Sponsored

Bikeman315

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Threads
520
Messages
15,243
Reaction score
19,263
Location
Myrtle Beach, SC
First Name
Ira
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT/CS, 2021 Volvo XC60
Tell that to Dodge.
There is a difference between there being a market and the size of that market. There is the market for $200K SUV's but I do not expect Ford or Dodge to build one anytime soon. Same goes for the high performance sedan/coupe. Car's are out period. No American manufacturer is designing new ones. All of their major resources are going into vehicles for the future. And those aren't V8 powered rear drive two door coupes.
Sponsored

 

zackmd1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Threads
138
Messages
5,136
Reaction score
2,650
Location
Maryland
First Name
Zack
Vehicle(s)
1970 Mustang, 1965 AC Cobra, 2023 Ford Bronco 2Dr
HP uses X amount of fuel.....no free lunch.
It also creates X amount of emissions.....no free lunch.
Regardless of displacement.....

The 7.3 is far cheaper to produce.
Cylinder deactivation on the cheap and easy is now possible.

Remaining N/A the Coyote is only good for just over 800 hp
with a full all out build using race fuel.
The 7.3 can do that with ease....

Expect a alloy block for the F-150 and Stang.

If you are using an electric motor to supplement some of that HP, in combination with a more efficient combustion cycle, a larger motor could produce less emissions and use less fuel.

The question is, does the cost savings of a 7.3 type engine vs a coyote allow for a hybrid power train with marginal increase in overall drivetrain cost.
 

Andrew@Lethal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
576
Location
West Palm Beach Florida
First Name
Andrew
Vehicle(s)
2003 10th Anniversary Cobra / 2003 Ford Lightning

zackmd1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Threads
138
Messages
5,136
Reaction score
2,650
Location
Maryland
First Name
Zack
Vehicle(s)
1970 Mustang, 1965 AC Cobra, 2023 Ford Bronco 2Dr
I highly doubt it, but for sure it would be an awesome motor for a Ford performance SUV or Truck. The 5.0 is iconic along with the 5.2. A 6.8 in a mustang just sounds awkward. Also Ford announced their next big thing is going electric.
That's why I am thinking it would be more likely a 7.0 variant IF this has any truth to it....
 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
There is a difference between there being a market and the size of that market. There is the market for $200K SUV's but I do not expect Ford or Dodge to build one anytime soon. Same goes for the high performance sedan/coupe. Car's are out period. No American manufacturer is designing new ones. All of their major resources are going into vehicles for the future. And those aren't V8 powered rear drive two door coupes.
Yet Dodge's sales have been increasing with their outdated old designs, mostly because of the large engines.
 

Sponsored

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
That's why I am thinking it would be more likely a 7.0 variant IF this has any truth to it....
7 liters would be a great number, but it's already announced as a 6.8 for both the Mustang and F150. Hopefully the 5.0's are kept as well.
 

zackmd1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Threads
138
Messages
5,136
Reaction score
2,650
Location
Maryland
First Name
Zack
Vehicle(s)
1970 Mustang, 1965 AC Cobra, 2023 Ford Bronco 2Dr
7 liters would be a great number, but it's already announced as a 6.8 for both the Mustang and F150. Hopefully the 5.0's are kept as well.
Wouldn't be hard to take a 6.8 and punch it to 7.0. 6.8 aluminum block for the F150 and a 7.0 for the mustang using mostly the same components as the 6.8 but with a special crank to punch it out to 7.0. Same assembly line, two different variants of the "6.8 architecture".
 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
Wouldn't be hard to take a 6.8 and punch it to 7.0. 6.8 aluminum block for the F150 and a 7.0 for the mustang using mostly the same components as the 6.8 but with a special crank to punch it out to 7.0. Same assembly line, two different variants of the "6.8 architecture".
Yes, but why? Unless it's an update a few years out. I'm not sure it will need to grow from there. They already have the 7.3. Although 427 or 429 sounds sweet.
 

zackmd1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Threads
138
Messages
5,136
Reaction score
2,650
Location
Maryland
First Name
Zack
Vehicle(s)
1970 Mustang, 1965 AC Cobra, 2023 Ford Bronco 2Dr
Yes, but why? Unless it's an update a few years out. I'm not sure it will need to grow from there. They already have the 7.3. Although 427 or 429 sounds sweet.

