2021 MUSTANG (S650) - 7th Generation Mustang Confirmed

[Spartan]

What is not talked about is the daily driving aspect much. The car has some pretty high complaints in that area regarding visibility and a rough ride. I don't know about most of you, but I spend a lot of my time daily driving more than I do on the race track. I've also had various friends and owners tell me I will enjoy a more comfortable drive in the Mustang as its more practical for the daily drive.

Do I still like the Camaro? Absolutely. I just like the Mustang more for what I would use it for which probably also explains why the Mustang sells so well for its price point. Sticker shock gets a lot of the Camaro buyers.

Agreed...the DD drive aspect is just a killer. I just don't get why they decided to make it worse...they should know that the mags/reviews would target it.

Sponsored

 

[MotorJoe]

Good for FORD not giving up.

After test driving a 2016 Camaro SS :hail:, it was very clear to me that the 6G Mustang will not be able to compete performance wise with it.

So good for Ford, they decided to bite the bullet on the 6G because it is and shall remain second place, and come back swinging with the 7G , I hope they make a great car this time around. Steering, suspension and weight are the most important issues they should address.

 

[Scrape]

I did the same thing and noticed that as well. The interior and fit and finish the Mustang has a slight edge on that.

After test driving a 2016 Camaro SS :hail:, it was very clear to me that the 6G Mustang will not be able to compete performance wise with it.

So good for Ford, they decided to bite the bullet on the 6G because it is and shall remain second place, and come back swinging with the 7G , I hope they make a great car this time around. Steering, suspension and weight are the most important issues they should address.

 

[Genxer]

I sat in a '16 Camaro over the weekend at an auto show. It still suffers from the same poor visibility as before. The rear quarter window is essentially useless and really no more than a styling element.The interior does seem nicer however. The shifter felt solidly mounted but a bit vague to me. Actually driving it may be a different experience. The exterior was just blah to me. It didn't excite me like the first time I saw an S550. It looked to me like the typical vanilla styling that is characteristic of GM. Why not a bit of flair like the Stingray?? They had a convertible Camaro as well and again, blah looks. They had a (presumably loaded) SS on the floor and it stickered at almost $48,900 MSRP.

 

[King_V]

Was the move from the old 5.0 to the 4.6 modular at one point a bid to get better mileage out of a V8?

If I were to speculate, I would say that's only part of the story.

Keep in mind that the Modular is now a quarter of a century old (sheesh, where does the time go), and that the Windsor was a 1960s design, I believe that they were trying to get

• better horsepower
• better reliability
• better durability (the modular seems to take to boost absurdly easily)
• lighter weight
• and, yes, better emissions

The earliest, of course, were a bit disappointing in terms of lugging about huge barges with a lack of low-end torque given their small displacement. But, they were the earliest ones, and their horsepower numbers, albeit at a higher RPM, were better than the pushrod 5.0.

Yet, look where we are now. The bigger, far more powerful 5.0L modular outperforms the 4.6 by a hefty amount, AND gets better fuel economy.


Could these changes have been applied to the Windsor? Possibly. Better heads, etc., but then the block design, as I understand it (secondhand info for me), has its weak points.

 

[mikeyjobu]

If I were to speculate, I would say that's only part of the story.

Keep in mind that the Modular is now a quarter of a century old (sheesh, where does the time go), and that the Windsor was a 1960s design, I believe that they were trying to get

• better horsepower
• better reliability
• better durability (the modular seems to take to boost absurdly easily)
• lighter weight
• and, yes, better emissions

The earliest, of course, were a bit disappointing in terms of lugging about huge barges with a lack of low-end torque given their small displacement. But, they were the earliest ones, and their horsepower numbers, albeit at a higher RPM, were better than the pushrod 5.0.

Yet, look where we are now. The bigger, far more powerful 5.0L modular outperforms the 4.6 by a hefty amount, AND gets better fuel economy.


Could these changes have been applied to the Windsor? Possibly. Better heads, etc., but then the block design, as I understand it (secondhand info for me), has its weak points.

