22 GT and Mach down 10hp… Is this true?

[Atlas1]

Norm, if you were given the choice of a 480/420 HP/TQ Mach 1 or a 470/410 Mach 1, which would you chose or you wouldn't care?? Cmon man, people love the #'s and specs, its kinda a big deal for car guys! lol
Too me, this is bad news for us Muscle car guys... we peaked and are going downhill now.

The ‘22 is actually not going to be a Mach 1. Due to the reduced power output ford is reclassifying it as the Mach 0.98
My sources inside FoMoCo are telling me to look for the official press release any day now………bad news indeed

Sponsored

 

[Vlad Soare]

Re #1: 99% of 99% of people's trips are not longer than half the range of any halfway decent modern EV... If you need to go further, there are other options. Range anxiety doesn't completely undo the practicality advantages of EVs for most people.

First, I don't know how you got that 99% figure. Do you happen to have any reference to back that up?
Second, if by "other options" you mean public transport, I'm not interested.
Third, even if your figure were correct, there's still 1% to cater to, and you can't ignore that just because you happen to be part of the 99%. The rights of 1% of the population are exactly as important as those of the other 99%. If 1% of the population want to drive their personal car long-distance, they must be able to do so.

Re #6: Disagree, it is true because EVs use less energy per unit of distance traveled than ICE's do. And yes, this is true even if the electricity comes from gas or goal power plants.

I don't mean that. I mean gas prices are overly inflated due to taxes. These taxes are a massive, massive source of cash for the government. Once everybody stops buying gas, the government will have to find another cash cow. Care to guess what that will be?
If someone invented a car that ran on tap water, and we all started driving that, then the government would tax the hell out of tap water. It's that simple. Enjoy your cheap electricity while you still can. It won't last forever.

 

[Germansheperd]

After a dyno tune the 22 cars will make the exact same HP as a tuned 18-21 car.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

After a dyno tune the 22 cars will make the exact same HP as a tuned 18-21 car.

Even without a tune. There are no differences other than Ford couldn't intentionally or accidentally cherry pick which cars/engines were used to measure for 2022. There will continue to be as many engines making 460 as before and the same number making 450 as before. Likewise for the entire range of HP variations, between engines.

 

[Ebm]

It won't ever change that it's a more complex system with more possible points of failure.

Yet, we drive a Mustang with a Coyote instead of a pushrod motor from Chevy or Dodge... More complex right? Yup...

 

[Norm Peterson]

Norm, if you were given the choice of a 480/420 HP/TQ Mach 1 or a 470/410 Mach 1, which would you chose or you wouldn't care??

I honestly wouldn't care, and I know this from when I've bought other cars the years they were de-rated by a more than comparable percentage of HP out of less than 200.

I know it wouldn't make any difference in our street driving, and not enough difference in HPDE lap times to matter.

Cmon man, people love the #'s and specs, its kinda a big deal for car guys! lol

Just for grins, I threw a comparable power de-rating at my '08 GT and found that quarter mile ET would only be about 0.06 seconds and 0.5 MPH slower at the dragstrip (which I don't do), and less than two tenths of a second slower around one of my home road courses (that I have done and hope to get back to doing). About a 1.5 mph loss in ultimate top speed (that I have no place to even try for). Those are the numbers that really matter more, and the de-rating isn't giving away enough to bother me.

Too me, this is bad news for us Muscle car guys... we peaked and are going downhill now.

I've said it before that I've always been more of a chassis-centered sports car guy than an engine-centric traditional muscle car guy. Substance and "balance" over projected image and bragging rights.

I'd have always picked small-blocks over big-blocks in any of the original years of ponycars (Mustangs, Camaros, and Challengers were on my list of 'watched cars' back before I could realistically afford any of them). Really liked the Boss 302 and the 340-6-pak Challengers/Cudas. Nicer driving cars than their 429 and 440/Hemi stablemates.


Norm

 

[Schwerin]

Even without a tune. There are no differences other than Ford couldn't intentionally or accidentally cherry pick which cars/engines were used to measure for 2022. There will continue to be as many engines making 460 as before and the same number making 450 as before. Likewise for the entire range of HP variations, between engines.

SAE ratings require an average variance of something like 1% of the average HP rating number (450 in this case)so no this isn't just cherry-picking. They can in theory be 445-455HP engines. But before now the range should be 455-465.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Here's what the difference looks like, running up through the gears. The acceleration curves almost fall completely on top of each other. At the 470 vs 480 and 450 vs 460 power levels it'd be the same story.

Norm

 

[Vlad Soare]

Those are the numbers that really matter more, and the de-rating isn't giving away enough to bother me.

