2018 Mustang refresh?

[15wile]

If I had kids, I'd have an EcoBoost V6 Flex.

The Mustang doesn't need to cater to regular rear seat passengers, it never really has.....

Cater to? No. Be able to handle in a pinch? Yes. That's the whole point of a 2+2. Otherwise, why bother with the +2 at all?

Sponsored

 

[Dirtyblueshirt]

Cater to? No. Be able to handle in a pinch? Yes.

Emphasis on pinch :lol:

 

[FISHTAIL]

If I had kids, I'd have an EcoBoost V6 Flex.

The Mustang doesn't need to cater to regular rear seat passengers, it never really has.....

If you say so. I drive both of my kids to/home from daycare everyday in mine. They both fit fine, ages 6 and 2. My wife is 6' and she fits fine with both kids in the back.

Would I go on a long trip in the Mustang? No, but it's perfect for short hops around town. In fact, one of the reasons I got the Mustang was *because* both kids fit in the back.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

Cater to? No. Be able to handle in a pinch? Yes. That's the whole point of a 2+2. Otherwise, why bother with the +2 at all?

Exactly. All of these binary opinions aren't realistic. I just purchased my car. I could have bought a Corvette or a Camaro but I wanted to be able to pick the kids up from school twice a week to help the misses. My twins turn 6 in a week. In 3 years I will have to buy something that can accommodate longer legs. At that point I will seriously consider a 2-seater and buy a third car to transport them as the 2+2 will no longer serve that purpose. BUT, I just spent $40K and moved a unit off of my local lot because for the next 3 years, the Mustang will serve that purpose. If the Mustang was smaller, I would not have bought it, and ford would have lost my business to Audi (S5). That's a fact.

 

[Spartan]

The unfortunate side to the MY18 car is that I guarantee it will be more expensive. You'll gain all this new fancy tech, and also a larger price tag. Making it a harder pill to swallow.

I'd rather pay for modern tech then pay for outdated tech.

 

[millhouse]

I'd rather pay for modern tech then pay for outdated tech.

I think GM would disagree with you on that. Like anything, there is a limit.

 

[15wile]

Exactly. All of these binary opinions aren't realistic. I just purchased my car. I could have bought a Corvette or a Camaro but I wanted to be able to pick the kids up from school twice a week to help the misses.

For me it's occasionally picking up my son from daycare if the wife can't do it. I keep a car seat in the back, generally, for when it's needed. Or when my wife needs her car (a Jetta Sportwagen) and I have a DJ gig at the same time, I need to be able to fit some sizable equipment back there. The fold down seats are great for this. I just take out the car seat, fold down the seats, and I have room for all of my gear. And a month ago or so, my wife's car was in the shop for two days, and the Mustang had to serve as temporary family hauler and grocery getter.

The vast majority of the time, though, I don't have to do these things. So I wanted a fun, fast car 90% of the time that roughly 10% of the time needed to be put to more practical use. The Mustang fit this perfectly. Anything more family-friendly would have been too mundane 90% of the time (or too expensive in the case of 4-door luxury sedans with good powertrains), and anything less wouldn't have been able to handle the 10% case.

2+2s exist for a reason!

 

[Darkane]

I think opinions on size are understood at this point.

On a different note, does anyone know what the stroke limitations of the coyote are? I guess I'm just curious, but I was wondering whether we could see the possibility of a 5.4L stroked voodoo with cpc and DI for a Mach 1 variant. With the added displacement and DI, using a current GT intake manifold, it would be good for 505hp/485lbft.

I've been reading some of your posts here about DI and they're out to lunch. Where are you getting your percentages for increases in power and torque? Credible sources?

Just to be fair, the current production tq/L record for a street NA engine is the Ferrari 4.5 V8. With your numbers the coyote, or the 5.4 I quoted will become the new NA champion. Not possible with its current volumetric efficiencies, compression ratio, or emissions and mpg goals.

 

[Spartan]

I think GM would disagree with you on that. Like anything, there is a limit.

The problem is GM put everything on their SS instead of making most of that in a performance pack like Ford did. That would bring the price down by $2500 at least on an SS.

Ford won't do that. Sure their will be a price increase but a lot of the new tech will be options minus the 10 speed.

 

[15wile]

I'd rather pay for modern tech then pay for outdated tech.

What outdated tech? The Coyote is actually a very modern motor. In some respects, more so than the pushrod GM motors. That's partly how it keeps up (relatively) with a much bigger displacement motor.

Even the magneride, and all that... you can find that on the GT350. Maybe it's a bummer for some that it's not yet an option on the GT, but that's more a matter of adjusting trim levels and options packages than a lack of technological prowess. Me personally... I don't give a sh*t.

In fact, the most dated part of the car is probably that 6-speed auto, and Ford is apparently already replacing that with the new 10-speed (or at least offering it as an option).

No, the car is not outdated. And this is made obvious by the fact that the tweaking needed to make it keep up with the (newer) Camaro are evolutionary, not revolutionary. Maybe shave a few lbs, bump power up a notch, and swap out the automatic. Done deal, my friend.

 

[millhouse]

The problem is GM put everything on their SS instead of making most of that in a performance pack like Ford did. That would bring the price down by $2500 at least on an SS.

Ford won't do that. Sure their will be a price increase but a lot of the new tech will be options minus the 10 speed.