I guess what I was getting at -- in order to preserve the wonderful exhaust note that we love, that you can only get from a V8 -- could all that's been learned from the current Coyote/Voodoo be made more fuel efficient by reducing displacement, and possibly boosting it, and having equal or better performance metrics by making the car lighter to get an even better power loading? We sit at around 8.5 pounds per horsepower -- I think a Carrera S is something around 8? I know it's out of left field somewhat to throw Porsche out there, but it's where my head is at the moment.

 

[Khell86]

While the Alpha platform is a performer, don't think the S550 is a slouch either. The S550 platform uses less aluminum in the body, suspension components, and has the bracing for the convertible built in it for even more stiffness and matches the camaro in weight. Sure ford went cheap on the shocks/struts, tires, engine/trans combo but it certainly wasnt because that was all ford could do. They choose to ride it out for a bit and make some money. Sucks for us ford guys, but dont be surprised if the MY18 matches the camaro performance at a lower price point.

 

[mikeyjobu]

While the Alpha platform is a performer, don't think the S550 is a slouch either. The S550 platform uses less aluminum in the body, suspension components, and has the bracing for the convertible built in it for even more stiffness and matches the camaro in weight. Sure ford went cheap on the shocks/struts, tires, engine/trans combo but it certainly wasnt because that was all ford could do. They choose to ride it out for a bit and make some money. Sucks for us ford guys, but dont be surprised if the MY18 matches the camaro performance at a lower price point.

+1 I don't disagree with this at all. It's just a tune away, really.

 

[Trackaholic]

I would also agree that the S550 platform isn't as far behind the Alpha as some are implying.

It might be true that the GTPP isn't at the same level as the SS or 1LE, and maybe the GT350 and 1LE are going to be neck and neck, but that isn't due to the platform IMO, but rather due to the suspension tuning choices and of course the excellent power band of the LT1.

In terms of weight distribution and interior room, the Alpha doesn't seem to be any better than the Mustang. It will really be interesting to see where the weight of the 1LE ends up, and how that compares to the GT350, since they have similar heavy duty components.

IMO, all the Mustang needs to do to compete with the Camaro on a handling level is to offer the GT350 suspension setup (mag shocks, and associated springs, sways, etc), as well as the Michelin PSS tires (not necessarily in the GT350 sizes), and they will be right there.

The main thing making the GT350 so expensive is the engine, and that is a big part of what makes it special, but doesn't impact handling at all really.

Throw in the upcoming 10 speed automatic and Ford will have a great answer to the SS. Then maybe go to a cross plane crank version of the Voodoo with a 7000 RPM redline, and you'd probably have something running very close to the 1LE at a similar price.

I would like to see an updated chassis with greater use of aluminum in certain places, but I really don't think the chassis is what is holding the Mustang back. It will be interesting to see what Ford does to counter the Camaro, which is certainly an awesome car.

-T

 

[King_V]

I guess what I was getting at -- in order to preserve the wonderful exhaust note that we love, that you can only get from a V8 -- could all that's been learned from the current Coyote/Voodoo be made more fuel efficient by reducing displacement, and possibly boosting it, and having equal or better performance metrics by making the car lighter to get an even better power loading? We sit at around 8.5 pounds per horsepower -- I think a Carrera S is something around 8? I know it's out of left field somewhat to throw Porsche out there, but it's where my head is at the moment.

I wouldn't be surprised if things went that way.

First, direct-injection will certainly give a bit more in terms of fuel economy and power.

I imagine Ford would go to a new engine design, or, if they stick with the Modular/Coyote/Voodoo block, could even design a "big block" version that has larger bore spacing. Not sure how expensive that would be compared to a new design entirely, though.

Still, offering, say, a V8 NA, and also a possibly smaller boosted V8 as the higher option producing more power is quite feasible. Whether there's enough market demand for it, I couldn't tell you.

I do really wish that Ford had gone bigger bore, shorter stroke with the modular, but I imagine they had some reason for going the route they did.... whether or not that reason ever held water, or if it only looks like a problem in hindsight, versus what was known in the 80s when they started designing it, I couldn't say.

 

[S550Boss]

I wouldn't be surprised if things went that way.

First, direct-injection will certainly give a bit more in terms of fuel economy and power..

Yes it will, and that is the saving grace for GM's V-8 family, along with cylinder shut-off and cam phasing. That's the only way it will continue forward.

