The Reason the SVO Name Won't Return.

[TampaBear67]

So as much as I would Love It, this is why I don't believe that Ford will use the SVO name on the 2015 Ecoboost. SVO was the Desination for Ford's Special Vehicle Operattions in the early 80's which was renamed Special Vehicle Team or SVT which We All know is now responsible for the Shelby- GT-500 and Previously the Cobra. So I dont see Ford resurecting the SVO Name on the 2015 since SVO is now Defunct.

Sponsored

 

[NeedLotteryToBuyStang]

I understand your reasoning, and there's a good chance you're right, but it's not unusual for manufacturers to reuse codes/names with different meanings. GM does it all the time (for instance, rumors that the Z06 this time will be the Z07, even though the 6 had nothing to do with the platform generation, and there was already a completely unrelated z07 option code on the C6)

 

[Whiskey11]

So as much as I would Love It, this is why I don't believe that Ford will use the SVO name on the 2015 Ecoboost. SVO was the Desination for Ford's Special Vehicle Operattions in the early 80's which was renamed Special Vehicle Team or SVT which We All know is now responsible for the Shelby- GT-500 and Previously the Cobra. So I dont see Ford resurecting the SVO Name on the 2015 since SVO is now Defunct.

The only car that SVO made in it's brief history under that name was the 2.3L Turbo 4 cylinder Mustangs so it would NOT surprise me if the name SVO came back because the only thing that ever wore their title was a Mustang. At this point if you ask any well educated Mustang enthusiast what SVO is/was, they will most likely say it was a 2.3L Turbo 4 cylinder Mustang made in the 80's and not the precursor to SVT.

Australia had an SVO division that lasted longer but didn't make any specialty vehicles with their badging on it.

 

[S550Boss]

The SVO nameplate had better not return! The SVO in it's time was the top of the line Mustang, the top performer in all dynamic aspects including acceleration, braking, handling. And it had the most sophisticated interior and ergonomics. If the nameplate is used again, it won't rate highest in any of these areas, and it will be an insult to an important piece of Ford's performance history.

And I had one of each, bought brand new then, and both used at track events. The GT was a nose-heavy pig, with lousy handling and dynamics as well as terrible seats. It went thru front brake bearings each day of a track event and calipers every other day. And it didn't have sufficient cooling to survive a 25 minute session without getting seriously hot. The SVO was the perfect contrast - exactly the opposite in all these regards. It was a car that could handle a track event well, and survive the weekend. And my weekends were at Watkins Glen, one of the top 3 toughest tracks in the country.

The SVO was and remains a total contrast to the GT: it's misunderstood, there are too many armchair quarterbacks, and it was a failure in the market not due to it's technical advantages but due to poor and untrained dealers.

SVO was also symptomatic of Ford's greater ills. The engineering that went into it's chassis was all lost when it was cancelled. The planned DOHC engine was cancelled as Ford planned to take the T-Bird upmarket to the planned supercharged V-6. And the emphasis on testing and developing for the track was dead for several years... the GTs continued to have severe problems on track. Cooling was the most irritating (and it's not just a matter of a large radiator), braking was very frustrating. It's a good thing Saleen came along and made use of some of the engineering (back in the days when they were still serious about this).

SVT, when it arrived 7 years later, helped the situation by training dealers and certifying them... a program which (like SVT) is dead and gone now.

SVT has no relationship to SVO, it was not a successor. SVT did take one thing from SVO in that they did their engineering development outside of Team Mustang, as a delta. Their engineering and testing was a delta, an add-on, not integrated in the full development cycle and therefore not benefitting from testing from the start of the basic product forward. And it showed in their quality... the further the SVT Mustangs got from the base product, the more quality issues they had. Things started with broken seat frames in '94, graduated to terrible cooling in '96, then engine output problems in '99, and finally engine tuning and durability issues in 2003. Even the IRS, which was heroes work, and which worked great on the track, suffered from too little testing. I had one of each of these, worked with Ford on the cooling issue in '96 (testing the first production repair kit on-track), with their IRS engineers to get my own IRS-equipped Cobras tuned for the track, and then suffered myself thru a blown engine on my POS 2003 Cobra (an engine with a service history so bad that it was cancelled for the 2005 Mustang where it had been planned as a step above the GT and below the planned IRS-equipped and aluminum-blocked 5.4 Cobra). And mine was a mid-2003 build, without the earlier cylinder head casting issues, the weak transmissions, and the cold-start tuning issues.

