- Banned
- #511
Oh yes, I will absolutely miss NA engines. I really think that the Voodoo engine will be one of the last high strung N/A engines that we see
Sponsored
Sponsored
Baron95
Well-Known Member
Yes. What is sad is that at the right moment that Ford creates such an amazing engine, the regulations are forcing them to sunset/abandon it.
As much as I like the small-block chevy, they are far from exciting at the top of the RPM range.
- Banned
- #513
Yep, and that's exactly why i don't like the small block chevy... I like to rev, and I can sacrifice some low end torque for that. makes it easier for me to modulate at the track, too. I'm excited to see what Chevy can do with a DOHC engine, though. Here's to hoping it's better than the northstar!
Baron95
Well-Known Member
Well, I hope (but I am not confident) that they do a better job on linearity, than Ford did on the Ford GT.
I just read the Car and Driver Ford GT review, and it is shocking to read. Some quotes:
"The boosted 3.5L V6 is big on lag, small on refinement."
"There’s plenty of turbo lag, replaced in short order by the rapidly swelling sensation of arriving boost."
That is hardly what you want to read, when referring to a $450K vehicle, which is supposed to be the best of the best that Ford can do.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/ford-gt-full-test-of-the-blue-oval-supercar-review
I just read the Car and Driver Ford GT review, and it is shocking to read. Some quotes:
"The boosted 3.5L V6 is big on lag, small on refinement."
"There’s plenty of turbo lag, replaced in short order by the rapidly swelling sensation of arriving boost."
That is hardly what you want to read, when referring to a $450K vehicle, which is supposed to be the best of the best that Ford can do.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/ford-gt-full-test-of-the-blue-oval-supercar-review
Trackaholic
Well-Known Member
Would be interesting to see a time-based dyno plot, rather than RPM or MPH based, in order to quantify lag at different RPMs.
Basically @ Time = 0 you go WOT, and then show the torque as a function time. Have 5 different plots, starting at 1000 RPM, 2000, up to 5000. You'd then get a very clear indication of lag at the various RPMs.
Would be cool to compare that to something like the Z06 engine, with similar peak power but a very different feel.
My 2010 GTI had horrible lag at anything under 2500 RPM. At 3000 and above that lag was mostly gone. But trying to accelerate out of a right turn is an almost sure fire way to light up the inside tire as the torque comes on.
The somewhat lacking top end of the LT1 was a big reason I went with the GT350 over the C7. I am very interested to see what GM does with their future engines. Will be tough to duplicate the packaging advantages of the cam-in-bock pushrod design.
-T
Basically @ Time = 0 you go WOT, and then show the torque as a function time. Have 5 different plots, starting at 1000 RPM, 2000, up to 5000. You'd then get a very clear indication of lag at the various RPMs.
Would be cool to compare that to something like the Z06 engine, with similar peak power but a very different feel.
My 2010 GTI had horrible lag at anything under 2500 RPM. At 3000 and above that lag was mostly gone. But trying to accelerate out of a right turn is an almost sure fire way to light up the inside tire as the torque comes on.
The somewhat lacking top end of the LT1 was a big reason I went with the GT350 over the C7. I am very interested to see what GM does with their future engines. Will be tough to duplicate the packaging advantages of the cam-in-bock pushrod design.
-T
Sponsored
Trackaholic
Well-Known Member
Don't forget to highlight their verdict:
"A staggering achievement and a future classic."
-T
Baron95
Well-Known Member
Either way, I think now we are living in the truly golden age of performance cars in terms of choice.
I think this will be a very short period of time where we have choice of NA high displacement Pushrod V8s, High Revving V8s from Fords, small displacement turbocharged engines in various states of tune.
It is good to see all the choices.
Unfortunately it is very possible that in as little as 5 years from now, all we will have is smaller turbocharged engines that top out at 7,000 RPM.
Baron95
Well-Known Member
That was never in question. The Ford GT is incredible vehicle, regardless of any minor deficits. So in the engine on the GT350. No one can take that away from them.
The only point to be argued is that in the very narrow realm of track performance for the buck, those two are not near the top.
- Banned
- #519
You know it's a good time when we can complain about minuscule (as opposed to, say, a 1989 RUF) amounts of turbo lag in a record setting, pushrod suspension supercar :cheers:
Hack
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2014
- Threads
- 83
- Messages
- 12,318
- Reaction score
- 7,487
- Location
- Minneapolis
- Vehicle(s)
- Mustang, Camaro
I take back what I said about the GT previously. Beating a Porsche 918 around VIR... wow.
What an amazing accomplishment by Ford, and a true supercar.
What an amazing accomplishment by Ford, and a true supercar.
Sponsored
ALUSA
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2017
- Threads
- 9
- Messages
- 558
- Reaction score
- 179
- Location
- Plainfield, IL
- First Name
- AL
- Vehicle(s)
- 2015 Mustang GTPP, 2017 Cadillac CTS 2.0T AWD
The Motortrend Comparison is out on their website. They also believe the new coyote engine is underrated. They are saying Ford is not publishing the real numbers to protect the GT350. I thought the engine rating tests were inspected by an authorized inspector. Interesting.
Trackaholic
Well-Known Member
I don't think MT really knows what they are talking about in that regard. I mean, the Camaro is still faster 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile, but they aren't implying that the LT1 is under rated.
The Ford wins on the top end probably due to things like gearing and aero.
I think most dyno runs show it around 410 HP, while I think the Voodoo is around 465 (well, my Voodoo runs around 465, so that's what I'm going with).
So that's about a 55 WHP difference. That seems to match up pretty well with the ~65 BHP difference between the two engines.
I'm just not seeing signs of an underrated engine. The numbers with the A10 transmission are impressive because that transmission keeps the engine in the peak power range more of the time.
-T
- Banned
- #524
Most are denoting at 420-425. Ford wins top end more likely due to gearing and horsepower advantage, and probably a little less drag... I'd say the HP is more of a contributing factor than the aero
9secondko
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2014
- Threads
- 4
- Messages
- 1,986
- Reaction score
- 1,030
- Location
- Irvine, ca
- Vehicle(s)
- 2003 cobra
100 lb + weight advantage for Chevy. Fairly significant Torque advantage for Chevy.
It SHOULD be that a 5 horsepower advantage wouldn't be enough to do ANYTHING really.
But it keeps up in areas where the torque and weight differences should create a more noticeable spread. And it deals serious damage at the higher end. So logic dictates it has more power than advertised.
Had the mustang not been fitted with the additional weight options, it may have been faster than the camaro in the lower end. That would only add fuel to the underrated idea.
It SHOULD be that a 5 horsepower advantage wouldn't be enough to do ANYTHING really.
But it keeps up in areas where the torque and weight differences should create a more noticeable spread. And it deals serious damage at the higher end. So logic dictates it has more power than advertised.
Had the mustang not been fitted with the additional weight options, it may have been faster than the camaro in the lower end. That would only add fuel to the underrated idea.
Sponsored