I imagine Ford would go to a new engine design, or, if they stick with the Modular/Coyote/Voodoo block, could even design a "big block" version that has larger bore spacing. Not sure how expensive that would be compared to a new design entirely, though. .

The reality of the Coyote is that it is just an evolution of the modular family (which dates back to late eighties and was first seen around '92). There is too much in tooling costs invested there to ever consider an all-new design V-8 engine. It will never happen. And changing bore spacing is financially impossible given the existing tooling costs. The bore spacing and thus bore is the limiting factor for naturally aspirated breathing, although variable valve timing helps a lot as would variable valve lift (which Ford has experimented with).Ford did an interesting research project a long time ago, resulting in an interesting SAE paper. The idea was to drive the most power possible in the 4.6 DOHC and see what was required... the net net was a totally reworked head with the valves in a very different position (which was not necessarily ideal for emissions). The conclusion was that the bore (because of bore spacing) was the limiting factor. There has been a lot of engineering done in the cylinder heads since then and major improvements have been made. There was even an experimental 5 valve version (+ ~80 HP) and some other things.

Basic reality: the group paying the bills for the Coyote development is the F-150. Without the F-150, there wouldn't have been a new Coyote for the Mustang. Mustang can't afford it on it's own, only variations of the engine family passed down from the F-150.

But times are rapidly changing. Especially given the 3.5EB, which is now more popular in the F-150 than the Coyote. And the 2.7EB is raising in popularity, too, and is an even more modern design. Consider what the upcoming high-output 3.5EB will do for the F series... especially combined with the 10-speed, which eventually will be the standard transmission across the F-150 line. Even the current 3.5EB yields better mileage, emissions, and drivability in the F-150 than does the Coyote. And it's far more fun to drive.

CAFE is a fact of life, it's not going to change, and the role of C02 to global warming is better understood everyday. The equivalent standards in other markets are tightening up even faster than ours and are going to get far more tighter.

So consider that the S650 may only offer a V-8 in special limited edition models... even a GT350 only perhaps. A high-output 3.5EB in a GT would provide more power and better emissions and mileage than the current Coyote - and would be much more fun to drive and with more potential (as anybody who has owned a Supra TT back in the day understands).

But since apparently the S650 is just another evolution of the same car, there would be room under the hood for a V-8, so it's likely to be offered - but at a higher cost and in lower quantities.

That V-8 might be a smaller displacement version of the Coyote, with cylinder shut-off, the 10-speed it would already have had in the last update to the S550, and even start-stop which is an easy technology to include.

As far as turbos on the V-8, packaging those in the current engine compartment looks like an enormous stretch. Yea, Ford has shown a twin turbo V-8 in an S197 chassis, but the same engine compartment in the S550 isn't setup for it in production and given the turbo placement it has zero chance for meeting crash standards. Don't count on this.

Lastly, look at market. Nobody is asking for this except a very small minority here in the US, and nobody else in any viably financial (meaning a quantity necessary to pay for emissions and crash test it for that Government) market elsewhere in the world (where it would be taxed to heck for one thing).

As for the "big block", that is the Boss engine family, planned for and then cancelled in 2005 for the Mustang. The only variant of that engine in production (and it was canceled and then revived at least once) is in the last Raptor and the upcoming 2017 F-250 series. The Mustang version was seen once 10 years ago - an all-aluminum DOHC 7 liter. Cancelled.

 

[Twin Turbo]

Lastly, look at market. Nobody is asking for this except a very small minority here in the US, and nobody else in any viable financial model elsewhere in the world (where it would be taxed to heck for one thing).

Whilst small in numbers, over 70% of Mustang sales in the UK have been for the V8......so there's at least one other country that wants a V8 ;)

But, I do get your points. At the very least, I really, REALLY hope S650 offers a V8 of some description, even if it is just for a halo model.

 

[mikeyjobu]

To me, if there's no V8, there's no Mustang. Keep a RWD sports coupe around put a turbo 6 or 4 in it, and call it something else -- I'm game -- but let's keep our Mustangs proper Mustangs, please.

 

[S550Boss]

Whilst small in numbers, over 70% of Mustang sales in the UK have been for the V8......so there's at least one other country that wants a V8 ;)

But, I do get your points. At the very least, I really, REALLY hope S650 offers a V8 of some description, even if it is just for a halo model.