And the Ford GT was also an SVT disaster: the "pace car for the entire company" (as it was put then) had severe engineering issues including a do-not-drive recall resulting in a total suspension replacement (>$25k/car) and an inherent inability to survive a track weekend without overheating (even the two that SVT had for their track event program both died in front of participants and despite a rebuild never worked - in the words of their own engineers). I was there, saw it, talked to their engineers at length.

So if SVT was once seen as representing the best of Ford, it ended up as symptomatic of all of Ford's ills. That's why SVT engineering was taken back inside Team Mustang in the end and SVT as we knew it is long gone.

In the end, I stick up for the SVO because it was Ford's first serious attempt at building a sophisticated Mustang and it meant a lot to us when it came out. It demonstrated what Ford engineers could do in a less-constrained environment, but it also shows us what little progress Ford has made in some areas over the past 30 years. Ford repeatedly blew it again and again after the SVO, with the zombie FOX platform living seemingly forever, with the failure to approve the planned MN12 and DEW98 -based Mustangs, with the continued quality issues, with the continued cycles of low sales and very few boom times. What would literally have been akin to an E46 M3 in the 89 or so timeframe (world class) ended up as much as an embarrassment as the Panther platform. And while a number of heroes inside worked to get us a few high-points over the years, the more important story is how each of those high points in turn disappeared from execution issues and apathy.

If there is finally a turning point here it's the new engines in 2011 (but not the accompanying manual transmission, which was a typical FAIL) and now the S550. This time, 30 years later, it might be for real. After all this churning, Mustang engineering may be finally approaching the quality level that the marketplace demands.

 

[w3rkn]

The SVO nameplate had better not return! The SVO in it's time was the top of the line Mustang, the top performer in all dynamic aspects including acceleration, braking, handling. And it had the most sophisticated interior and ergonomics. If the nameplate is used again, it won't rate highest in any of these areas, and it will be an insult to an important piece of Ford's performance history.

And I had one of each, bought brand new then, and both used at track events. The GT was a nose-heavy pig, with lousy handling and dynamics as well as terrible seats. It went thru front brake bearings each day of a track event and calipers every other day. And it didn't have sufficient cooling to survive a 25 minute session without getting seriously hot. The SVO was the perfect contrast - exactly the opposite in all these regards. It was a car that could handle a track event well, and survive the weekend. And my weekends were at Watkins Glen, one of the top 3 toughest tracks in the country.

The SVO was and remains a total contrast to the GT: it's misunderstood, there are too many armchair quarterbacks, and it was a failure in the market not due to it's technical advantages but due to poor and untrained dealers.

SVO was also symptomatic of Ford's greater ills. The engineering that went into it's chassis was all lost when it was cancelled. The planned DOHC engine was cancelled as Ford planned to take the T-Bird upmarket to the planned supercharged V-6. And the emphasis on testing and developing for the track was dead for several years... the GTs continued to have severe problems on track. Cooling was the most irritating (and it's not just a matter of a large radiator), braking was very frustrating. It's a good thing Saleen came along and made use of some of the engineering (back in the days when they were still serious about this).

SVT, when it arrived 7 years later, helped the situation by training dealers and certifying them... a program which (like SVT) is dead and gone now.

SVT has no relationship to SVO, it was not a successor. SVT did take one thing from SVO in that they did their engineering development outside of Team Mustang, as a delta. Their engineering and testing was a delta, an add-on, not integrated in the full development cycle and therefore not benefitting from testing from the start of the basic product forward. And it showed in their quality... the further the SVT Mustangs got from the base product, the more quality issues they had. Things started with broken seat frames in '94, graduated to terrible cooling in '96, then engine output problems in '99, and finally engine tuning and durability issues in 2003. Even the IRS, which was heroes work, and which worked great on the track, suffered from too little testing. I had one of each of these, worked with Ford on the cooling issue in '96 (testing the first production repair kit on-track), with their IRS engineers to get my own IRS-equipped Cobras tuned for the track, and then suffered myself thru a blown engine on my POS 2003 Cobra (an engine with a service history so bad that it was cancelled for the 2005 Mustang where it had been planned as a step above the GT and below the planned IRS-equipped and aluminum-blocked 5.4 Cobra). And mine was a mid-2003 build, without the earlier cylinder head casting issues, the weak transmissions, and the cold-start tuning issues.

