EcoBoost vs. Pre-Coyote GT?

[Macfarland]

LOL! I'm sorry but there is absolutely no way the most modified 2010 Mustang could in any way resemble something that came out in the last several years let alone the 2015 Mustang. I've ALWAYS loved mustangs but come on, the 2010 is not a winner in the looks department

I didn't say people confused it with the S550. I just said that people have asked me if it's a 2015.

Sponsored

 

[15wile]

Again, I'm not a racer. If you win, good for you. I will still enjoy the V8 sound every time I drive her!! Eventually I'll be switching to the S550 but in the meantime I didn't have to waist my money on a 4 Mustang!! I just couldn't bare the whistle sound on a Mustang. GM got it right of making the turbo 4 their entry level Camaro.

What is "waisting" your money? Does that mean you have a fanny pack?

 

[Whiskey11]

Partly true. The EB is strongest from 3500 - 5500 RPM. On the factory tune, though, north of 5700 RPM just stinks. Short-shifting is the best strategy for this car. In fact, when stock, I would get shitty times in my automatic if I *didn't* use the paddles. I think this is why some testers get crappy 1/4 mile and 0-60 times -- they are testing the automatic, and letting it shift itself, which is normally GOOD, but not in this case. One of the first things tuning shops change on the car, with the automatics, is the shift points and shift pressure. That alone makes a world of difference. Of course, that doesn't do anything for the manual drivers -- but still, the manual drivers should be short-shifting.



True. Although the chassis and IRS make up a lot of difference here. Having driven both, the S550 chassis and suspension setup is miles ahead of the S197 GTs.



Which is a shame. Tunes really make a substantial difference with this motor. It's *typical* to see gains of +30-40RWHP and +80-100RWTQ. I think the EB is a better weekend canyon carver than the GT... but in all other things, including autocross, the 5.0 GT is better, for the reasons you stated. The 4.6, in autocross, on the other hand... I honestly don't know. I'll defer to others on that. I can definitely see what you're talking about, though.

Short shifting doesn't work in autocross as the time lost in shifting is more than the time gained by staying in the power. That is why my 3V revs to 7k even though it doesn't make much power beyond 6k with the CAI + Tune. This is why the EB wont be the powerhouse many think it will be until ESP in Solo.

I disagree about the S550 chassis mattering that much. The IRS is nice and stock for stock there is probably a slight advantage in the overall wider track of the S550 than the IRS by itself. Modified, I don't believe the IRS is that big of an advantage, if it is one at all.

It certainly is a shame, but that is the way the SCCA wants to run their show. I just play by the rules!

 

[Macfarland]

Actually you're right I was thinking about the 2009. 2010 isn't near as bad but still does not at all look new or like it would be a 2015

The torch red color helps a lot. If my '10 would've been another color, probably no one would ask me if it's a 2015. The color really helps a lot.

 

[MrBillton]

a 108 trap speed running a 12.3 is pretty pathetic and not "competing" with the Boss...should be running 116+, clearly the car dies in the back half of the race, which means with drag radials/slicks and/or anything from a roll and the ecoboost is getting smashed.

How does a 4.6 compete?

See Cobra, Roush 427r, and Saleen s281sc. With boost pressure, like the ecoboost has. except it'll be around a 120 trap speed and laying down 4-450 at the wheels on 8-10 psi.

The 4.6L 3V is all show, no go.

A modified Ecoboost just ran a 12.3 @ 108. Altogether it was around 2500 bucks. That thing RIPPED through the 1/8th, then fell off on the last 1/8th. Still, it ran as fast through the quarter mile as a Boss 302. Please try to tell me how the 4.6 could compete with the Boss LOL.

 

[MrBillton]

yeah dude the GT is better than the ecoboost at everything but "weekend canyon carving"...sigh...

Partly true. I think the EB is a better weekend canyon carver than the GT... but in all other things, including autocross, the 5.0 GT is better, for the reasons you stated.

 

[thehunterooo]

So you'd rather be all show no go pretty much, I love how this post carries no logic. "Yes I prefer my 5-speed 4.6l v8 because 'murica and sound instead of a newer car that's a million times better in every way but god forbid someone catches me with my small penis in a fast 2.3" Acting like turbo sounds are a bad sound, so sad.

