2011 Mustang: Where does it fall?

[Jroc]

This isn't a SVT motor, yet... There has to be room to grow this new motor for the top-shelf Mustang to come. Personally, I'm OK with these rods being almost maxed out at 7000 rpm and 412hp in a NA motor, logic would indicate that when they do build a 5.0 for the next generation SVT Mustang, which will most likely be boosted in some fashion, they will have to upgrade the rods.

I'm not saying that it needs Manley H-Beam rods or anything, but if they're no stronger than the current GT's rods then its power potential is no better than the 3v's until you tear into the bottomend as you can easily get a 3v GT to 450 whp which is about its safe limit B/F it starts breaking the interals. LS motor rods aren't expensive forged rods, but they'll hold upwards of 600 whp if I'm not mistaken.

Say if you can do head and cam mods to this new motor and make upwards of 500 whp thats great, but if the rods aren't up to the task then it doesn't matter, and that hurts the performance enthusiast who doesn't have the money to do a complete rebuild, and don't even think about any big shot. I mean look at an L. Its got alot of HP potential being a factory SC 5.4 car, but its stock rod hold it back.

 

[WP64]

I'm not saying that it needs Manley H-Beam rods or anything, but if they're no stronger than the current GT's rods then its power potential is no better than the 3v's until you tear into the bottomend as you can easily get a 3v GT to 450 whp which is about its safe limit B/F it starts breaking the interals. LS motor rods aren't expensive forged rods, but they'll hold upwards of 600 whp if I'm not mistaken.

Say if you can do head and cam mods to this new motor and make upwards of 500 whp thats great, but if the rods aren't up to the task then it doesn't matter, and that hurts the performance enthusiast who doesn't have the money to do a complete rebuild, and don't even think about any big shot. I mean look at an L. Its got alot of HP potential being a factory SC 5.4 car, but its stock rod hold it back.

I get your point, but the current top-shelf Mustang, the GT500, doesn't use H-Beam forged rods and it will support 750, even 810 hp as long as it's not reved over 6500 rpm, that's a 50-60% increase over the GT500's typical stock BHP.

It sounds to me like your expecting the Coyote motor to be at it's top development stange right out of the gate and neglecting the fact that it's going into a GT Mustang, not a SVT branded Mustang. Ask yourself this question, was the 4.6 at it's performance pinnicle when it was introduced or did it get better with time?

To assume that the Coyote's rods are the same as the 4.6 3-valve rods is an inaccurate assumption. This is from the 5.0 Magazine article:

"It's worth noting that while the Coyote rod shares its big-and small-end diameters plus it's center-to-center length with the 4.6 rod, the Coyote rod has been redesigned to more evenly distribute bearing loads and is definitely an improved piece."

Have you ever considered that maybe Ford uses powder forged rods purposely to keep the public from cranking these motors to crazy levels of HP on a stock short block? I think this is the case with the GT500 motor, look what happened when they put Manley rods in the Terminator motor, guys were modding the stock long block to 1000+hp; I think this is one of the reasons why the H-Beam rods didn't make it into the GT500 motor, price consideration being another.

 

[Jroc]

I get your point, but the current top-shelf Mustang, the GT500, doesn't use H-Beam forged rods and it will support 750, even 810 hp as long as it's not reved over 6500 rpm, that's a 50-60% increase over the GT500's typical stock BHP.

It sounds to me like your expecting the Coyote motor to be at it's top development stange right out of the gate and neglecting the fact that it's going into a GT Mustang, not a SVT branded Mustang. Ask yourself this question, was the 4.6 at it's performance pinnicle when it was introduced or did it get better with time?

To assume that the Coyote's rods are the same as the 4.6 3-valve rods is an inaccurate assumption. This is from the 5.0 Magazine article:

"It's worth noting that while the Coyote rod shares its big-and small-end diameters plus it's center-to-center length with the 4.6 rod, the Coyote rod has been redesigned to more evenly distribute bearing loads and is definitely an improved piece."

Have you ever considered that maybe Ford uses powder forged rods purposely to keep the public from cranking these motors to crazy levels of HP on a stock short block? I think this is the case with the GT500 motor, look what happened when they put Manley rods in the Terminator motor, guys were modding them to 1000+hp on the stock block; I think this is one of the reasons why the H-Beam rods didn't make it into the GT500 motor, price consideration being another.

The article also talks about how the rods are the weak link in the motor, and how they won't support really any extra power over the current rods. Yes the GT500 rods are strong without being expensive Manly H-Beam rods so give the new 5.0 a similar rod.