And the Ford GT was also an SVT disaster: the "pace car for the entire company" (as it was put then) had severe engineering issues including a do-not-drive recall resulting in a total suspension replacement (>$25k/car) and an inherent inability to survive a track weekend without overheating (even the two that SVT had for their track event program both died in front of participants and despite a rebuild never worked - in the words of their own engineers). I was there, saw it, talked to their engineers at length.

So if SVT was once seen as representing the best of Ford, it ended up as symptomatic of all of Ford's ills. That's why SVT engineering was taken back inside Team Mustang in the end and SVT as we knew it is long gone.

In the end, I stick up for the SVO because it was Ford's first serious attempt at building a sophisticated Mustang and it meant a lot to us when it came out. It demonstrated what Ford engineers could do in a less-constrained environment, but it also shows us what little progress Ford has made in some areas over the past 30 years. Ford repeatedly blew it again and again after the SVO, with the zombie FOX platform living seemingly forever, with the failure to approve the planned MN12 and DEW98 -based Mustangs, with the continued quality issues, with the continued cycles of low sales and very few boom times. What would literally have been akin to an E46 M3 in the 89 or so timeframe (world class) ended up as much as an embarrassment as the Panther platform. And while a number of heroes inside worked to get us a few high-points over the years, the more important story is how each of those high points in turn disappeared from execution issues and apathy.

If there is finally a turning point here it's the new engines in 2011 (but not the accompanying manual transmission, which was a typical FAIL) and now the S550. This time, 30 years later, it might be for real. After all this churning, Mustang engineering may be finally approaching the quality level that the marketplace demands.

This^

The SVO was a great car to drive, had a similar European feel as the XR4ti. My friend totaled his SVO just out of highschool and he got a notchback 5.0.

We both secretly loved the SVO, so much more. It had a different feel to it.

 

[Whiskey11]

The SVO nameplate had better not return! The SVO in it's time was the top of the line Mustang, the top performer in all dynamic aspects including acceleration, braking, handling. And it had the most sophisticated interior and ergonomics. If the nameplate is used again, it won't rate highest in any of these areas, and it will be an insult to an important piece of Ford's performance history.

I don't personally think the SVO title should be given to a base Turbo 4, I think it SHOULD be given to the Performance Package Turbo 4 because that is the goal of the PP. Instead of calling it a PP, they should call it the SVO Package, because it DOES represent some of the best of the Mustang, solid acceleration (not world shattering) in a lighter weight platform with amazing handling capabilities in the right hands and solid brakes. That certainly has the ethos of the SVO program in more ways than the revitalized Boss 302 had compared to the original.

 

[S550Boss]

We both secretly loved the SVO, so much more. It had a different feel to it.

Some of the changes included a different steering rack and pump. They went thru the entire car start to finish.

 

[Stevefreestyle]

Some of the changes included a different steering rack and pump. They went thru the entire car start to finish.

Although it's stating the obvious (given the official info'), it would appear that the S550 has also been through an "entire car, start to finish" transformation, especially in the engine, transmission, braking and suspension areas.

Can't wait to get more info.

 

[S550Boss]

I meant the SVO had numerous different parts, including the power steering rack and pump.

 

[Mriley]

Although it's stating the obvious (given the official info'), it would appear that the S550 has also been through an "entire car, start to finish" transformation, especially in the engine, transmission, braking and suspension areas.

Can't wait to get more info.

Engine? Unless you're talking about the new 4cylinder the V6 and V8 are pretty much carried over from what I understand.

Same with the transmission tho it sounds like they reworked it a bit. But not enough to call it by another name.

 

[Mriley]

I don't personally think the SVO title should be given to a base Turbo 4, I think it SHOULD be given to the Performance Package Turbo 4 because that is the goal of the PP. Instead of calling it a PP, they should call it the SVO Package, because it DOES represent some of the best of the Mustang, solid acceleration (not world shattering) in a lighter weight platform with amazing handling capabilities in the right hands and solid brakes. That certainly has the ethos of the SVO program in more ways than the revitalized Boss 302 had compared to the original.

I think this makes a lot of sense. It would be cool if they could also add a little more than your typical PP. Give it a few unique exterior changes to make it look unique, a different shifter, special pedals, etc. Something more in line with the uniqueness of the original SVO altho I understand the different economics of this makes this not very likely to happen.

 

[S550Boss]

Why would you want them to a better shifter and pedals than the GT PP has?
Or is this appearance only? And to what point is appearance if form follows function?

