GT350 vs. Z/28

[reason4treason]

Well, the Z/28 is a real car...the GT350 is a pipe dream.

I just have never understood why Ford seems to have such a cavalier attitude about leaving loyalists just waiting and waiting, speculating in the dark for what can be years at a time while there is nothing killer at all on the shelves.

 

[darreng505]

I just have never understood why Ford seems to have such a cavalier attitude about leaving loyalists just waiting and waiting, speculating in the dark for what can be years at a time while there is nothing killer at all on the shelves.

I agree. I mean, why not give us a teaser. Chevy already has their killer cars on the market, so if Ford put out a teaser pic and announced there WILL be a GT350 or whatever, it won't come as any surprise to the competition.....and it might even prevent some people from jumping onto Chevy cars since there is NO in-production performance car from Ford right now (GT500 has ceased production). Crazy right?

 

[specizripn]

Chevy released the Zl1 figures and it looked like a monster and Ford was super late with the details, but when they were finally released the GT500 had 80 more hp and shocked everyone. I don't think Ford will disappoint, they just want to finalize the figures before they release them...

 

[americansteel]

Same displacement vs same displacement and both having same intake sizing, ohv will make more power everywhere than ohc.

That's said, ohc's are engineered different than ohvs and each is factory tailored to it's strengths factory.

That's awesome that you've been building engines for 10 years and I don't mean to take anything away from that, my point is simply that when comparing factory oem engines, like the ls vs modular engines, they are tailor built to their strengths. They are also geared accordingly to compliment their strengths.

Take a modular 5.3 bb (which is not a factory engine and really muddles everything now but anyways) vs an gm ohv 5.3 and compare their power curves. They are different power curves even when both are built to produce the same modest power and keep the same displacement.

Compare a gm 4.7 vs a modular 4.6, both make different power curves even at just 280hp.

Now when building engines, you can really tailor the powerband just as I'm sure you've seen, and as you know, ohv isn't as dynamically efficient as ohc

2001 4.8l 255HP @ 5200 torque 285 @ 4000. 5.3l 270HP @ 5100, torque 315 @ 4000 these are 2001 engine models. 4.6l-231HP @ 4750, torque @ 293 @ 3500. 5.4l-260HP @ 4500, torque 350 @ 2500RPM the 05 later 4.6l engines made a lot more power and torque than earlier models and that goes for the 5.4l. I believe the 5.4l went all the way to 391 FT lbs of torque by 09 if im correct which I cant remember. you know ford under rates there power numbers right? I have built probably 200 modular engines im actually sick of looking them but they are the easiest engine to build. I cant post pictures up here and I tried the photo bucket thing like you said but what I can do is write on here some examples of output numbers od some engines I have built and compare them. mind you I don't build many LS engines but I do some! examples- a 390HP 4.6l at 6300RPM 376 TQ @ 4900RPM with ported PI head 20 pound injectors cam 500/500 duration was like 230 I think long tube headers 75MM TB, that same top end on a 4.6l big bore 302 made 421HP at 6300 397TQ @ 4900RPM mind you the bigger bore will allow more air in the cylinders creating more torque and power and unshrouds the valves. notice how the RPM did not change? that's because of the same duration for both engines the bigger bore had more air coming into the engine but still made more power at the same RPM level.
5.4l with same top end and high baller intake from HPS, ported pi heads and the cam grinds I listed are perfect street cams for the street and is what is offered by comp-cams, anyway same top end as the 4.6l the 5.4l made 441HP @ 6100RPM and 410TQ @ 4800RPM big bore 5.4 at 351 cubic inches with the same top end made 468HP @ 6100RPM and 427TQ @ 4800 notice how the 5.4l/5.8l dropped in RPM's? that's because of the long stroke which will effect ratings at the RPM band.
LS3 vs ford SOHC 6.2l almost identical in cubic inches intake design being sheet metal intakes camshaft specs the ford head outflowed the LS3 by stock and no porting 10;1 CR same pound injectors throttle bodies were the same at 110MM the LS3 made 502HP @ 6200RPM and 478TQ @ 4650RPM the ford 6.2l made 521HP @ 6200RPM and TQ 4650RPM that same engine is going into a friends crown vic. the SOHC made more power and torque at the same RPM's than the LS3 with very similar components. now we cant compare ford and GM engines because neither engines have the same displacement except for the raptor/super duty 6.2l but trying to compare modular and LS engines is stupid we all know what happened when the LS1 went up against the 2 valve mustangs. if the current Camaro with the current LS3 was the same weight as the mustang the mustang would lose and especially the aftermarket backing for the Camaro and the ability to stroke and bore the LS engine to pretty substantial displacements, the coyote wouldn't keep up the 5.0 can only do so much for so long but when you have same weight and traction sorry bud but the smaller engine will lose. valve train design does not dictate where torque is made as I stated before that is entirely up to displacement cam shaft duration and intake runner length. stroke will make differences in torque production for 2 engines with the near or same cubic inch displacement as the 5.4l and 5.3l I compared to. the 5.4l made more torque at lower RPM's if they both hade the same bore and stroke well that's up to compression and intake runner length but have you compared a GM vortec intake to a ford triton intake? major difference clearly the triton intake is designed for very low-end output. the 5.4l was a decent engine for the F150 and expedition but for the heavier super duty trucks the 5.4l was not a good option for that use, it only showed what the problem was and that was lack of displacement the 5.4l lacked power and torque for such a heavy vehicle add a bigger bore to the long stroke then you got something but even long strokes aren't the answer for torque production. cobra im deleting my profile on this forum and im sticking with another forum I belong to, there are too many troll's, losers, no life's and people that just want to talk shit to others, ohv or ohc designs do not dictate where torque is made and ohv engines do not make more peak torque at a lower rpm than an engine that has over head camshafts. like I wrote before torque production is dictated by displacement duration and intake runner length, stroke effecting torque production but that goes for any engine whether it be ohc sohc or dohc. ohv engines have no advantages in making power/torque only if displacement is there, but if you have a ohc or dohc engine and a ohv displacing the same cubic inches the ohc engine will make more power not by much and the dohc will make almost at least 50 more horsepower than the sohc engine, sohc engines will always make more power if they displace the same as an ohv engine. but you can manipulate where torque and horsepower is made at by the top end. I know I made a couple spelling errors up top but I don't feel like looking through the post but good luck! im out.

