2018/19 Shelby GT500 Mustang Spotted! Twin Turbo V8 Powered? [UPDATED WITH VIDEO]

[Need4SpeedMotors]

Just saying im going to buy this car when it comes out !!!!!

Sponsored

 

[DohctorSmith]

Why is no one bringing up(maybe I missed it) the 6.2l. Four valve heads w/FI. Roush has been messing with this engine(the 777) forever, I believe it showed up at SEMA 2015 with 825HP N/A. Who expected the 5.8 Trinity or 5.2 FPC? Ford showing GM and Mopar what 6.2l can really do? Or increase displacement to 7.0l or 429ci. Ford's pretty much covered all the past great Mustangs except the Boss 429 Can you imagine the response to a Boss 429?

 

[ShelbyGT350]

Twin-Turbo Patent

Folks,

My guess is it will be an ecoboost twin-turbo based on the patent Ford secured in 2013. See the following link: https://www.google.com/patents/US8459026

That details two turbochargers located in the valley of the V so the plumbing is bit different and more compact in an already tight engine bay.

 

[healntoe]

I can guarantee you ..
It WILL be a TT V8.
It WILL NOT be awd.
:cheers::ford:

How is it that you speak with such authority on this? Do you have a FP or Ford connection?

 

[HCT]

Folks,

My guess is it will be an ecoboost twin-turbo based on the patent Ford secured in 2013. See the following link: https://www.google.com/patents/US8459026

That details two turbochargers located in the valley of the V so the plumbing is bit different and more compact in an already tight engine bay.

That patent might or might not be relevant. I work in tech, not automotive, but I know in my field we get patents all the time that don't necessarily find their way into products. So be cautious of pointing to a patent and using it as proof of product direction.

Also, there are already twin-turbo hot V designs on the market. The Mercedes AMG GT uses a hot V twin turbo. Not sure if it's somehow different enough to avoid the Ford patent or if they're paying licensing fees.

 

[jonesd]

While i am excited about the possibility of a 800hp gt500 (and will probably buy one). I hope something has actually been done to put the power down. My last gt500 had traction issues as it was already...

 

[z06psi]

Merc, Audi, and BMW have been doing power Vs for awhile now.

 

[Jay159866]

How is it that you speak with such authority on this? Do you have a FP or Ford connection?

A great friend of mine that has owned all of the recent Shelbys, has a connection with a FR. He knew 3 years ago that they were making a GT500 for 17 or 18. That's also how I validate his information. When they break the news, we will all know for sure.

 

[Jay159866]

While i am excited about the possibility of a 800hp gt500 (and will probably buy one). I hope something has actually been done to put the power down. My last gt500 had traction issues as it was already...

I can't wait to see what dealerships try to add on to the price tag. :cheers:

 

[z460]

GT 500 mule, probable . Engine beefed up Twin Turbo GDTi AWD 6 not V 8 TT . They would not do that would they? Variation on the engine used in Lincoln.:gossip::faint:

It's not a damn V6 GT500 Ford want's to sell car's not run buyers off AWD WTF if ford was going to use AWD they would have did it on the Ford GT :frusty:

 

[dsp4848]

Why is no one bringing up(maybe I missed it) the 6.2l. Four valve heads w/FI. Roush has been messing with this engine(the 777) forever, I believe it showed up at SEMA 2015 with 825HP N/A. Who expected the 5.8 Trinity or 5.2 FPC? Ford showing GM and Mopar what 6.2l can really do? Or increase displacement to 7.0l or 429ci. Ford's pretty much covered all the past great Mustangs except the Boss 429 Can you imagine the response to a Boss 429?

I was actually wondering why the 6.2L hasn't been brought up as well. It's a motor that Ford has already designed and can be tweaked for the Mustang. However, from what I heard from asking about this motor several months ago was that it's too big of a DOHC motor to fit in the Mustang engine bay. If Ford was able to fit this motor into the Mustang some way, that would be incredible. Low end torque for days.

But, with government emission regulations, I don't see how Ford could get away with a larger displacement engine. Supposedly, that's why the C7 Z06 is a forced induciton 6.2L - GM couldn't build a large displacement naturally aspirated engine (i.e. the next version of the 7.0L LS7) that met emission standards.

My guess is TT V8 with displacement in the 4.6 - 5.0L range.

 

[jonesd]

I agree with the media. Based on the information thePill received, it will be a turbo. There are 3 turbo options.

Twin
Bi
Or Twin Scrolling Twin or Bi-Turbo (Parallel or Sequential. It will be over 750hp but based on the TT 3.5, a TT V8 should be over 150hp per liter. Now, at what displacement?

MSRP for $67k, stay under 4000lbs and no word on AWD at all. At least not now...

Mach 1 is a SC V8 engine and could be a GT option.


There are other prototypes running around. An NA, GT350-ish Mustang would be an R Package GT or MGTR. That is all that is required to deal with a camaro. An R Package GT, 10 Speed Auto for the GT and a GT500.

Checkmate...

At 67k msrp after adding in a few options, that would put the car around 75k out the door probably. Should be interesting to see how it goes.

 

[93 347 Cobra]

I was actually wondering why the 6.2L hasn't been brought up as well. It's a motor that Ford has already designed and can be tweaked for the Mustang. However, from what I heard from asking about this motor several months ago was that it's too big of a DOHC motor to fit in the Mustang engine bay. If Ford was able to fit this motor into the Mustang some way, that would be incredible. Low end torque for days.

