be the shorter bores and wider bore spacing leading to a longer but narrower engine which would package more easily. (Shortening the V)</p><p></p><p>I'm too lazy to Google right now but there was an article in a truck magazine (Truck Trend?) where they slapped ProChargers on Ford and GM 6.2 liter trucks and dyno'd them. It was about 80-horse and 50 ft-lb in favor of the Ford. Same boost, same day, side-by-side. To let that engine not make its way into a production Mustang is a huge missed opportunity.</p><p></p><p>Seems the 5.2 rumors are more credible. Hopefully they at least throw in rods that can handle the stresses of above stock power without being prone to failure. Also, upgrading those oil pump gears as you're quite familiar with. </p><p></p><p>I'm also curious about heat dissipation around the exhaust valves on 100mm bore spacing. They achieved pretty fantastic results HP/L-wise on the Ford GT and I'm wondering what they did to keep those valve temps down. That was the limiting factor on Trinity. A redesigned head could be the solution but were the 5.4/5.8 heads really that maxed on coolant flow? Is there much more room in the cooling passages on the newer Voodoo heads to make a significant difference?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="93 347 Cobra, post: 15702287, member: 7047"] Exactly. A side benefit of the 6.2 architecture would be the shorter bores and wider bore spacing leading to a longer but narrower engine which would package more easily. (Shortening the V) I'm too lazy to Google right now but there was an article in a truck magazine (Truck Trend?) where they slapped ProChargers on Ford and GM 6.2 liter trucks and dyno'd them. It was about 80-horse and 50 ft-lb in favor of the Ford. Same boost, same day, side-by-side. To let that engine not make its way into a production Mustang is a huge missed opportunity. Seems the 5.2 rumors are more credible. Hopefully they at least throw in rods that can handle the stresses of above stock power without being prone to failure. Also, upgrading those oil pump gears as you're quite familiar with. I'm also curious about heat dissipation around the exhaust valves on 100mm bore spacing. They achieved pretty fantastic results HP/L-wise on the Ford GT and I'm wondering what they did to keep those valve temps down. That was the limiting factor on Trinity. A redesigned head could be the solution but were the 5.4/5.8 heads really that maxed on coolant flow? Is there much more room in the cooling passages on the newer Voodoo heads to make a significant difference? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
Anyone else frustrated with Ford over the next GT500?
Top