They offer a few more amenities, but not $3500+ worth (the difference between 1ss and base GT). Keep in mind, the Camaros non SS modeled vehicles are also more expensive and don't include HID headlamps as standard. You can buy 6 piston Brembos for the SS, but they'll set you back a cool $3k (not that they need them). You wan't mag ride...you're gonna pay.

My point was, If you want direct injection and a 10 speed auto....get ready to pay out the ass for them. Fortunately, the prices of the 4 and 6cyl models should still be fairly reasonable, so the legacy can continue.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

I've been reading some of your posts here about DI and they're out to lunch. Where are you getting your percentages for increases in power and torque? Credible sources?

Just to be fair, the current production tq/L record for a street NA engine is the Ferrari 4.5 V8. With your numbers the coyote, or the 5.4 I quoted will become the new NA champion. Not possible with its current volumetric efficiencies, compression ratio, or emissions and mpg goals.

My figures are derivative of LT1 torque curves over LS3 as a baseline with VVT locked out. I modeled the combustion cycle myself using my own proprietary algorithms in Engineering Management Studio, which is what I use to design chemical processing plants. Granted, it has occured to me that I need to adjust my valve-geometry to account for the DI nozzles, so my figures may be a bit generous on flow rates (assuming valves would need to be downsized). I'm assuming a .5 CR bump as a result of cooler piston temp allowance and otherwise using the current volumetric model.

That said, the 458 engine actually has much more torque potential, but is biased towards top end power as a result of it's firing order/ exhaust-merge configuration. It could likely produce 100lbft/Liter if it used a configuration similar to the coyote, with runner and collector offsets adjusted of course.

My methods may not be perfect, but they do have a first principle basis. Just FYI, I modeled the voodoo back in 2011 at 5.3L at an output of 550hp/405lbft. Not perfect, but pretty close. If I would have had the firing order correct, it would have been within +/-2% of the outcome.

 

[wireeater]

My figures are derivative of LT1 torque curves over LS3 as a baseline with VVT locked out. I modeled the combustion cycle myself using my own proprietary algorithms in Engineering Management Studio, which is what I use to design chemical processing plants. Granted, it has occured to me that I need to adjust my valve-geometry to account for the DI nozzles, so my figures may be a bit generous on flow rates (assuming valves would need to be downsized). I'm assuming a .5 CR bump as a result of cooler piston temp allowance and otherwise using the current volumetric model.

That said, the 458 engine actually has much more torque potential, but is biased towards top end power as a result of it's firing order/ exhaust-merge configuration. It could likely produce 100lbft/Liter if it used a configuration similar to the coyote, with runner and collector offsets adjusted of course.

My methods may not be perfect, but they do have a first principle basis. Just FYI, I modeled the voodoo back in 2011 at 5.3L at an output of 550hp/405lbft. Not perfect, but pretty close. If I would have had the firing order correct, it would have been within +/-2% of the outcome.

Ya. What he said. I was in the process of typing the same thing but he beat me to it so i deleted it.

 

[Spartan]

They offer a few more amenities, but not $3500+ worth (the difference between 1ss and base GT). Keep in mind, the Camaros non SS modeled vehicles are also more expensive and don't include HID headlamps as standard. You can buy 6 piston Brembos for the SS, but they'll set you back a cool $3k (not that they need them). You wan't mag ride...you're gonna pay.

My point was, If you want direct injection and a 10 speed auto....get ready to pay out the ass for them. Fortunately, the prices of the 4 and 6cyl models should still be fairly reasonable, so the legacy can continue.

If you look at what the SS has which is 4p brembos (all 4 corners), suspension, tires, rims, cooling, etc it's definitely $2500 worth but more like $3k. Even the base SS has upgraded info/interior tech that the base GT does not offer unless you go up to premium. But a lot of these things Camaro should have optioned..that's that point. Mustang did that part right for sure.

I'm fine with paying more for the 10 speed. Brings the Mustang up to the current gen 8 speed transmission (well passes them now). Add in by then Apple car play (which should be out) plus possibly upgraded gauges like the F-150/infotainment screens and I'll be happy. Icing on the cake would be the PP offered on the Auto though if they fix up the bouncy for stock, then it wouldn't really be that much needed anymore unless you plan to track it.

 

[millhouse]

If you look at what the SS has which is 4p brembos (all 4 corners), suspension, tires, rims, cooling, etc it's definitely $2500 worth but more like $3k. Even the base SS has upgraded info/interior tech that the base GT does not offer unless you go up to premium. But a lot of these things Camaro should have optioned..that's that point. Mustang did that part right for sure.

I'm fine with paying more for the 10 speed. Brings the Mustang up to the current gen 8 speed transmission (well passes them now).

$2500 worth for who? The brakes on the SS don't stop any quicker than the GT. The cooling on the GT is perfectly adequate. Rims/tires may be marginally better (for the track). The suspension is what it is though. The SS is obviously far more capable stock for stock, but I'd venture to say most of these components with the exception of the wheels/tires cost about the same on either vehicle.

With that said, I think most would be fine paying a small extra premium for the 10 speed over what the current 6 is, at least those looking at the V8 option. Direct injection is going to cost you though, which is where a majority of a horsepower bump would likely come from. That is of course, unless they decide to slap the power pack 3 on stock for a few extra $$$.

Sponsored