Road & Track: Flat Crank 600hp 5.4 NA GT350

[specizripn]

keep dreaming. you'll find out as the months pass by. wait till January!

Oh I will, sorry if that was an asinine comment, im just a little irritated at the fact that every magazine and forum page has someone saying they know somebody and everyone says something different. Ima just wait till ford announces it themselves op:

 

[Fenixfire]

I dont see how one can say that the 5.0 wont be gaining any more power N/A......The 5.0 is HARDLY maxed out for streetable N/A hp. Not even close. People can make 430 whp with a tune and basic bolt ons and those are perfectly reliable and streetable. Id even go so far to say that the 5.0s out there making 500 hp to the TIRES (not crank) are quite streetable. If Ford really wanted to, they could bring out a production 5.0 that makes 475 hp NA and meet all quality, reliability and NVH requirements without even breaking a sweat AND it could get better mileage than the current 5.0.

 

[mtrsprt]

I dont see how one can say that the 5.0 wont be gaining any more power N/A......The 5.0 is HARDLY maxed out for streetable N/A hp. Not even close. People can make 430 whp with a tune and basic bolt ons and those are perfectly reliable and streetable. Id even go so far to say that the 5.0s out there making 500 hp to the TIRES (not crank) are quite streetable. If Ford really wanted to, they could bring out a production 5.0 that makes 475 hp NA and meet all quality, reliability and NVH requirements without even breaking a sweat AND it could get better mileage than the current 5.0.

While this may be true, Ford also has to decide how far they want to push the risk, without sacrificing excessive warranty claims......

 

[americansteel]

I dont see how one can say that the 5.0 wont be gaining any more power N/A......The 5.0 is HARDLY maxed out for streetable N/A hp. Not even close. People can make 430 whp with a tune and basic bolt ons and those are perfectly reliable and streetable. Id even go so far to say that the 5.0s out there making 500 hp to the TIRES (not crank) are quite streetable. If Ford really wanted to, they could bring out a production 5.0 that makes 475 hp NA and meet all quality, reliability and NVH requirements without even breaking a sweat AND it could get better mileage than the current 5.0.

yeah I remember ford stating that the 5.0 is maxxed for N/A street performance as a mass produced engine. you stated that the 5.0 can make 475hp and get better mileage than the current 5.0, that is totally false and can never happen. a 5.0l making 475hp is revving past 6800RPM. why in the world would ford make a screaming engine in N/A form for a daily driven vehicle that doesn't even see that kind of RPM except for track use? reliability will suffer, NVH goes up and quality suffers. nearly 90 percent of GT owners don't even race their mustangs! the 5.8l will take that task in the upcoming models.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

yeah I remember ford stating that the 5.0 is maxxed for N/A street performance as a mass produced engine.

if you're going to keep spewing this same ****in bullshit line all over this damn forum, then post a reference already. of course we all know that you won't, because not only would ford never make an official statement of this sort, it's complete bullshit to begin with.
THE BOSS HAS 444HP - THE 5.0l IS NOT MAXED OUT AT 420. there is NOTHING exotic or expensive about the roadrunner 5.0l, aside from MAYBE the heads(and that would take nothing more than a casting modification to incorporated the changes that they are CNC-ing into the boss heads), this engine could easily be a standard GT engine.
"revving past 6800RPM" - oh jesus, what is this, 1970? 7000RPM isn't exactly impossible for a 150,000 mile engine these days. go tell honduh they don't know what the **** they're doing, putting a 9000RPM limited engine in the S2000...

 

[americansteel]

if you're going to keep spewing this same ****in bullshit line all over this damn forum, then post a reference already. of course we all know that you won't, because not only would ford never make an official statement of this sort, it's complete bullshit to begin with.
THE BOSS HAS 444HP - THE 5.0l IS NOT MAXED OUT AT 420. there is NOTHING exotic or expensive about the roadrunner 5.0l, aside from MAYBE the heads(and that would take nothing more than a casting modification to incorporated the changes that they are CNC-ing into the boss heads), this engine could easily be a standard GT engine.
"revving past 6800RPM" - oh jesus, what is this, 1970? 7000RPM isn't exactly impossible for a 150,000 mile engine these days. go tell honduh they don't know what the **** they're doing, putting a 9000RPM limited engine in the S2000...

