REVscene Automotive Forum

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)
-   Vancouver Auto Chat (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-auto-chat_173/)
-   -   Ford 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 twin-turbo engine revealed (https://www.revscene.net/forums/560137-ford-3-5-liter-ecoboost-v-6-twin-turbo-engine-revealed.html)

kumbo1 01-13-2009 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon (Post 6222273)
it only had 4 cylinders... lol

lol...You spew stuff outta your mouth that you don't even know anything about...Go and check the SVO mustang in google, if anyone cares...

Great68 01-13-2009 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumbo1 (Post 6222405)
lol...You spew stuff outta your mouth that you don't even know anything about...Go and check the SVO mustang in google, if anyone cares...

Um, it only had 4 cylinders was pretty much exactly the problem.

When people think Mustang they think V8 Muscle. Period.

Alatar 01-13-2009 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumbo1 (Post 6222405)
lol...You spew stuff outta your mouth that you don't even know anything about...Go and check the SVO mustang in google, if anyone cares...

Uh. No, he speaks correctly. The first and only mass-market production mustang that was turbocharged was back in the early 80s, and it was a turbo 4 cylinder.

!LittleDragon 01-13-2009 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumbo1 (Post 6222405)
lol...You spew stuff outta your mouth that you don't even know anything about...Go and check the SVO mustang in google, if anyone cares...

Lemme see.... who on earth would buy a 4cyl "muscle" car? Part of owning a muscle car is to be able to make fun of the 4bangers.. Average joe doesn't care how much power it'll make, it's got freakin 4 cylinders!

heleu 01-13-2009 11:02 PM

A lot of manufacturers are starting to match 6 cylinder engines with turbos. I think the turbo lag we used to associate with 90's turbo four cylinders will be a thing of the past.

...and RE, 4cyl muscle car, the V6 mustang outsells the V8 mustang by a big margin if I recall correctly. A lot of people just want the image.

!LittleDragon 01-13-2009 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heleu (Post 6222912)
...and RE, 4cyl muscle car, the V6 mustang outsells the V8 mustang by a big margin if I recall correctly. A lot of people just want the image.


Times are different now... Back then, you didn't have a lot of women buying the Mustang either.

thumper 01-14-2009 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon (Post 6222813)
Lemme see.... who on earth would buy a 4cyl "muscle" car? Part of owning a muscle car is to be able to make fun of the 4bangers.. Average joe doesn't care how much power it'll make, it's got freakin 4 cylinders!

tough call... yes there was a 4cyl mustang, but the mustang was the only pony/muscle car to survive when both the camaro and firebird were both killed off.

wasn't at one point in history the dodge challenger became a little mitsubishi-based car?

LowTEC 01-14-2009 11:21 AM

^^we are talking about 20 years difference in time frame

bossxx 01-14-2009 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumbo1 (Post 6217310)
"We're able to decrease the size of the available engine - such as installing a V-6 versus a
V-8 - yet boost the power using turbocharging to deliver similar power and torque of that larger engine."

I dunno why but I laughed when I read this.

heleu 01-15-2009 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon (Post 6223020)
Times are different now... Back then, you didn't have a lot of women buying the Mustang either.

I disagree. The mustang was meant to be the sports car for all people when it first came out. That's why you could buy a small 6 cylinder engine for those that just wanted the look and a huge big block V8 for those who wanted to take it to the dragstrip.

I think times are changing. BMW stopped turbocharging it's engines for a long period and now all of their top non-M models are turbo'd. I think a Turbo M car is just a matter of time.

!LittleDragon 01-15-2009 02:29 PM

The Mustang isn't a sports car, it never was. I had a '91 LX 5.0 as my first car but I'll let the other resident Mustang experts explain...

But back to the issue at hand... the turbo mustang didn't sell well and failed BECAUSE it was a 4banger. A simple show of hands will show you that. Everyone who thinks of a turbo4 when they hear Ford Mustang raise your hands. Everyone who thinks of a turbo4 when they hear American muscle, please raise your hands... Chances are, they never even knew they existed.