If they had to target a budget to produce a motor that cost X amount of money to build then why spend it on headers that only give them 6 more HP when you could throw the money saved on the headers into building stronger rods. In "Iron Fist, Lead Foot" J Colleti says that the older N/A Cobra rods cost about $11 apiece for Ford to produce whereas the Manley rods cost them about $56 apiece. I'm pretty sure GT500 rods cost Ford quite abit less than the Manley rods, but at the same time they're still very stout.

Lets assume that it cost $20 apiece for Ford to produce a manifold. That would mean it would be $60 apiece for them to produce a header if what the article says is correct about then cost 3x more to build than regular manifolds. So if they went with manifolds that would save them $80 a motor and they could of thrown that into better rods.

The guy that developed the motor said that its HP potential isn't much greater than it is stock because of the rods not being up to the task of handling much more power. Thats terrible for Mustang enthusiasts because to a great majority of us part of owning a Mustang is to mod more HP out of it, and most Mustangs are cheap cars, and most of their owners can't afford to buy the lastest new Mustang because they want the awesome new motor, and then afford to do some expensive rebuild because they want to be able to up the power on it.

Don't get me wrong I think this motors great, and I'm very excited about it, but I'd rather mod headers than have to do a rebuild so that I could start bringing out some of the motors potential. According to the article 2011 Mustang owners can pretty much forget about throwing a Vortech and 8 psi or a 100 shot at this motor on a factory bottomend. Its not just that N/A Mustang rods won't handle much boost its that they won't handle much HP.

 

[WP64]

According to the article 2011 Mustang owners can pretty much forget about throwing a Vortech and 8 psi or a 100 shot at this motor on a factory bottomend. Its not just that N/A Mustang rods won't handle much boost its that they won't handle much HP.

And in a selfish kinda way, I'm OK with it being limited to the factory 412hp, I won't have to worrie about them being modded to the point of being able to keep up with my GT500 in a straight line, at least not until the next generation SVT Mustang hits the streets :-D

 

[Formula51]

*sigh*

Taken from leftlanenews:
Combined with Ford’s latest track pack, the 2011 Mustang GT reportedly lapped Michigan’s GingerMan Raceway dead-even with the current BMW M3 — despite a 200 pound weight disadvantage.

I'll take being "down on power" when it runs even with an M3 and the Camaro and Challenger can't come close to that.

Camaro Curb Weight: 3849
Mustang Curb Weight: 3562 (assuming this number since every article says the new 2011 weighs 10lbs more than the 2010).

So even having "only" 412hp, it should easily keep up with, if not beat, the Camaro in a straight line and in the twisties.

What you must have missed is the Mustang was wearing some race rubber and on top of that, it was a pre-production car. I am excited to see how it performs.

In this year's Lightning Lap the 2010 Stang GT Track Pack was 4 seconds behind the Camaro SS and the M3 was 4-5 seconds ahead of the Camaro. I'm pretty sure the Camaro and M3 were significantly faster at Laguna Seca also, but I don't remember the times.

I think the new Mustang should pass the Camaro, but I don't think it will catch the M3. Now if the Camaro gets some type of "Track Pack" then it could be a good competition.

 

[Formula51]

It's official, the Mustang is the best bang for the buck. I see the Camaro failing soon after the GT appears in dealerships:banana:

You think? I don't know, I think its close, but I'm still leaning towards the 1SS Camaro.

For $1,300 more than the Mustang you get more power/torque, 20" wheels, 245/275 tires, IRS, Brembo brakes, power driver and passenger seats, rear body and side curtain air bags, leather wrapped steering wheel, etc.

I think both cars are price appropriately.

 

[WP64]

You think? I don't know, I think its close, but I'm still leaning towards the 1SS Camaro.

For $1,300 more than the Mustang you get more power/torque, 20" wheels, 245/275 tires, IRS, Brembo brakes, power driver and passenger seats, rear body and side curtain air bags, leather wrapped steering wheel, etc.

I think both cars are price appropriately.

That $1300 is $300 short of a Griggs GR40SS suspension which includes their torque arm and adjustable coil-over struts and shocks. Add this to the base 5.0 GT with the Brembo brake package and 3:73 gears and the Camaro won't stand a chance against a 5.0 Mustang on the street and on the road course.

20" wheels are garish and pimpy on a performance car IMO... You gonna put lights on the undercarriage of that Camaro you keep saying you're going to buy? You also get 280 more pounds with that extra $1300oke:

 

[ON D BIT]

That $1300 is $300 short of a Griggs GR40SS suspension which includes their torque arm and adjustable coil-over struts and shocks. Add this to the base 5.0 GT with the Brembo brake package and 3:73 gears and the Camaro won't stand a chance against a 5.0 Mustang on the street and on the road course.