 

[SStormtrooPer]

I don't personally think the SVO title should be given to a base Turbo 4, I think it SHOULD be given to the Performance Package Turbo 4 because that is the goal of the PP. Instead of calling it a PP, they should call it the SVO Package, because it DOES represent some of the best of the Mustang, solid acceleration (not world shattering) in a lighter weight platform with amazing handling capabilities in the right hands and solid brakes. That certainly has the ethos of the SVO program in more ways than the revitalized Boss 302 had compared to the original.

I disagree, and as Tampa said, it won't be used, at least not if they are smart.

The SVO Mustang was named after the team that worked on the car, the same team that created the line SVE(Special Vehicle Equipment). Further to that, the SVO had more premium materials in the interior, better brakes, revised/improved suspension geometry, updated aero, and was the most expensive Mustang in the line-up. How naming the new car after a group that no longer exists, and won't have the premium upgrades and price over the GT makes more sense than calling the current Boss a Boss is beyond me. It "could" have premium upgrades with a premium price over the already spendy GT, but I just don't see a $40,000+ Turbo 4 happening -- at least not if they want to sell any.

The new Boss on the other hand is a track car just like the original, and it did exactly what Ford intended -- win at the track, and was done in the spirit of the original(with the exception being this time around it wasn't 'top secret'). That program did exactly what the original did.

You would be calling the car SVO for sentimental reasons -- and at that point you are whoring out a name to make money. Just like Chevy is doing with "Z/28" and praising it as the return of the original. In true spirit the Z/28 would have been a Boss 302 competitor, not a $75,000 destroyer of magazine tests.

Fords current line of lightweight high performance is badged ST. Whether we like that name or not, that makes much more sense than calling it SVO. I don't like ST as a trim name, and I loved SVO, but I sure hope they don't call it SVO.

If anything, they should call it ST to align with current programs, and call the higher performance version the ST Competition Prep like they did with the SVO Comp Prep -- THAT has the ethos of the program.

 

[Whiskey11]

I disagree, and as Tampa said, it won't be used, at least not if they are smart.

The SVO Mustang was named after the team that worked on the car, the same team that created the line SVE(Special Vehicle Equipment). Further to that, the SVO had more premium materials in the interior, better brakes, revised/improved suspension geometry, updated aero, and was the most expensive Mustang in the line-up. How naming the new car after a group that no longer exists, and won't have the premium upgrades and price over the GT makes more sense than calling the current Boss a Boss is beyond me. It "could" have premium upgrades with a premium price over the already spendy GT, but I just don't see a $40,000+ Turbo 4 happening -- at least not if they want to sell any.

The new Boss on the other hand is a track car just like the original, and it did exactly what Ford intended -- win at the track, and was done in the spirit of the original(with the exception being this time around it wasn't 'top secret'). That program did exactly what the original did.

You would be calling the car SVO for sentimental reasons -- and at that point you are whoring out a name to make money. Just like Chevy is doing with "Z/28" and praising it as the return of the original. In true spirit the Z/28 would have been a Boss 302 competitor, not a $75,000 destroyer of magazine tests.

Fords current line of lightweight high performance is badged ST. Whether we like that name or not, that makes much more sense than calling it SVO. I don't like ST as a trim name, and I loved SVO, but I sure hope they don't call it SVO.

If anything, they should call it ST to align with current programs, and call the higher performance version the ST Competition Prep like they did with the SVO Comp Prep -- THAT has the ethos of the program.

SVO created one car, one, single, car and it was a Turbo 4 Mustang. The name SVO, to the enthusiast, means a Mustang made in the 1980's on Fox platform with a 2.3L Turbo 4 cylinder motor. Outside of that, it means NOTHING. There was nothing else made under that program/company/whateveryouwanttocallit. I'm not sure why people are hung up on the idea of using that name because it was a program like SVT? Who the hell cares about the group SVO at this point and time? Their legacy is in the Mustang that had the same name so lets honor that name.

Yes, it had better materials, so does the WHOLE Mustang lineup now. Yes it had better brakes, the performance package comes with Brembo's vs the floating stock calipers. Yes it had better suspension, the PP will have that too and who knows what, if any aero changes will occur. Sounds like an SVO to me.