Yes, Mustang has done well in UK... but what are the total numbers there, how much is pent-up demand (having been so difficult to obtain for 30 years)? It will be important to watch the numbers there on a monthly basis over years to answer this one. Same for Australia. That's what determines the future direction.
Many markets have pent-up demand, even the U.S. (and the Camaro types certainly did, they went crazy in sales when their car came back).

 

[Consola Performance]

Yes it will, and that is the saving grace for GM's V-8 family, along with cylinder shut-off and cam phasing. That's the only way it will continue forward.



The reality of the Coyote is that it is just an evolution of the modular family (which dates back to late eighties and was first seen around '92). There is too much in tooling costs invested there to ever consider an all-new design V-8 engine. It will never happen. And changing bore spacing is financially impossible given the existing tooling costs. The bore spacing and thus bore is the limiting factor for naturally aspirated breathing, although variable valve timing helps a lot as would variable valve lift (which Ford has experimented with).Ford did an interesting research project a long time ago, resulting in an interesting SAE paper. The idea was to drive the most power possible in the 4.6 DOHC and see what was required... the net net was a totally reworked head with the valves in a very different position (which was not necessarily ideal for emissions). The conclusion was that the bore (because of bore spacing) was the limiting factor. There has been a lot of engineering done in the cylinder heads since then and major improvements have been made. There was even an experimental 5 valve version (+ ~80 HP) and some other things.

Basic reality: the group paying the bills for the Coyote development is the F-150. Without the F-150, there wouldn't have been a new Coyote for the Mustang. Mustang can't afford it on it's own, only variations of the engine family passed down from the F-150.

But times are rapidly changing. Especially given the 3.5EB, which is now more popular in the F-150 than the Coyote. And the 2.7EB is raising in popularity, too, and is an even more modern design. Consider what the upcoming high-output 3.5EB will do for the F series... especially combined with the 10-speed, which eventually will be the standard transmission across the F-150 line. Even the current 3.5EB yields better mileage, emissions, and drivability in the F-150 than does the Coyote. And it's far more fun to drive.

CAFE is a fact of life, it's not going to change, and the role of C02 to global warming is better understood everyday. The equivalent standards in other markets are tightening up even faster than ours and are going to get far more tighter.

So consider that the S650 may only offer a V-8 in special limited edition models... even a GT350 only perhaps. A high-output 3.5EB in a GT would provide more power and better emissions and mileage than the current Coyote - and would be much more fun to drive and with more potential (as anybody who has owned a Supra TT back in the day understands).

But since apparently the S650 is just another evolution of the same car, there would be room under the hood for a V-8, so it's likely to be offered - but at a higher cost and in lower quantities.

That V-8 might be a smaller displacement version of the Coyote, with cylinder shut-off, the 10-speed it would already have had in the last update to the S550, and even start-stop which is an easy technology to include.

As far as turbos on the V-8, packaging those in the current engine compartment looks like an enormous stretch. Yea, Ford has shown a twin turbo V-8 in an S197 chassis, but the same engine compartment in the S550 isn't setup for it in production and given the turbo placement it has zero chance for meeting crash standards. Don't count on this.

Lastly, look at market. Nobody is asking for this except a very small minority here in the US, and nobody else in any viably financial (meaning a quantity necessary to pay for emissions and crash test it for that Government) market elsewhere in the world (where it would be taxed to heck for one thing).

As for the "big block", that is the Boss engine family, planned for and then cancelled in 2005 for the Mustang. The only variant of that engine in production (and it was canceled and then revived at least once) is in the last Raptor and the upcoming 2017 F-250 series. The Mustang version was seen once 10 years ago - an all-aluminum DOHC 7 liter. Cancelled.

Unless I missed something in this discussion no one has really mentioned the fact that the Coyote was designed, from the start, for direct injection. In addition I thought cylinder deactivation, stop-start, and VVL were all being slowly introduced to keep the engine fresh as it moved forward. The death of the V8 is inevitable but hopefully Ford can keep it alive for another decade.
If Formula One can increase thermal efficiency from 30% to 50% in two years, which is better than a Prius by the way, then maybe Ford can surprise us with something.:ford:

Sponsored