But, with government emission regulations, I don't see how Ford could get away with a larger displacement engine. Supposedly, that's why the C7 Z06 is a forced induciton 6.2L - GM couldn't build a large displacement naturally aspirated engine (i.e. the next version of the 7.0L LS7) that met emission standards.

My guess is TT V8 with displacement in the 4.6 - 5.0L range.

I occasionally lurk here but registered to respond to your message. Yes, the 6.2 would be perfect, or that architecture at least. I responded in a thread on SVTP about the upcoming GT500. I found an old article on MM&FF from 2010 speaking to a Ford exec about the 6.2 and he said unequivocally that the 6.2 would be used in the Mustang in the future. Shoe-horning the 6.2 into the S197 would have been cost prohibitive, think of all the custom parts needed to fit the engine when they could just modify the 5.4 to get the job done well. They succeeded with Trinity at a fraction of the cost of putting in the 6.2.

Regarding displacement the main thing hurting the mod motors and Coyote by extension is the 100mm bore spacing. The 6.2 architecture has 115mm bore spacing. The S550 hoodline is lower though as we saw with the power drop in the V6 due to the redesigned intake for clearance. The 6.2 architecture could make sense if they would de-stroke it and chop down the deck height, go with a larger bore and come out at say....5.8 liters or so. That engine would be longer than Trinity but shorter and narrower which would help out immensely with packaging. On Trinity Ford was right at the edge of the envelope in regards to exhaust valve longevity due to the heat from all that cylinder pressure. Larger bore spacing gives them room for larger coolant passages and correspondingly better heat rejection. We know they're gunning for more than 707 so say 725+ or so.

From an engineering perspective increasing displacement is the easiest way to increase power. 115mm bores give Hameedi & Co. enormously more flexibility for heat rejection, packaging in S550 chassis, and displacement. 5.8 is a magic displacement number in Ford history so I wouldn't be completely surprised if that's the route they took. I say this in reference to using a power-adder on a 5.2.

Everyone keeps saying Twin-turbos and that's the wise bet but I wouldn't completely rule out an Eaton TVS2, an updated much more efficient version of the TVS that Eaton just recently released.

So if we go back to Trinity, it was some intake tract work away from 700+ (resonator delete, larger throttle body) at 5.8 liters. Adding Variable Valve Timing alone would have picked up 20+ horses. They've already done most of the design legwork heads, cams, and associated componentry for a 115-mm bore spacing and even did DOHC prototype heads for Project 777 that was mentioned a couple of posts back. The increased bore spacing solves the heat rejection issues that were present in the Trinity and gives them quite a bit of room to run much more power. So a smaller displacement 6.2 derivative is completely feasible and even quite logical a guess for this new GT500.

 

[93 347 Cobra]

Sources I trust say it is a Eaton blower larger than 2.3l and mounted on a larger V8.

Wow! Great info!

I've spent hours reasoning out from an engineering perspective how they'd do it given packaging constraints. I came to my conclusion reasoned out in the post above. Makes perfect sense.

 

[Erik427]

I occasionally lurk here but registered to respond to your message. Yes, the 6.2 would be perfect, or that architecture at least. I responded in a thread on SVTP about the upcoming GT500. I found an old article on MM&FF from 2010 speaking to a Ford exec about the 6.2 and he said unequivocally that the 6.2 would be used in the Mustang in the future. Shoe-horning the 6.2 into the S197 would have been cost prohibitive, think of all the custom parts needed to fit the engine when they could just modify the 5.4 to get the job done well. They succeeded with Trinity at a fraction of the cost of putting in the 6.2.

Regarding displacement the main thing hurting the mod motors and Coyote by extension is the 100mm bore spacing. The 6.2 architecture has 115mm bore spacing. The S550 hoodline is lower though as we saw with the power drop in the V6 due to the redesigned intake for clearance. The 6.2 architecture could make sense if they would de-stroke it and chop down the deck height, go with a larger bore and come out at say....5.8 liters or so. That engine would be longer than Trinity but shorter and narrower which would help out immensely with packaging. On Trinity Ford was right at the edge of the envelope in regards to exhaust valve longevity due to the heat from all that cylinder pressure. Larger bore spacing gives them room for larger coolant passages and correspondingly better heat rejection. We know they're gunning for more than 707 so say 725+ or so.

From an engineering perspective increasing displacement is the easiest way to increase power. 115mm bores give Hameedi & Co. enormously more flexibility for heat rejection, packaging in S550 chassis, and displacement. 5.8 is a magic displacement number in Ford history so I wouldn't be completely surprised if that's the route they took. I say this in reference to using a power-adder on a 5.2.

Everyone keeps saying Twin-turbos and that's the wise bet but I wouldn't completely rule out an Eaton TVS2, an updated much more efficient version of the TVS that Eaton just recently released.

So if we go back to Trinity, it was some intake tract work away from 700+ (resonator delete, larger throttle body) at 5.8 liters. Adding Variable Valve Timing alone would have picked up 20+ horses. They've already done most of the design legwork heads, cams, and associated componentry for a 115-mm bore spacing and even did DOHC prototype heads for Project 777 that was mentioned a couple of posts back. The increased bore spacing solves the heat rejection issues that were present in the Trinity and gives them quite a bit of room to run much more power. So a smaller displacement 6.2 derivative is completely feasible and even quite logical a guess for this new GT500.

No need to destroke the 6.2 at all. At the current deck height, Ford was able to get 500cid. They could drop the deck to nine inches and still get 6.2 liters without hurting the rod to stroke ratio.

Sponsored