Wouldn't having a smaller pole mean less weight?

 

[cosmo]

a 108 trap speed running a 12.3 is pretty pathetic and not "competing" with the Boss...should be running 116+, clearly the car dies in the back half of the race, which means with drag radials/slicks and/or anything from a roll and the ecoboost is getting smashed.

How does a 4.6 compete?

See Cobra, Roush 427r, and Saleen s281sc. With boost pressure, like the ecoboost has. except it'll be around a 120 trap speed and laying down 4-450 at the wheels on 8-10 psi.

Yeah, that's what I said. It falls off on the last half of the 1/4 mile. That's the nature of the beast with regards to a turbo 4. It will wreck through the 1/8th (80-90mph) but falls off after that. That trap speed is not pathetic at all. Think about it. 4 cylinder eagle talons have trapped 10s sub 100mph runs. Doesn't matter who traps the faster speed, what matters is who made the quarter mile time quicker.

We're comparing the 4.6L 3V, not the cobra and the supercharged 4.6 4V. That engine was WAY ahead of it's time, and is easily one of the best engines ever put out by Ford. If you're talking the 427R Roush car, that's just a supercharged 4.6L for a laughable amount of money. Put that money into a 4 cylinder and prepared to get destroyed. Again, up to 5-600 HP you cant go wrong on either a 4 cylinder or a V8. Different strokes for different folks.The 427R old school pushrod motor is irrelevant to this discussion. And Saleen is failing as a company for a reason.

 

[MrBillton]

You asked how a 4.6 competes with a 12.3 time, and I told you with forced induction, then gave you 3 examples. The Roush is too much money? Dude stop arguing semantics. If you want I can say a 2005 GT with Edelbrock supercharger, 2006 with a Whipple, 2007 GT with Vortech, 2008 with a procharger, 2009 with Roush TVS. Is that better? :doh:

Trap speed does matter, because performance and racing don't only count in a quarter mile race from a dig. In any roll racing scenario, longer race or with drag radial tires on the v8 the EB gets its a$$ handed to it.

Can't go wrong with a I4 or V8 up to 4-600 hp? Wrong, 4 cylinder engines by nature are designed for fuel economy, not extreme performance. One has an easier time getting to that HP number while the other must face higher external stresses (20+ pounds of boost to make the power).

And even though your mention of this does nothing to refute my point, we now know that Saleen is failing as a company for a reason...so what is that reason? because they modify cars and charge a premium for it? maybe you can enlighten us all on why Roush and Shelby are not failing and Saleen is...

If you plan on only spending $1000-$2000 on performance modifications, then yes, the ecoboost can be made faster. And yes, we all understand it's a nicer car from build material/creature comfort perspective.

But, if you plan on spending $18k (approx price of '05 w/ blower kit) or more on a vehicle (which all ecoboost buyers did) then an s197 GT is faster. Also, money aside (even though you brought it up with the Roush comment) if you plan to keep the car stock or spend $5k+ in mods the s197 GT is faster.

Yeah, that's what I said. It falls off on the last half of the 1/4 mile. That's the nature of the beast with regards to a turbo 4. It will wreck through the 1/8th (80-90mph) but falls off after that. That trap speed is not pathetic at all. Think about it. 4 cylinder eagle talons have trapped 10s sub 100mph runs. Doesn't matter who traps the faster speed, what matters is who made the quarter mile time quicker.

We're comparing the 4.6L 3V, not the cobra and the supercharged 4.6 4V. That engine was WAY ahead of it's time, and is easily one of the best engines ever put out by Ford. If you're talking the 427R Roush car, that's just a supercharged 4.6L for a laughable amount of money. Put that money into a 4 cylinder and prepared to get destroyed. Again, up to 5-600 HP you cant go wrong on either a 4 cylinder or a V8. Different strokes for different folks.The 427R old school pushrod motor is irrelevant to this discussion. And Saleen is failing as a company for a reason.

 

[15wile]

yeah dude the GT is better than the ecoboost at everything but "weekend canyon carving"...sigh...

