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

[ice445]

US manufacturing moved to China out of greed. American workers lost their jobs so large corporations could make more profit exploiting the backs of cheap Chinese labor, and manufacturing facilities that did not have to follow US safety or environmental regulations. Now, the US and Europe both give China this "pass" you mention so the corporations that donate so generously to political campaigns and personal charities and foundations may continue to make massive profits. Meanwhile, they crack down on emissions and force our lifestyles to change under the guise of "protecting the planet from climate change." Meanwhile, China constructs ever more coal fired plants and disregards almost all emissions controls. Clearly, it isn't about saving the planet. Simply bringing most manufacturing back to the US would have a greater overall positive benefit to the planet in terms of emissions than forcing us away from ICE vehicles.

Of course it was greed. But now it's necessary to keep prices low. As we've seen so far, even the tiniest disruptions result in huge price balloons in certain materials and finished goods. I'm all for bringing back US manufacturing, but it's certainly not going to be easy at this point. Resetting a race to the bottom requires pretty major changes that I'm doubtful will happen.

Also, my point there was that manufacturing itself is bad for the planet. Emissions from transportation are what, like 20-30% of the total? If we cared about the planet we'd stop buying so much crap, lol. Think of how many tons of garbage one household produces in a year.

Also bonus round, China is actually trying to invest in green energy. They're at least actually opening new nuclear plants, something no western nation has the balls to do anymore besides France, despite it being very green (albeit expensive).

Sponsored

 

[troverman]

Back to the original topic, if the Mach 1 can still produce 470HP and meet emissions compliance, why can't the GT continue to make 460 and meet emissions? I'm assuming the GT took a cut for the sole purpose of making the Mach 1 appear to maintain its HP advantage.

 

[Bikeman315]

Back to the original topic, if the Mach 1 can still produce 470HP and meet emissions compliance, why can't the GT continue to make 460 and meet emissions? I'm assuming the GT took a cut for the sole purpose of making the Mach 1 appear to maintain its HP advantage.

Huh? The Mach 1 is going from 480 to 470. Both are losing 10 meaningless gross horsepower.

 

[troverman]

Huh? The Mach 1 is going from 480 to 470. Both are losing 10 meaningless gross horsepower.

It's the same engine. If power needs to be reduced, it doesn't make sense they would both need to lose the same amount. In other words, if the Mach 1 can be compliant at 470, there's no reason the GT cannot remain compliant at 460. Forget if it makes a difference in the real world or not; something is changing regardless. I'm just questioning if something needed to change on the GT or if that was done simply to protect the Mach 1's small HP advantage.

 

[Bikeman315]

It's the same engine. If power needs to be reduced, it doesn't make sense they would both need to lose the same amount. In other words, if the Mach 1 can be compliant at 470, there's no reason the GT cannot remain compliant at 460. Forget if it makes a difference in the real world or not; something is changing regardless. I'm just questioning if something needed to change on the GT or if that was done simply to protect the Mach 1's small HP advantage.

The Mach 1 has the Bullitt/GT350 intake which got it from 460 to 480. There was probably some rounding involved, and maybe this was a reason. Regardless the entire topic is ridiculous as we are discussing gross HP.

 

[DaveB]

There won't be a Gen 4 Coyote... You'll be lucky to see the Gen 3 Coyote last a few more years. Why would they develop a motor going away soon?

It's not going anywhere anytime soon...unless they developed a different v8....like going from the 4.6 to coyote, or the LS to the LT at gm

 

[Vlad Soare]

So I’m guessing we are done having a ridiculous discussion about 10 lousy gross horsepower and moved on the the serious topics of climate control and ICE vs. EV powered automobiles? God, I love this forum!

That's probably because EV fanboys are like vegans - they can't stand not telling everybody about it. Every time the word "emissions" comes up, they must step in and tell us how wonderful EVs are.
I know, I'm being mean. Shame on me...

It's the same engine. If power needs to be reduced, it doesn't make sense they would both need to lose the same amount. In other words, if the Mach 1 can be compliant at 470, there's no reason the GT cannot remain compliant at 460. Forget if it makes a difference in the real world or not; something is changing regardless. I'm just questioning if something needed to change on the GT or if that was done simply to protect the Mach 1's small HP advantage.