Fair enough. However, it's still something they take away from us, without giving us anything in return. If you took five cents from my pocket, those five cents would make no difference whatsoever to me or my lifestyle, but it would still upset me.

 

[Strokerswild]

Fair enough. However, it's still something they take away from us, without giving us anything in return. If you took five cents from my pocket, those five cents would make no difference whatsoever to me or my lifestyle, but it would still upset me.

The power cut kind of sucks, but it costs more!

 

[RocketGuy3]

First, I don't know how you got that 99% figure. Do you happen to have any reference to back that up?
Second, if by "other options" you mean public transport, I'm not interested.
Third, even if your figure were correct, there's still 1% to cater to, and you can't ignore that just because you happen to be part of the 99%. The rights of 1% of the population are exactly as important as those of the other 99%. If 1% of the population want to drive their personal car long-distance, they must be able to do so.


I don't mean that. I mean gas prices are overly inflated due to taxes. These taxes are a massive, massive source of cash for the government. Once everybody stops buying gas, the government will have to find another cash cow. Care to guess what that will be?
If someone invented a car that ran on tap water, and we all started driving that, then the government would tax the hell out of tap water. It's that simple. Enjoy your cheap electricity while you still can. It won't last forever.

It's obviously a number I pulled out of my ass, but I don't doubt it's far from the truth. The overarching point is it's certainly a majority. I wasn't asking if you were interested, my point was just that it's doable for most people and there is clearly an ever growing market for it. Also, public transport is not the only option... Ridesharing, car rentals, hitching a ride with a friend, flying... There's a million options, potentially.

You may be right about gas taxation, but the more likely scenario, as I'm already seeing all around me, is tollroads. I hate them, but they seem to be a common solution to funding transit. The point is that in terms of energy costs, EVs are strictly and unequivocally lower than ICE cars.

Nowhere near practical in existing urban neighborhoods almost anywhere, let alone those in the Northeast and Rustbelt. Add street recharging in many of those places and you just added "charging rage" to the already existing matter of "parking rage". Need I mention 'inner city gun violence' here?



Cherry-picking the situations where it could work is not the way toward any universal solutions here.



And that's exactly why I've been calling it "kool-aid" for the past several years, here and elsewhere. Get the engine-centric enthusiasts on board first with that, no matter how heavy the car needs to be or how stupid the power level ends up being. Never mind when some agency decides that there's big enough EV market penetration to start dialing back the insane EV power levels that have already shown up in the name of overall energy conservation. It'd be a bad bet to ignore this downstream possibility, when you wouldn't even have the straightline performance bragging rights to fall back on any more.


Norm

I don't really understand what you're trying to get at in your first section. Something about gun violence...?

And I'm not cherry-picking. My point in fact is that the person I'm rebutting is doing the cherry picking. No one is claiming that EVs are a silver bullet for climate change, nor that they're ready to take over every vehicle application today (or probably even in the next 20 years).

And yeah, if power consumption is still a problem, there may well be regulations on power output in the future. Not sure why that's a knock on EVs or otherwise relevant.

 

[13GetThere]

A 10 hp and 10 fpt sucks and is no big deal at the same time. Now back in the early 70's when a 375 horse engine dropped to 150; now that was some scary schit.
I don't like it, but it's a manageable loss.

 

[Rick#7]

Yeah, for the '72 MY, the mandated change in how HP ratings were measured coincided with increased EPA emission requirements which meant lower compression, retarded cam timing, and some more bolt on emission related hardware. That's why similar engines showed such drastic differences in rated HP from '71 to '72. i.e., the Boss 351 was rated at 330hp in '71 with 11.7:1 CR (many claimed that figure was under rated for insurance reasons, but that's the official number none the less), by comparison the '72 351 R-code (AKA 351 H.O.) which replaced the Boss in the line-up was rated at 275hp with just 8.6:1 CR. That's a 55hp drop in rated power. Although most of that drop was in the measuring method and not completely from an actual loss in power, it kinda puts this 10hp difference into perspective.

The current horsepower race isn't going away tomorrow, the 10 HP difference is only a small bump in road and Ford will have more revisions and advancements to the ICE V8 Mustangs before the final run.

 

[Orange devil]

Gm might try to Capitalize on this with one big push before there current 6 gen goes away .
https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-blackwing-upgrade/

 

[Atlas1]

Gm might try to Capitalize on this with one big push before there current 6 gen goes away .
https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-blackwing-upgrade/

Glad to see them upping the performance but I don’t think it really matters. The platform is dead in the water. A bump of 18 hp and some more expensive brakes can’t save it at this point unfortunately.

Sponsored