The 5.0, absolutely. I love that motor.

 

[cosmo]

You asked how a 4.6 competes with a 12.3 time, and I told you with forced induction, then gave you 3 examples. The Roush is too much money? Dude stop arguing semantics. If you want I can say a 2005 GT with Edelbrock supercharger, 2006 with a Whipple, 2007 GT with Vortech, 2008 with a procharger, 2009 with Roush TVS. Is that better? :doh:

Trap speed does matter, because performance and racing don't only count in a quarter mile race from a dig. In any roll racing scenario, longer race or with drag radial tires on the v8 the EB gets its a$$ handed to it.

Can't go wrong with a I4 or V8 up to 4-600 hp? Wrong, 4 cylinder engines by nature are designed for fuel economy, not extreme performance. One has an easier time getting to that HP number while the other must face higher external stresses (20+ pounds of boost to make the power).

And even though your mention of this does nothing to refute my point, we now know that Saleen is failing as a company for a reason...so what is that reason? because they modify cars and charge a premium for it? maybe you can enlighten us all on why Roush and Shelby are not failing and Saleen is...

If you plan on only spending $1000-$2000 on performance modifications, then yes, the ecoboost can be made faster. And yes, we all understand it's a nicer car from build material/creature comfort perspective.

But, if you plan on spending $18k (approx price of '05 w/ blower kit) or more on a vehicle (which all ecoboost buyers did) then an s197 GT is faster. Also, money aside (even though you brought it up with the Roush comment) if you plan to keep the car stock or spend $5k+ in mods the s197 GT is faster.

Roush overcharges their factory cars. A stage 2 Roush right now is horrendously overpriced for no good reason. Take a good look at what you actually get with the stage 2, even the stage 3, and see if it is worth it. They've always been like that. Comparing a 4.6L with a supercharger installed is a much better comparison. Shelby only loans out their name to ford now. Roush designs the svt vehicles. The gt500, gt350, etc. Those are roush designs actually. That's why they're still in business.

The 4.6 is only good until about 450whp with a blower. That's been proven time and time again. The EB is holding strong at those numbers with a turbo kit (4k) which comes with top end power, enabling the higher trap speeds you're wanting. Forged rotating assembly on v8 motors are much more expensive and would be necessary to hit the 5-600 whp we're talking about. The forged internals needed for the EB to hit those numbers is 1300 bucks. The 4.6? Youre looking at 2500, minimum. Arguing about whether or not the money initially invested in a typical used 4.6L versus a new EB is relevant, I agree. However, you're getting a much better package overall. The interior creaks and rattles are almost completely absent on the s550, the interior design and features are better, the handling is much better, etc. You're getting into the used vs new car debate there which is something else entirely. I brought up that the roush 427R vehicles were too expensive out of the factory, and still are.

The 4.6L only really starts to overcome the 4 cylinder until you've spent around 10k, the motor and forced induction. Yeah, the sky is the limit after that, but you're adding a lot more weight with that blower. That stock v stock weight advantage just went out the window with a horribly heavy front end now. There goes the handling. The 4.6L parts are still too expensive nowadays versus just buying a coyote and starting from there. But this debate isn't about the coyote versus the EB.

The thing about turbo cars is you can tune them to do what you want. You can have the power band be up high, down low, or anywhere in between. The eagle talon I mentioned let off after the 1/8th. He would've ran 8s if he nailed it, at a ridiculous trap speed. The EB which hit 12.3s @ 108 was on the stock turbo, all low end power. Swap the turbo and you will have similar times but trap more around 117-120.

Oh, and for your comment regarding 4 cylinders being developed for fuel economy. That may be true out of the factory, sometimes, but isn't always the case. Rally cars run high performance i4s all the time. One of the most legendary ford vehicles ever made, ford rs200, being one of them. 440 HP i4 at 8000RPM. Made in... Mid 1980s.

Edit: I'm just trying to help you see the other side. I used to hate 4 cylinders before I got the EB. I'm going back to v8s (a boss 302) but only because I want the sound/character back NOT because of power.

 

[MrBillton]

Let me help you out here...the EB is not a better "weekend canyon carver", that's just you making up something

The 5.0, absolutely. I love that motor.

