Sponsored

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
Have you sat in a Camaro, it’s horrible and the trunk can’t even fit golf clubs without putting seats down... no thanks
Actually, I have. Got to take a brief drive in a 1SS 6-speed car (private owner, not a test drive from a dealership). Didn't find it nearly as bad or difficult as so many people make it out to be.

What I didn't care for was that car's heavy steering feel in 'Track' mode. Heavy for the sake of being heavy, without any more feel to show for it.


Norm
Sponsored

 
OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
To me it doesn't make any sense to buy an A10 Mach 1 when the same car is already sitting on the lot sans some stickers. And less 10 grand.
Tbh, I agree. I mean, a 301A PP1 A10 (basically the Mach 1) is a good $10k cheaper. A FTBR diff cooler, mishimoto trans cooler, and GT350 intake/tune will get you to Mach 1 for WAY cheaper, the biggest hurdle there is warranty. But if you aren’t too worried about that, then yeah, the A10 Mach

Even though I love the styling of the Mach 1 I think the price is too high for the value. You basically don't have to spend that much more for a new ZL1 or C8 1LT, both are way better performance cars while the Mach 1 is pretty much a fancier PP2. They should have gone for 500+hp to make the Mach 1 worth it imho.
Tbh, if the C8 came with a manual, it’d be a hard choice between that and a Mach 1. But as for the 500hp, I hate that that’s the mentality... as if that 20 horsepower would make this car any more special. Just with the gear ratio change, the car has about 20hp more at each shift point than the Bullitt... that means it will likely feel like it has 20 more hp than the Bullitt. Sure, I do wish that they would’ve just slapped some GT350 heads on it and revved it to 8k, mainly because people would stop complaining and it would be called “special” or whatever. But I really don’t think it’s a necessity, and I think the trans upgrade is a WAY bigger deal than people are making it out to be

then by god it should have come with a NACA hood and shaker. /ducks
Dodge can do the engineering, how come Ford can't?
It’s not about “doing the engineering”, because the engineering shows that it would hurt the performance much more than it would help it
 

Strokerswild

Shallow and Pedantic
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Threads
74
Messages
6,612
Reaction score
5,396
Location
Southern MN
First Name
Dave
Vehicle(s)
Things With Wheels
Meh.

5.2 CPC NA engine would have made it The Shit. The end.
 
OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
Meh.

5.2 CPC NA engine would have made it The Shit. The end.
5.2 CPC would’ve taken away DI and made the car cost significantly more

All it needed was GT350 heads and an increased redline
 

Strokerswild

Shallow and Pedantic
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Threads
74
Messages
6,612
Reaction score
5,396
Location
Southern MN
First Name
Dave
Vehicle(s)
Things With Wheels
The GT350 heads would have been part of the 5.2 deal in my dream scenario.....

Just bumping the displacement to 5.2 nets 500+ HP with all else the same as the Bullitt/Mach DI 5.0 if you do the math. GT350 heads, gravy baby.
 

Sponsored

OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
Or they could’ve just been added to the 5.0 for cost savings and the more efficient dual injection solely as a sort of supporting mod for the increased redline

If they would’ve done a full bespoke 5.2 CPC, people would bitch because it’d be astronomically expensive for little gain. As it sits, people bitch about the engine not being “special” because it doesn’t hit a certain number. Easiest solution to that would be increasing the redline to 8k and giving the engine the ability to flow air and the valvetrain modifications to support it (or, in other words, GT350 heads). That would give it the low cost that people want, the “special” factor because it revs to 8k, and the 500+ power figure that people complain about. It would’ve been perfect
 

shogun32

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2019
Threads
89
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
12,098
Location
Northern VA
First Name
Matt
Vehicle(s)
'19 GT/PP, '23 GB Mach1, '12 Audi S5 (v8+6mt)
Vehicle Showcase
2
Or they could’ve just been added to the 5.0 for cost savings and the more efficient dual injection solely as a sort of supporting mod for the increased redline

If they would’ve done a full bespoke 5.2 CPC, people would bitch because it’d be astronomically expensive for little gain
How is swapping cranks from GT500 to GT an expensive proposition? Ford already has 12:1 pistons be they from the GT350 (94mm) or from the 5.0 (93mm). Keep the same 5.0 heads with dual-fuel systems. Slap on the GT350 TB+intake like they did for the Bullitt and 'power pack' and you're done. $1000 surcharge tops.

Actually it gets easier - just bore the Coyote block to 94mm and use matching pistons. 5163cc displacement.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
How is swapping cranks from GT500 to GT an expensive proposition? Ford already has 12:1 pistons be they from the GT350 (94mm) or from the 5.0 (93mm). Keep the same 5.0 heads with dual-fuel systems. Slap on the GT350 TB+intake like they did for the Bullitt and 'power pack' and you're done. $1000 surcharge tops.

Actually it gets easier - just bore the Coyote block to 94mm and use matching pistons. 5163cc displacement.
It’s not just “swapping cranks”, it’s a whole different block/crank, which means a completely different engine design. Manufacturers don’t “just bore” an engine block, there needs to be manufacturing procedures that can be easily utilized on an assembly line and still provide OEM quality. Doing what you want them to do would mean essentially creating a completely new assembly process for a single-use 2 year run engine, which just isn’t viable.