That depends on which emissions they want to reduce, and how. If, as I suspect, they're planning to install GPFs like they do in European vehicles, then the GPF will take 10 HP from whatever power output the engine happened to have to begin with.
It will be interesting to see if European Mustangs are also going to lose 10 HP. I see no reason for that to happen, since they already have GPFs, and European standards haven't changed recently. Euro 6.2 is still in force, as far as I know, and the Mustang is already compliant with it as it is.

 

[IPOGT]

So I’m guessing we are done having a ridiculous discussion about 10 lousy gross horsepower and moved on the the serious topics of climate control and ICE vs. EV powered automobiles? God, I love this forum!

on

That's probably because EV fanboys are like vegans - they can't stand not telling everybody about it. Every time the word "emissions" comes up, they must step in and tell us how wonderful EVs are.
I know, I'm being mean. Shame on me...


That depends on which emissions they want to reduce, and how. If, as I suspect, they're planning to install GPFs like they do in European vehicles, then the GPF will take 10 HP from whatever power output the engine happened to have to begin with.
It will be interesting to see if European Mustangs are also going to lose 10 HP. I see no reason for that to happen, since they already have GPFs, and European standards haven't changed recently. Euro 6.2 is still in force, as far as I know, and the Mustang is already compliant with it as it is.

The difference will only ever matter to collectors. Everyone else won't even notice or care.

 

[Vlad Soare]

The difference will only ever matter to collectors. Everyone else won't even notice or care.

To be honest, it bothers me a bit that I could have 460 HP, but instead I've only got 450 because of some fat, useless politicians in Brussels.
Sure, it doesn't matter. I probably wouldn't feel the difference even if I were to drive both immediately one after the other. But still, there's a nagging voice in the back of my head that says "you could have had more".

 

[troverman]

That depends on which emissions they want to reduce, and how. If, as I suspect, they're planning to install GPFs like they do in European vehicles, then the GPF will take 10 HP from whatever power output the engine happened to have to begin with.

I was aware some vehicles (mostly German) were already installing GPFs, but only in Europe. I did not know they were doing it on the Mustang.

That said, I highly doubt they are installing them here in the US. Besides HP, you'd see another major change...the price. DPFs on diesel vehicles are a big reason the diesel engines cost so much more. And finally, only direct-injection gas engines have a problem with tiny particulate. In fact, GDI engines produce more fine particulate than an unfiltered direct injected diesel. The Mustang has dual injection, so it likely is cleaner than a straight GDI engine. And does the EcoBoost Mustang see a reduction? That's purely GDI, correct?

I'm not wild about a regeneration occurring in a GPF. Diesel is much safer in that regard.

 

[13GetThere]

Damn! I'm too late for the global warming, climate change, it's all my fault fight. I've had over 60 years of experience to throw in that fight.
Guess I'll just have to stick to the lost 10 horses. Hope somebody finds the poor things soon. Maybe they ran over to the GM ranch. I hear their horses are increasing.

 

[The Demon]

And in the meantime I read there are rumors that the ZL1 is maybe getting the Blackwing motor. They aren't going backwards.

 

[Orange devil]

Next thing you know they’ll be outlawing Taco Bell. They’ll be coming after every Mexican restaurant north of the border.

Oh hell no!!!

 

[FinitePrimus]

Peak power/torque numbers may well be close, but the power delivery (including "linearity" is not. Turbocharged engines can still be caught off-boost in certain situations - it's inherent to exhaust-driven forced induction even with dual-scroll turbocharging. And there's still the matter of managing the extra heat developed when running hard for extended periods of time.

These aspects are much more noticeable when running hard (HPDE and up in particular) - or when pulling into a side street whose posted speed requires downshifting.

The future is in electric turbos.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a32883694/mercedes-amg-electric-turbocharger/

 

[13GetThere]

The future is in electric turbos.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a32883694/mercedes-amg-electric-turbocharger/

Now that's the kind of electric power I can appreciate.

Sponsored