 

[MrBillton]

Okay, so since you are bringing up how much a Roush costs, I'll bring up how much an Ecoboost costs, for the price of an ecoboost you could buy an 05 GT, a built motor, and a blower kit...and as you said "the sky is the limit". And dude I get your point about Roush/Saleen/etc. being overpriced, which is why I a) brought up a blown GT and B) discussed that an Ecoboost costs like $10k-$15k more than a 3v GT

Shelby only loans out their name to Ford? What about a 2015 Shelby GT? a 2011 GT350? or a 2013 Shelby GTS? the SuperSnake? or the Shelby Cobra replica for sale a few months back?

Forged rotating assemblies on a 4.6 are about 2k

I've stated several positive things about the ecoboost in my posts here including what you mentioned. I just think from a performance perspective it is not really on the same playing field as the 3v V8 even though it might appear close on paper. Either way it's fun to talk about this stuff plus you're joining the Boss club so you must know a thing or two:cheers:

Roush overcharges their factory cars. A stage 2 Roush right now is horrendously overpriced for no good reason. Take a good look at what you actually get with the stage 2, even the stage 3, and see if it is worth it. They've always been like that. Comparing a 4.6L with a supercharger installed is a much better comparison. Shelby only loans out their name to ford now. Roush designs the svt vehicles. The gt500, gt350, etc. Those are roush designs actually. That's why they're still in business.

The 4.6 is only good until about 450whp with a blower. That's been proven time and time again. The EB is holding strong at those numbers with a turbo kit (4k) which comes with top end power, enabling the higher trap speeds you're wanting. Forged rotating assembly on v8 motors are much more expensive and would be necessary to hit the 5-600 whp we're talking about. The forged internals needed for the EB to hit those numbers is 1300 bucks. The 4.6? Youre looking at 2500, minimum. Arguing about whether or not the money initially invested in a typical used 4.6L versus a new EB is relevant, I agree. However, you're getting a much better package overall. The interior creaks and rattles are almost completely absent on the s550, the interior design and features are better, the handling is much better, etc. You're getting into the used vs new car debate there which is something else entirely. I brought up that the roush 427R vehicles were too expensive out of the factory, and still are.

The 4.6L only really starts to overcome the 4 cylinder until you've spent around 10k, the motor and forced induction. Yeah, the sky is the limit after that, but you're adding a lot more weight with that blower. That stock v stock weight advantage just went out the window with a horribly heavy front end now. There goes the handling. The 4.6L parts are still too expensive nowadays versus just buying a coyote and starting from there. But this debate isn't about the coyote versus the EB.

The thing about turbo cars is you can tune them to do what you want. You can have the power band be up high, down low, or anywhere in between. The eagle talon I mentioned let off after the 1/8th. He would've ran 8s if he nailed it, at a ridiculous trap speed. The EB which hit 12.3s @ 108 was on the stock turbo, all low end power. Swap the turbo and you will have similar times but trap more around 117-120.

Oh, and for your comment regarding 4 cylinders being developed for fuel economy. That may be true out of the factory, sometimes, but isn't always the case. Rally cars run high performance i4s all the time. One of the most legendary ford vehicles ever made, ford rs200, being one of them. 440 HP i4 at 8000RPM. Made in... Mid 1980s.

Edit: I'm just trying to help you see the other side. I used to hate 4 cylinders before I got the EB. I'm going back to v8s (a boss 302) but only because I want the sound/character back NOT because of power.

 

[04SloSnake]

Why are we comparing a stock turbo car to a 3v with a power adder? Did people in here get infected with the dumb?

 

[Apwrx]

Mr billton is still arguing this lol.The first couple of Upgraded turbo kits are now out for the eco with more to come, its just going to get worse for you.Anyhow Why do you care so much if this 4 is faster/ makes more power than an 8?This isn't new ,evo and wrx have been laying waste to 5bros for awhile.I loved my v8 but I also knew some boosted fours were faster with their small FACTORY turbo never mind slapping a bigger one on it.
You argue the 4 has forced induction so what the 8 has twice the cylinders its a pointless argument you're hung up on. Let it go already.

Sponsored