Dual fuel isn’t compatible with the GT350/500 block. The direct injector ports are cast into the block, not the head. Swapping Coyote heads onto a 5.2 block would do nothing for the DI, as the DI ports are casted into the block (which is why Gen 3 gets a unique engine block and why the GT500 didn’t get DI). So really, we have 2 options here:
1. Use block and crank from hand-assembled GT500 engine, but use GT heads and add direct injection, which means whole new assembly process, casting procedures, and QC procedures
2. Install GT350 heads/valvetrain, increase redline, no more QC or procedure changes needed than Bullitt engine

We have to understand that our requests have to be reasonable, or else they’ll always get turned down and we’ll always be disappointed
 

Jimmy Dean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Threads
30
Messages
2,029
Reaction score
2,411
Location
Baton Rouge
First Name
Al
Vehicle(s)
71 mach 1, 82 Bronco, 86 Bronco (dd),
It’s not just “swapping cranks”, it’s a whole different block/crank, which means a completely different engine design. Manufacturers don’t “just bore” an engine block, there needs to be manufacturing procedures that can be easily utilized on an assembly line and still provide OEM quality. Doing what you want them to do would mean essentially creating a completely new assembly process for a single-use 2 year run engine, which just isn’t viable.

Dual fuel isn’t compatible with the GT350/500 block. The direct injector ports are cast into the block, not the head. Swapping Coyote heads onto a 5.2 block would do nothing for the DI, as the DI ports are casted into the block (which is why Gen 3 gets a unique engine block and why the GT500 didn’t get DI). So really, we have 2 options here:
1. Use block and crank from hand-assembled GT500 engine, but use GT heads and add direct injection, which means whole new assembly process, casting procedures, and QC procedures
2. Install GT350 heads/valvetrain, increase redline, no more QC or procedure changes needed than Bullitt engine

We have to understand that our requests have to be reasonable, or else they’ll always get turned down and we’ll always be disappointed
reasonable my ass. I still want a 7.3, or the rumored 6.8 pushrod. Don't care about road tracking the car. just straight line grunt.
 

shogun32

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2019
Threads
89
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
12,098
Location
Northern VA
First Name
Matt
Vehicle(s)
'19 GT/PP, '23 GB Mach1, '12 Audi S5 (v8+6mt)
Vehicle Showcase
2
Manufacturers don’t “just bore” an engine block
the hell they don't? The standard Coyote3 casting come off the line and slapped in a jig, torque plate attached, and the boring machine set to 93mm. For the Mach we just set it to 94mm. It's a single parameter difference in the CAM instructions. The little plastic bin that carries the pistons and rings gets populated with 94mm pistons and matching rings. It's not remotely complicated. It's an otherwise fully identical Coyote3 engine just with oversized bore.

though I can see your point. Ford engine assembly tech are likely so blind and careless they can't tell that they are putting 93mm pistons in a 94mm bore or putting a 93mm head gasket on a 94mm block.

I wonder how many Mach 1 with Tremec will instead show up at the dealer with the MT82 bolted in place. I'll bet it won't be zero.
 
Last edited:

Sponsored
OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
the hell they don't? The standard Coyote3 casting come off the line and slapped in a jig, torque plate attached, and the boring machine set to 93mm. For the Mach we just set it to 94mm. It's a single parameter difference in the CAM instructions. The little plastic bin that carries the pistons and rings gets populated with 94mm pistons and matching rings. It's not remotely complicated. It's an otherwise fully identical Coyote3 engine just with oversized bore.

though I can see your point. Ford engine assembly tech are likely so blind and careless they can't tell that they are putting 93mm pistons in a 94mm bore or putting a 93mm head gasket on a 94mm block.

I wonder how many Mach 1 with Tremec will instead show up at the dealer with the MT82 bolted in place. I'll bet it won't be zero.
The Gen 3 gets that done as part of the plasma bore lining process, they aren’t just boring out an old gen2 casting... they still had to create a whole new casting to support that process. And even at that, that’s on an engine that’s shared with the highest selling vehicle in America... they can afford to develop a completely new process for an engine that sells in that high volume because it offsets the cost. A single use 2 year run engine though? Not a chance

If my Mach ends up with a MT82, I’ll be able to tell the second I drive off the lot... the abysmal gearing in that car is the main reason I sold mine for a Mach 1 LMAO
 
OP
OP
jake_zx2

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
reasonable my ass. I still want a 7.3, or the rumored 6.8 pushrod. Don't care about road tracking the car. just straight line grunt.
Add a supercharger... that’ll give you more grunt than that overweight truck engine
 

shogun32

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2019
Threads
89
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
12,098
Location
Northern VA
First Name
Matt
Vehicle(s)
'19 GT/PP, '23 GB Mach1, '12 Audi S5 (v8+6mt)
Vehicle Showcase
2
The Gen 3 gets that done as part of the plasma bore lining process
plasma lining is a distinct step from cylinder boring. There too it's probably a single value change by 0.5mm of plasma element/nozzle.

Given Ford's inability to conduct QC they might have to resort to Mondays (or Mon+Tues once a month) the line builds 94mm engines and the rest of the time the line goes back to standard 93mm. Frankly they should have tried this back in the Bullitt days.

But no worries, the faithful will gladly belly up to the table and eagerly swallow whatever horse-hockey Ford PR is shoveling on any given day...
 

Jimmy Dean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Threads
30
Messages
2,029
Reaction score
2,411
Location
Baton Rouge
First Name
Al
Vehicle(s)
71 mach 1, 82 Bronco, 86 Bronco (dd),
Add a supercharger... that’ll give you more grunt than that overweight truck engine
or I could add a supercharger to a 7.3/6.8 hmmm......
 

w3rkn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Threads
21
Messages
3,078
Reaction score
755
Location
Detroit
Vehicle(s)
bmw 135is(sold)
I see the list, but where are the option details? Or what in the option package, etc. No sticky either.
Sponsored

 
 




Top