20" wheels are garish and pimpy on a performance car IMO... You gonna put lights on the undercarriage of that Camaro you keep saying you're going to buy? You also get 280 more pounds with that extra $1300oke:

Griggs website has the gr40ss suspension at 3600msrp not 1600. Unfortunately we cant order the brake package without getting the suspension package from ford as well...

 

[Formula51]

That $1300 is $300 short of a Griggs GR40SS suspension which includes their torque arm and adjustable coil-over struts and shocks. Add this to the base 5.0 GT with the Brembo brake package and 3:73 gears and the Camaro won't stand a chance against a 5.0 Mustang on the street and on the road course.

20" wheels are garish and pimpy on a performance car IMO... You gonna put lights on the undercarriage of that Camaro you keep saying you're going to buy? You also get 280 more pounds with that extra $1300oke:

I think you missed the point. We were talking bang for the buck FACTORY cars.

To help you out a little: You can't get a "base" GT with the Brembo brake package. It is only available on the "premium" GT. Also, a Brembo brake optioned, 3.73 gear optioned, Mustang GT Premium would be $34,935 and closer to $36k with upgraded wheels. Certainly a great car, but perhaps not the best bang for the buck.

 

[Formula51]

Griggs website has the gr40ss suspension at 3600msrp not 1600. Unfortunately we cant order the brake package without getting the suspension package from ford as well...

Hey D BIT, do you have the details on how that works, I have been trying to figure it out from that order sheet.

Is Rapid Spec 402A the Track Pack and does it include the 19" wheels and Brembo's?

 

[WP64]

I think you missed the point. We were talking bang for the buck FACTORY cars.

To help you out a little: You can't get a "base" GT with the Brembo brake package. It is only available on the "premium" GT. Also, a Brembo brake optioned, 3.73 gear optioned, Mustang GT Premium would be $34,935 and closer to $36k with upgraded wheels. Certainly a great car, but perhaps not the best bang for the buck.

To help you out a little, the Brembo brake package comes with upgraded wheels... $34,935 sounds good, we know it's 280lbs. less in weight, so how much less, in dollars, is the '11 Mustang then a comparable catfish?

You gonna put in some grill speakers to go along with those 20's on the Camaro you're buying?


Thanks Michael for the pricing clarification, so I was off by 125% :rolling:

-
-
-
-
-
-

 

[ON D BIT]

Hey D BIT, do you have the details on how that works, I have been trying to figure it out from that order sheet.

Is Rapid Spec 402A the Track Pack and does it include the 19" wheels and Brembo's?

It does not say. I looked at the 2010 order specs and they dont have the 402A available. The 2010 Track pack consisted of:
•Dual piston front calipers
•Performance front and rear brake pads
•Performance 3.73 axle ratio
•Unique front strut and rear shock tuning
•Strut tower brace
•SVT front sway bar
•SVT rear sway bar
•SVT lower rear control
•Unique ESC tuning
•19” painted-aluminum wheels with unique 19” Pirelli summer-only performance tires
•Tire inflator kit replaces spare tire

An educated guess would say the 402A is the track pack and it would incude 19inch wheels like the 2010 did.

 

[Formula51]

To help you out a little, the Brembo brake package comes with upgraded wheels... $34,935 sounds good, we know it's 280lbs. less in weight, so how much less, in dollars, is the '11 Mustang then a comparable catfish?

You gonna put in some grill speakers to go along with those 20's on the Camaro you're buying?

That's right, I think the 18" wheels don't clear the brakes or something.

So if the Brembo brake package includes 19" wheels/tires AND if Package 402A is the Track Pack which includes all of the above plus 3.73 gears, sway bars, suspension tunning, etc., that would sound about right.

I'm not currently planning on buying a Camaro. If I did, it would get a set of 19" x 10.5" wheels with 305's on all four corners. This is what Pedders did and it saved 40 pounds of rotating mass while adding tons of traction.

As for weight you said 280lbs. Perhaps you think those big Brembo brakes and 19" wheels with wider tires weigh nothing?

The 2011 Mustang GT Premium with Brembo brake option is $34,935. A comparable 2SS Camaro is $33,945 with the small price bump Chevy announced a few weeks ago. Man, that catfish statement backfired on you huh, haha! And the catfish died in 2002. You guys need to come up with another name for the 2010 because it certainly doesn't look like a catfish.

Maybe you could call it piggy?

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

the brembos are straight off of the GT500, so 18s will fit. i don't believe they are offered though. i'll definitely 'waste' the extra $1k on the mustang, if anything because of looks.

 

[CobraRed01]

Hmmm...the original Camaro the new one is based on was called "The Hugger". How about "The FUgger"?