Sales of the Mustang other than the V8's didn't really pick up until the 4th gen, prior to that, the LX5.0 outsold all other Ford cars. What was different with the 4th gen was women started to find it appealing for them to drive but many of them opted for the V6 rather than the 8. Today, sales of the 6 may or may not be higher (I can't confirm this) than the 8 but it's still the 8 that people think associate with Mustang

Great68 01-15-2009 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon (Post 6226111)

But back to the issue at hand... the turbo mustang didn't sell well and failed BECAUSE it was a 4banger.

The funny thing was that the SVO Mustang was faster, handled better (Factory Koni's!) and stopped better (4 wheel discs!) than the 5.0 at the time.

But well, the sales numbers spoke for themselves.

Rich Sandor 01-15-2009 03:12 PM

The mustang WAS originally meant to be a sports car, like the corvette, but it quickly became far too heavy, with no real engineering R&D put into handling. Emphasis was always on aggressive looks and massive power - and thus the MUSCLE CAR was born.

I sell Mustangs, but I would never call them a sports car. They are Muscle cars, pure and simple, and that's nothing to be ashamed of. Hell, if I had the extra income, I'd rock one. The new 2005+ frame are awesome, and can be made to handle extremely well. (as per the Shelby KR's) I'd actually even prefer an FR500C to the Porsche race car that I'm currently building.

Great68 01-15-2009 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor (Post 6226170)
but it quickly became far too heavy, with no real engineering R&D put into handling.

Except for when a man named "Caroll Shelby" got a hold of them.

!LittleDragon 01-15-2009 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor (Post 6226170)
Emphasis was always on aggressive looks and massive power - and thus the MUSCLE CAR was born.

I'm pretty sure the muscle car was around since the early 50's, long before the Mustang and that the Mustang brought on the pony car era

Rich Sandor 01-15-2009 09:47 PM

Muscle cars in the 50's were colloquially called "Hot Rods", and in the 60's and 70's they were called "Supercars" The term "Muscle Car" didn't really enter mainstraim media until the mid to late 70's, when the classic muscle car production had already died off.

You're right the Mustang spawned the Pony car era, but when average Joe thinks of a "Muscle Car" it's a car based on the Pony appearance (Long hood, short trunk) but with way more horsepower than the original Ponies.

ericthehalfbee 01-15-2009 10:29 PM

I almost bought an SVO when they came out. Ford crammed a lot of technology into the car and all the magazines raved about how great it drove.

The V8 Mustang was quicker than the SVO in a straight line, and sold for several thousand less. That's what killed the SVO - that it was more expensive and slower. Nobody really cared that it handled and braked extremely well and would hand the GT its ass on a track. The only thing people wanted was to have a fast car for those stop-light to stop-light races.

People call it a failure because of poor sales numbers, but that doesn't mean it was a lousy car. The SVO was a fantastic car that was basically too sophisticated for the general buying public.


That said, I think Ford is stupid if they don't use this engine in the Mustang. It's pretty sad when your competitors V6 (Camaro) outclasses your V8. Especially when you have a turbo V6 in your corner that trumps the Camaros. People will be wondering why they let such a great engine sit on the shelf.

Rich Sandor 01-15-2009 10:49 PM

I don't think the engine will be sitting on the shelf. If anything, I don't think they will be able to produce enough of them to meet the demand for the models that they are currently slated for. Usually this is a problem of the supplier. I can already foresee a shortage or turbos or other subcomponents from suppliers. By contrast, there are plenty of the current 4+Litre V6 and V8 engines sitting on shelves.

As a Ford dealer, we have NOTHING on the engine other than what we read on autoblog. The biggest problem about it is customers expecting to be able to get a powerplant in any model car which may never happen. As far as I'm concerned, until it's in our system as an order, it's not available.

wyattH 01-15-2009 10:53 PM

good for ford.
but nothing TOOOO exciting.

justdoit 07-25-2009 03:26 AM

Hey Kumbo1, I am trying to message you but I am unable to, because your mailbox is full.

btw, thats looks like a powerful engine.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net