GT350 Horsepower

[Wildcat]

I doubt that the GT350 will start just $5K north of a loaded GT, which can top fifty grand (barely). Look at the Z28 if you want a pricing ballpark.

If they price it up near the Z/28 I think that would be a mistake.

Sponsored

 

[Swamp Yankee]

I certainly don't think Ford would be able to sell enough of them at that price point.

 

[Tim Hilliard]

Cross Plane Cranks are heavier as a result of additional metal for balancing the engine. They generally produce more low end torque and less vibrations for durability and heavy loads etc.

Flat Planes are able to use less material on the shafts and are able to rev much higher with greater mid/top end, but they have vibration issues in larger applications.

While I agree a FPC is lighter and has less inertia, that allows lower rotating inertia which effect is acceleration rate not necessarily power output. CPC make more torque down low due to the fact that the engines power band is typically designed around the designed rpm range so cylinder head flow, cam design is suited accordingly. A FPC engine will typically be designed around a higher operating range so the power curve is moved higher in the range. It does not mean it makes less torque. While CPC inertia does contribute to some artificial torque from inertia and firing angles it's splitting hairs. It still has more to do with the rest of the system and less to do with what angle power strokes are hitting, again at lower speeds.

If we were comparing the old 5.0 cast crank engine from the 80's to the 5.2 coming, yes I agree completely but we are comparing a modern, compact 5.0 that already has very low mass and proven 8K RPM capability. The advantage will be minimal based on crank designs...in this case.

This assumes they are revealing a street going model and not a race car.

I'll be proven wrong tomorrow but I do not see FPC a practical, economic solution for a conservative automaker such as Ford. The current engine is capable of making most of the (realistic)HP levels posted in this thread.

435hp
440hp -10lbs of rotating mass (FPC or race XPC), 5hp.
450hp cat-back exhaust, 10hp
475hp cams, 25hp
490hp 91+oct tune (still conservative), 15hp
500hp better scavenging (FPC-headers and/or spl XPC headers), 10hp
520hp +0.2L displacement, 4%

or not! haha...

DI + 2%

Exhaust pulse bank to bank balance is not a practical argument in a package based on a production platform. It's effect only shows up if exhaust can be designed without any packaging constraints. LT's on the current engine proves the the big number comes from the header design not the crank. Looking at the sneak peaks the car to be revealed does not have an exhaust system to take advantage.

Just my .33

 

[Tim Hilliard]

I doubt that the GT350 will start just $5K north of a loaded GT, which can top fifty grand (barely). Look at the Z28 if you want a pricing ballpark.

I agree Jim. This is a statement car, it will make a statement.

If they price it up near the Z/28 I think that would be a mistake.

Because you and I both refuse to pay that much for a Mustang :shrug:

This is a price point with M4's Lexus, HellCat, and the top dog Z-28. It pains me to say this but it has actually become a reasonable price range :shocked:

I certainly don't think Ford would be able to sell enough of them at that price point.

Which is what Ford is planning on, limited numbers, premium price, huge street (marketing) credit. Think Z-28>>>HellCat>>>GT350

 

[EiBStudent]

While I agree a FPC is lighter and has less inertia, that allows lower rotating inertia which effect is acceleration rate not necessarily power output. CPC make more torque down low due to the fact that the engines power band is typically designed around the designed rpm range so cylinder head flow, cam design is suited accordingly. A FPC engine will typically be designed around a higher operating range so the power curve is moved higher in the range. It does not mean it makes less torque. While CPC inertia does contribute to some artificial torque from inertia and firing angles it's splitting hairs. It still has more to do with the rest of the system and less to do with what angle power strokes are hitting, again at lower speeds.

If we were comparing the old 5.0 cast crank engine from the 80's to the 5.2 coming, yes I agree completely but we are comparing a modern, compact 5.0 that already has very low mass and proven 8K RPM capability. The advantage will be minimal based on crank designs...in this case.

Tim I agree completely...I was just giving an extremely basic view of each design. I've always struggled to understand why go to FPC on an engine like the coyote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[c3po]

People....all well thought out replies above. However, I think we should also keep in mind that Ford can, and has, surprised us in the past. Remember the thread a while back concerning Line Lock? It started out before we knew there was going to be a Line Lock feature and many here did not think Ford would do it mostly because of insurance reasons.