 

[ON D BIT]

The 2011 Mustang GT Premium with Brembo brake option is $34,935. A comparable 2SS Camaro is $33,945 with the small price bump Chevy announced a few weeks ago. Man, that catfish statement backfired on you huh, haha!

Maybe you could call it piggy?

As long as we are jabbering about specifics, those are not comparable equipped vehicles(Its as close as the options will allow, but not exact). As you yourself said the camaro does not have a track or suspension pack option and the mustang you priced does. Its also comparing 10 camaro price to the 11 mustang price.:beer:

 

[Formula51]

As long as we are jabbering about specifics, those are not comparable equipped vehicles(Its as close as the options will allow, but not exact). As you yourself said the camaro does not have a track or suspension pack option and the mustang you priced does. Its also comparing 10 camaro price to the 11 mustang price.:beer:

I dont think so D BIT. I was comparing the GT with the Brembo option only. I thought the Brembo option was only brakes and wheels/tires???

If you want to get stupid, 19" wheels aren't 20" wheels either, but I'm not going there. I would say a GT Premium with Brembos and 19's is pretty darn comparable to a Camaro 2SS.

Can you think of another time a comparable Mustang GT was more than a Camaro??? Or the last time a Mustang had the label "91 octane fuel recommended"? Things are certainly changing. It will be interesting to see how it all works out. I do know its the first Mustang GT that has got my full attention.

 

[ON D BIT]

I dont think so D BIT. I was comparing the GT with the Brembo option only. I thought the Brembo option was only brakes and wheels/tires???

If you want to get stupid, 19" wheels aren't 20" wheels either, but I'm not going there. I would say a GT Premium with Brembos and 19's is pretty darn comparable to a Camaro 2SS.

Maybe I am wrong. I was led to believe that the track pack came with the brembo package. In doing a quick search I see no mention of the track pack anywhere in the press release of the 2011 mustang gt. It did mention however stock handling was going to be improved over the 10 gt.

The only mention of the 11 track pack is from 3 month ago when ford was testing the 11 mustang at gingerman with the pzero corsa tires! And all this was speculation on what may be. :rockon:

 

[Formula51]

Maybe I am wrong. I was led to believe that the track pack came with the brembo package. In doing a quick search I see no mention of the track pack anywhere in the press release of the 2011 mustang gt. It did mention however stock handling was going to be improved over the 10 gt.

The only mention of the 11 track pack is from 3 month ago when ford was testing the 11 mustang at gingerman with the pzero corsa tires! And all this was speculation on what may be. :rockon:

As best I can understand it right now, the Brembo brake option gets you 19" wheels/tires and of course Brembo brakes. This option cost ~$1,700.

What I believe is the Track Pack (Package 402A) should include the 19" wheels/tires, Brembo brakes, 3.73 gears, GT500 sway bars, different shock tunning, etc. That package cost around ~$2,400 to ~$2,500 is I am remembering correctly and that sounds about right relative to the content and price of the Brembo option.

If I am correct, then it looks like the Track Pack cost is up about $1,000 from 2010 mostly because of the Brembo's.

It looks like a GT Premium with Brembo option is going to be almost the same price as a 2SS Camaro. Now that sounds like a great competition. However, I am pretty sure we will only see Track Pack GT's with 3.73 gears in all the Mag tests, atleast at first. Thats how it was for the 2010 GT anyway.

Which makes you wonder, what percentage of Mustangs sold in 2010 had the Track Pack option?

 

[SVTStrikesBack]

This can be percived as either negative or positive, but I mean it as a point of encouragement towards Ford.

Chevy has had the advantage in cubic inches for as long as I have been old enough to drive. I wish for ONCE Ford would at least equal them so we can once and for all stop saying what if. The 6.2l should be in the Mustang GT, period.

I am pretty sure the Raptor is getting a SOHC version of this engine, so it stands to reason you could do a DOHC version for a Cobra/Shelby version. Keep the blowers for the aftermarket and give us the BEST available platform to start from.

I do think the new DOHC 5.0 will be a good platform to start from, but Chevy really upper the ante with the LS3 in the Camaro, just like they did with the LS1 and the LT1. What engine did Ford really knock the socks off of Chevy with? The term motor? Maybe, but the LS1 could still do a really good job against it with the right N/A parts, and we are still talking about a blower motor.

IMO, a 400hp N/A 5.0 would have been big news if they put it in the Mustang when the FR500 came out. Nearly ten years later? You can get excited, but I like to have something to get excited about. People are getting excited about a car that still doesn't equal the power of a Chevy.

The problem is, you can bark all you want about the Mustang being lighter, but can the lighter Mustang keep up with the Chevy N/A mod for mod?