 

[tt335ci03cobra]

Ya that's all about perfectly true American steel, also I noticed in my post you quoted that I had stated ohv will outperform ohc and that was a typo. I fixed my original post.

I meant to right ohc will out perform ohv, as that follows with everything else I have been rambling on about.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

Lol he got banned again?

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

I think one thing the OHV has going for it is less bearing friction. They do return excellent fuel economy in comparison. I believe the only advantages the OHC delivers is an unobstructed port and if designed correctly, a stable valve train. Until someone takes the same identical shortblock and swaps around heads with DOHC, SHOC and OHV cylinder heads WITH THE SAME valve area, with no adjustable cam timing, and identical compression ratio and cam timing between each, will we know for sure the advantages of each system on a level playing field. We are always seeing the advantages pushed by design layout (which is perfectly correct to do) which colors everyone's opinion of the "better" design. Hell, even whats considered better can be more opinion than fact, or driven by application needs.

I personally can't wait until an electrically powered solenoid valve train comes into practical usage....then we can argue about electrical efficiency and infinitely variable cam lift and timing throughout the rpm band.

 

[Devious_Snake]

2015 GT350? Performance Mustang Caught Testing With Less Camo | StangTV

 

[Husker]

2015 GT350? Performance Mustang Caught Testing With Less Camo | StangTV

I think we are getting a Halo this year-->:shrug:

 

[darreng505]

What's most interesting in those pics is that it appears to be running a square tire setup and the one pic shows the tire size to be 295/35/19 (click through the mustang6g)

 

[az20115.0]

Well, the rear fascia is going to be different for sure.. On that test mule, they took the regular rear valance and cut it to fit the quad exhaust.. Lets hope Ford does this one right, because that Z28 is damn fast.. And please please Ford, put some good brakes on that thing!!

 

[Vonbrandwolf]

Judging by those pictures I'm going to make a few predictions.

1: 700 hp flat crank twin turbo 5.0
2: Carbon ceramic Brembo brakes
3: flared fenders
4: extensive use of aluminum panels
5: viper beating performance

 

[OKC03Cobra]

Judging by those pictures I'm going to make a few predictions.

1: 700 hp flat crank twin turbo 5.0
2: Carbon ceramic Brembo brakes
3: flared fenders
4: extensive use of aluminum panels
5: viper beating performance

Maybe not.

2015 Ford Mustang Specs Leaked

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

Maybe not.

2015 Ford Mustang Specs Leaked

That article is from October. No one knew shit about the car then but a reliable source has already said no twin turbo.

 

[OKC03Cobra]

That article is from October. No one knew shit about the car then but a reliable source has already said no twin turbo.

Post the link then. It could be a twin turbo on a smaller engine putting out 500hp.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/road-side-pub-17/981827-news-2015-svt-cobra-2.html

Second post of the page. There could be a TTV6 but it's never been confirmed at any point. TT V8 would ve a ways out if they did it.

 

[5 DOT 0]

There already is a TT V6 and it puts out 600 HP. :beer:

[FONT=arial, sans-serif;]

[/FONT][FONT=arial, sans-serif;]
[/FONT]

 

[Serpent]

That article is from October. No one knew shit about the car then but a reliable source has already said no twin turbo.

I know that pic is from october but I think its bad ass that they are using basically a race car to compare the new platform with. Every time one of the big three sets the bar, there is always someone trying to pass it.
This means its good for all of us!!!

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

There already is a TT V6 and it puts out 600 HP. :beer:

[FONT=arial, sans-serif;]

[/FONT][FONT=arial, sans-serif;]
[/FONT]

Lol, the prototype engine? We can only hope one day!

I know that pic is from october but I think its bad ass that they are using basically a race car to compare the new platform with. Every time one of the big three sets the bar, there is always someone trying to pass it.
This means its good for all of us!!!

Don't get me wrong, I think the TT will eventually have to be used as the competition gets tougher and restrictions more stringent. It only makes sense to me, and as the Mustang starts goes through it's transition from retro to forward looking Ford will ditch the components that are more synonymous with giving the Mustang muscular character, ie SRA, blowers, manual trans, etc for IRS, turbo, and the inclusion of DCT. The manual trans won't be dropped for a long time to come I don't think, but they need to keep the Mustang competitive by offering DCT in most likely the new 8 and 9 speed transmissions Ford and GM are working on together.

 

[darreng505]

As an aside about the TT V6 which I believe the IMSA Ford DP uses. Well, it didn't have a good showing at Daytona. Despite setting a speed record there in testing, the Ford DP cars just didn't have the straight line speed to finish well. I feel bad for Ganassi they didn't seem all too thrilled with their new car.

Sorry for off topic, but since you guys mentioned that motor and its touted as being race bred and used in production cars (upcoming)...I guess my point is that Ford is still playing catch up, now in racing too. Just has me worried.