 

[Tim Hilliard]

...again I've been wrong before. I thought this about adding DI to the 5.0 until a friend that builds DI racing engines straightened me out on the cause and effect of DI over PI

With Fords 25 year experience with variable runner intakes, variable cam phasing a FPC engine with good low end power is not out of the question, I just don't see it in a street car at this displacement...

 

[Jimdohc]

DI + 2%

Exhaust pulse bank to bank balance is not a practical argument in a package based on a production platform. It's effect only shows up if exhaust can be designed without any packaging constraints. LT's on the current engine proves the the big number comes from the header design not the crank. Looking at the sneak peaks the car to be revealed does not have an exhaust system to take advantage.

Just my .33

DI... nice

True, GT40 balanced headers won't fit. But FPC doesn't require matching left & right exhaust pulses to scavenge. Back to XPC, yeah, it wouldn't be easy to get 10 peak hp out of emissions legal shorty headers, but not impossible.
I guess it's all a long shot. Unfortunately, my list is more of what I would do, not what I think they did... I have not clue what's going to be released. It's killing me. haha...

I have confidence, whatever is actually released. It will be better than I can imagine.

 

[Jimdohc]

435hp
440hp -10lbs of rotating mass (race XPC), 5hp.
450hp cat-back exhaust, 10hp
475hp cams, 25hp
490hp 91+oct tune (still conservative), 15hp
500hp DI, ~2% (idea stolen from Tim )
520hp +0.2L displacement, ~4%

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

I think that silhouette in video 4 tells us a lot of what we need to know. If the body was modified then we are exotic, beyond what a Boss 302 was to a GT and has higher goals in its sights. That means significantly higher revs, as given by the FPC and the breathing advantage it provides, are called for. It also lends an exotic touch, which high dollar payers demand and enjoy. I'm thinking mid to upper 60's to start and mid to upper 70's with all the whistles and bells with limited runs about half the quantity of the Boss. This thing is going after the Z/28, and will need the whole package to do so.
All my speculation, colored by my desire to see the Z/28 get waxed!

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

DI... nice

True, GT40 balanced headers won't fit. But FPC doesn't require matching left & right exhaust pulses to scavenge. Back to XPC, yeah, it wouldn't be easy to get 10 peak hp out of emissions legal shorty headers, but not impossible.
I guess it's all a long shot. Unfortunately, my list is more of what I would do, not what I think they did... I have not clue what's going to be released. It's killing me. haha...

I have confidence, whatever is actually released. It will be better than I can imagine.

Bundle of snakes, seen them on a Pantera once at Hallet(they removed the back window so they could fit), you could hear him wherever he went. Also saw a 69 fastback 428 CJ there with the 180 degree headers that crossed under the oil pan, and he sounded awesome also. It is a higher pitch sound, it makes it seem like they are turning 1000 rpms higher than everyone else.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

I certainly don't think Ford would be able to sell enough of them at that price point.

How many do you think they plan to sell? Boss was 5,000 a year; for the GT350, maybe 1,000 a year? They can get away with that at that price.

 

[Swamp Yankee]

Honestly, it's hard to guess. However, if Ford is going to be selling the GT350 in all of the markets around the world where they will be selling the Mustang GT then it seems reasonable to guess they'd be aiming at more than 5000 units a year. But what do I know? This is all just gut feeling.

 

[Momentum]

For those wanting to see Ford "wax" a Z28 (and that means waxing about 99.9% of all cars made), then its going to take hp and weight loss (both of the Z's weaknesses). That's going to cost money. Serious money. Then you'll hear the same cries the Camaro camp hears...."A $75k Mustang?"

 

[Mazda]

For those wanting to see Ford "wax" a Z28 (and that means waxing about 99.9% of all cars made), then its going to take hp and weight loss (both of the Z's weaknesses). That's going to cost money. Serious money. Then you'll hear the same cries the Camaro camp hears...."A $75k Mustang?"

I would gladly pay for a Mustang that matched/exceeded the performance of the z/28. The z/28 is a sweet car, I really like it but from the first time I laid my eyes on the new generation mustang and heard that flat plane crankshaft engine I instantly fell in love with it. Can I get a used Ferrari for that amount of money and get the same performance? Sure. I'd rather get the Mustang for the better bang for the buck value they have.

Some people don't understand that if you want a performance vehicle you're gonna have to pay up.

Sponsored