2010 ford made the statement. but of course people like you don't know anything about engines, but I guess owning a mustang makes you qualify as a car tuner right? lol typical mustang cry baby's.
I've built several 5.0l engines and I know what it takes for that 5.0l coyote motor to push 475HP with out the aid of forced induction. and that is what ford looks at! and the Boss 302 mustang? what a piece of shit on the street. you don't like it??? TOO BAD!!! a factual statement given by the manufacture.

 

[mtrsprt]

the Boss 302 mustang? what a piece of shit on the street.

:??:

 

[americansteel]

yup -_-

 

[chuckstang]

if you're going to keep spewing this same ****in bullshit line all over this damn forum, then post a reference already. of course we all know that you won't, because not only would ford never make an official statement of this sort, it's complete bullshit to begin with.
THE BOSS HAS 444HP - THE 5.0l IS NOT MAXED OUT AT 420. there is NOTHING exotic or expensive about the roadrunner 5.0l, aside from MAYBE the heads(and that would take nothing more than a casting modification to incorporated the changes that they are CNC-ing into the boss heads), this engine could easily be a standard GT engine.
"revving past 6800RPM" - oh jesus, what is this, 1970? 7000RPM isn't exactly impossible for a 150,000 mile engine these days. go tell honduh they don't know what the **** they're doing, putting a 9000RPM limited engine in the S2000...

I agree with everything you said but you cant compare a honda 4 banger revving to 9k to a Ford V8 revving to whatever said rpm

 

[chuckstang]

2010 ford made the statement. but of course people like you don't know anything about engines, but I guess owning a mustang makes you qualify as a car tuner right? lol typical mustang cry baby's.
I've built several 5.0l engines and I know what it takes for that 5.0l coyote motor to push 475HP with out the aid of forced induction. and that is what ford looks at! and the Boss 302 mustang? what a piece of shit on the street. you don't like it??? TOO BAD!!! a factual statement given by the manufacture.

you havent built shit, my money is on you being about 16 years old :read:

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

2010 ford made the statement.
and yet you can't even post a ****ing link backing it up

but of course people like you don't know anything about engines, but I guess owning a mustang makes you qualify as a car tuner right? lol typical mustang cry baby's.
really? what mustang do i own? that's about as factual as your quotation from ford...

I've built several 5.0l engines and I know what it takes for that 5.0l coyote motor to push 475HP with out the aid of forced induction. and that is what ford looks at!
news flash rocket surgeon: a 302 windsor/cleveland bears ZERO relevance to a 5.0l coyote. oh, unless you're going to tell how many countless coyote's you've built... :rollseyes

quote where i said 475HP, oh great observant reader

and the Boss 302 mustang? what a piece of shit on the street.
wow, thanks for the factual statement. your worthless opinion doesn't change the FACT that the boss 302 is packing naturally aspirated variant of the 5.0l coyote that makes 444HP - read that again, 444HP. one more time, 444HP. i don't know if you can count or not, but 444 is a larger number than 420.

you don't like it??? TOO BAD!!! a factual statement given by the manufacture.
and you STILL can't post a ****in link backing up said statement

back your shit up or shut the **** up already. all you've posted since the day of your arrival to this site is utter garbage that you pull out of your ass. NOTHING you say can be backed up with any legitimate reference, because it's all bullshit and everyone here knows it. even you, no matter how hard you try to posture.

I agree with everything you said but you cant compare a honda 4 banger revving to 9k to a Ford V8 revving to whatever said rpm

wasn't intending to compare the two as much as i was just having fun with his ignorance. i doubt he even knew that honda offered a 9000RPM street engine, let alone for ~$35k.
besides, the coyote already revs to 7000RPM while the boss 302 roadrunner revs to 7500RPM, straight from the factory and on the street. don't tell genius up there that though, because he doesn't think ford would ever make a street V8 that revs past 6800RPM...

i wonder if he knows that the 2013+ GT500 revs to 7000RPM too...