For the simple fact that it wouldn't be hard or costly to do to get another iconic Mustang displacement number. Plus it would provide a few more ponies for not alot of cost in other areas.

Again this is all speculation on a rumour that might turn out to be wrong....
 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
For the simple fact that it wouldn't be hard or costly to do to get another iconic Mustang displacement number. Plus it would provide a few more ponies for not alot of cost in other areas.

Again this is all speculation on a rumour that might turn out to be wrong....
I heard the official info release will be on Sunday.
 

Sponsored

ngiotta

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Threads
1
Messages
165
Reaction score
43
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
2019 GT / 1970 Mach 1 (Twin Turbo Coyote)
Pushrod engines can rev quite high. It's largely a matter of how long is the stroke. Short stroke engines of any type can rev quite high. There were E and F gassers in the 60s running de-stroked Chevy small blocks revving over 9000 rpms. I think emission controls forced most manufacturers to switch to smaller bore, longer stroke engines in the 70s.

Lots of interesting theories in this thread. I'm going to guess not much changes with regard to engine configuration for the Mustangs available to the general public. Ford has been content to go with the Coyote design for a many years. I can't see them changing now.
Indeed. The little 289 in my first Mustang (a 1967 coupe) would rev to 7,500 and not break a sweat.
 

Elp_jc

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2020
Threads
48
Messages
3,531
Reaction score
795
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
None
The engineers at Ford know that lighter cars can get better fuel mileage than heavy vehicles.
They've known that for decades man :). In fact, anybody with elementary school physics class knows that. Ha ha. But it costs MONEY to achieve it, and THAT is the problem. Otherwise all cars would be made of C/F tubs, all aluminum suspension and body panels, forged wheels, titanium engine parts, etc. :).
 

jake_zx2

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Threads
11
Messages
2,305
Reaction score
1,418
Location
Texas
Vehicle(s)
Kona Blue 2018 GT
Vehicle Showcase
1
I really wish Ford would either make a bigger DOHC V8 for the Mustang (like a 5.8 or 6.0 or something) or make a small, high revving DOHC V8 (4.0-4.6 or something) rather than making the switch (downgrade) to pushrod engines. Just give us a better DOHC V8 and a rear mounted transaxle all in a smaller, lighter chassis and make a new Gran Torino for the guys who want pushrod engines and big boats cars with lots of rear legroom

But we all know that won’t happen
 

zackmd1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Threads
138
Messages
5,136
Reaction score
2,650
Location
Maryland
First Name
Zack
Vehicle(s)
1970 Mustang, 1965 AC Cobra, 2023 Ford Bronco 2Dr
I really wish Ford would either make a bigger DOHC V8 for the Mustang (like a 5.8 or 6.0 or something) or make a small, high revving DOHC V8 (4.0-4.6 or something) rather than making the switch (downgrade) to pushrod engines. Just give us a better DOHC V8 and a rear mounted transaxle all in a smaller, lighter chassis and make a new Gran Torino for the guys who want pushrod engines and big boats cars with lots of rear legroom

But we all know that won’t happen

What makes you think a pushrod engine is a downgrade? In many ways it's an upgrade in terms of complexity. Add that to the fact that 2 larger valves are actually more efficient then 4 smaller ones in larger displacements and that makes the DOHC architecture the downgrade. That's the whole reason the 7.3 exists as a pushrod motor.

DOHC is a benefit in smaller bore engines where 2 valves wouldn't be large enough to overtake 4 smaller ones.
 

engineermike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Threads
16
Messages
4,119
Reaction score
3,483
Location
La
Vehicle(s)
2018 GTPP A10
. Add that to the fact that 2 larger valves are actually more efficient then 4 smaller ones in larger displacements and that makes the DOHC architecture the downgrade. ....

DOHC is a benefit in smaller bore engines where 2 valves wouldn't be large enough to overtake 4 smaller ones.
This just isn’t right. As I stated earlier, the two intake valves in a gen 3 coyote have the skirt area of a single 3” valve that you can’t fit in any production v8.
Sponsored

 
 




Top