I think where you and others get hung up on this idea is the fact that it isn't the "top dog" Mustang for this generation. It will never be the top dog Mustang as engine technology has made V8's viable into the near future. When you can buy a 662 HP 5.8L V8 that avoids the gas guzzler tax, we live in a great world. That doesn't mean that Ford can't name the 2.3L EB4 Mustang with PP an SVO to avoid the shitty ST name plate or something just as awful. At least SVO HAS heritage in the Mustang world, ST in the US means nothing except for the FoST and FiST and the Mustang should not be lumped into the same category as some hopped up FWD hatchback.

 

[Stevefreestyle]

Engine? Unless you're talking about the new 4cylinder the V6 and V8 are pretty much carried over from what I understand.

Same with the transmission tho it sounds like they reworked it a bit. But not enough to call it by another name.

The 5.0 V8 has been significantly reworked, with "lessons learned" and performance components from the BOSS 302 engine development, including Crank, Rods, Valve Springs, Valve Lift, Heads, Porting/Gas Flow, Cam Timing, Inlet Manifold et.al.

The beating heart of a pony
No Ford Mustang engine lineup would be complete without a great V8 engine at its core. The 5.0-liter V8 powers into a new generation with a host of upgrades that enable it to breathe better, especially at higher engine speeds. Many of these changes are derived from the lessons learned in developing the special edition 2013 Mustang Boss 302.
Getting air into the cylinders and exhaust out is the key to generating more power and torque from any engine, and that has been the focus of development on the V8, which features:

• Larger intake valves
• Larger exhaust valves
• Revised intake camshafts
• Revised exhaust camshafts
• Stiffer valve springs – ensures that the valves close completely at high rpm
• New cylinder-head casting – revised ports that provide a straighter path to the valves for less-restrictive intake and exhaust flow; combustion chamber modifications accommodate larger valves
• Sinter forged connecting rods – lighter and more durable for high-rpm operation
• Redesigned piston tops – deeper cutouts clear the new larger valves
• Rebalanced forged crankshaft – supports higher-rpm operation

These upgrades are projected to generate more than 420 horsepower and 390 lb.-ft. of torque.


A new intake manifold includes charge motion control valves to partially close off port flow at lower engine speeds. This increases the air charge tumble and swirl for improved air-fuel mixing. This results in better fuel economy, idle stability and lower emissions.


The variable camshaft timing on the intake side now has a greater range of adjustment available thanks to mid-lock phasers. This enables better optimized control of the valve timing over a broader range of engine speeds and loads for improved fuel economy and emissions


Transmissions
More than most drivers, Mustang owners like to take control and shift for themselves. Whether they select a fully manual gearbox or the updated automatic transmission, the experience will be better than in any previous pony.
The Getrag manual has a new shift linkage design for shorter throws and improved precision. The shift lever is now positioned closer to the driver and away from the cup-holders so the driver has a clear path for shifting.
Mustang blends outstanding all-around performance and everyday usability. Drivers who prefer to let the car handle the shifting during their daily work run, but still want to take control when the roads get twisty, will appreciate the new steering-wheel-mounted shift paddles with rev-matching downshifts that are now standard with the Select-Shift six-speed automatic transmission.


The automatic also features a redesigned case with cast-in ribs that help make it stiffer and reduce the weight. Internally clutches have been optimized and operating temperature has been increased to reduce friction. The output shaft is now supported by a ball-bearing that enables a top speed of 155 mph for Mustang GT.
With a choice of powertrains to match driving styles and lifestyles, the new Mustang has contemporary technology under the hood to match its modern design and remain quintessentially Mustang.

http://media.ford.com/content/fordm...hed--motivating-the-all-new-ford-mustang.html

And from Jarstang in this Forum:

Engines

• 5.0L V8 (Coyote)
  • > 420 HP (projected)
  • > 390 Lb-Ft (projected)
  • Sintered-iron forged Boss-like 302 rods and springs
  • Upgrade valvetrain and cylinder heads with improved port design
  • Larger valves and cams
  • New intake manifold with charge motion-control valves
  • Redesigned piston tops
  • Balanced forged crank
  • 11:1 compression ratio
  • 155 MPH top speed
  • Even more detailed changes:
    • New cams with 1mm more intake lift and 2mm more lift on the exhaust side
    • New cylinder heads with revised high-flow ports and slightly larger valves
    • Mid-lock cam phasers to provide greater range of cam timing on the intake side
    • A revised intake manifold with charge-motion control valves.
    • The forged connecting rods from the current Boss 302 engine
    • The forged balanced crank from the current Boss 302 engine
    • The valve springs from the current Boss 302 engine
    • Standard oil cooler

Sponsored