 

[NametoShowOther]

back your shit up or shut the **** up already. all you've posted since the day of your arrival to this site is utter garbage that you pull out of your ass. NOTHING you say can be backed up with any legitimate reference, because it's all bullshit and everyone here knows it. even you, no matter how hard you try to posture.


wasn't intending to compare the two as much as i was just having fun with his ignorance. i doubt he even knew that honda offered a 9000RPM street engine, let alone for ~$35k.
besides, the coyote already revs to 7000RPM while the boss 302 roadrunner revs to 7500RPM, straight from the factory and on the street. don't tell genius up there that though, because he doesn't think ford would ever make a street V8 that revs past 6800RPM...

i wonder if he knows that the 2013+ GT500 revs to 7000RPM too...

Next claim will be a power stroke in the SE's

 

[americansteel]

putting facts on this thread seems to get me trolled on by a bunch of fan boy losers! but of course I don't expect much from wannabe "mustang owners" and so called professional "engine experts" I think I might have to stop now apparently im baiting trolls.

 

[jes_csx]

So you claim to be a professional, huh?

 

[Voltwings]

*comes on Mustang (sub)forum and gets mad at "mustang owners." lol

Yes, with no other changes, it would take more rpms to make more horsepower with the equation for horsepower being Torque X rpm / 5252 for those wondering.

Now, that leaves us with two options for making more power: More airflow velocity (read: torque) in the midrange/top end, or more RPMS, and since 6700 rpms is just astronomical lol lets start with mid range airflow.

Of course since we're all engine builders and tuners here i dont need to explain how airflow effects power lol, but lets look at what our goal realistically is. 470hp. So, assuming we achieve no increase in RPM, we need to target around 370 torque at 6700 rpms.

Assuming the current coyote sees 420 hp (330tq), you're realistically looking for 40 crank torque at 6700 rpms to get 470 whp... not exactly "remarkable" or "unachieveable," when you consider the heads, cams, and tuning available from the Ti-vct system. Thats also assuming we stick with a strict 6700 rpms limit, but if we bump it up to just 7000, we only need 350 torque for our magical 470hp number... again, not exactly unbelieveable.

 

[1wild-horse]

I'm sure they revved this biatch past 7 grand, sounded good too! Sorry bout the wind noise.
[youtube_browser]/FpTIXU0VDLQ[/youtube_browser]

 

[specizripn]

you havent built shit, my money is on you being about 16 years old :read:

Good so I'm not the only one thinking this

 

[RTD]

Come on guys, anytime someone starts a post with "my buddy's cousin works at Ford and he told me this secret info" I stop reading and hit the back button on my browser.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

What makes you say this? I believe Ford said it would have performance gains(dont quote me on this), and there already castings in the block for direct injection which would probably be accompanied by an increase in compression or more aggressive cam timing. There is so much going around, im taking everything with a grain of salt. Just have to wait and see :shrug:

Dude, this had my mind boggled for a good 5min until I tracked down who actually said this because it wasn't me lol. You quoted me but I was quoting someone else who for some reason was improperly quoted (you can see it on the previous page). I don't believe this whatsoever and I was questioning the person who posted this just as you are.

The guy that posted it is 16 years old as stated above... I'm 28. Americansteel, we have professionals that work for Ford on this board and they don't engage in back and forth banter as you do, nor do they make extravagant claims. You can say til your face goes blue but this site is pretty damn reliable and it's members know who bs'ing and who is real. There's only TWO members I can think of that are unanimously considered reliable in the 10 years Ive been here and you are not one!

 

[specizripn]

Dude, this had my mind boggled for a good 5min until I tracked down who actually said this because it wasn't me lol. You quoted me but I was quoting someone else who for some reason was improperly quoted (you can see it on the previous page). I don't believe this whatsoever and I was questioning the person who posted this just as you are.

The guy that posted it is 16 years old as stated above... I'm 28. Americansteel, we have professionals that work for Ford on this board and they don't engage in back and forth banter as you do, nor do they make extravagant claims. You can say til your face goes blue but this site is pretty damn reliable and it's members know who bs'ing and who is real. There's only TWO members I can think of that are unanimously considered reliable in the 10 years Ive been here and you are not one!

My apologies! I should've paid more attention :bash: