Could this be the new svo muctang

REPCobra10

REPCobra10

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,132
Location
Tamarac, FL
Cam VanDerHorst said:
Turbo four-cylinder > N/A six-cylinder. Less weight, more power, more efficient, and all the fun that boost brings in a smaller, lighter, more athletic package? Sign me up, let the "manly men" have their overblown, overweight Brostangs...
Click to expand...

:shrug: I'm not sure why you're comparing the 4-cylinder EcoBoost to a N/A 6-cylinder. I, as well as others, were stating that we'd like to see the Mustang available with an EcoBoost option that the F150 uses, which is a turbo 6-cylinder, not a N/A 6-cylinder. So, with that being said; turbo 6-cylinder > turbo 4-cylinder. Also, in case you didn't notice, the EcoBoost 4-cylinder is rated at 250-bhp and the N/A 6-cylinder that is currently employed by the V6 Mustang is rated at 305-bhp. So, your argument that the EcoBoost 4-cylinder makes more power than the N/A V6 in the Mustang now falls flat on its face in that aspect...
 
Last edited:
97desertCobra

97desertCobra

Procharged!
Established Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
5,386
Location
Back in the USA!
REPCobra10 said:
:shrug: I'm not sure why you're comparing the 4-cylinder EcoBoost to a N/A 6-cylinder. I, as well as others, were stating that we'd like to see the Mustang available with an EcoBoost option that the F150 uses, which is a turbo 6-cylinder, not a N/A 6-cylinder. So, with that being said; turbo 6-cylinder > turbo 4-cylinder. Also, in case you didn't notice, the EcoBoost 4-cylinder is rated at 250-bhp and the N/A 6-cylinder that is currently employed by the V6 Mustang is rated at 305-bhp. So, your argument that the EcoBoost 4-cylinder makes more power than the N/A V6 in the Mustang now falls flat on its face in that aspect...
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that 250 hp rating is under rated. They could bump displacement in the ecoboost 4 and increase boost a tad to make 300hp pretty easily. The EVO X and the STi both make 300hp with turbo 4's. Consider a 3,000lb mustang with rwd making 300rwhp(asuming light mods for sake of arguement) and tell me that would not be a really fun DD? Would I want it to replace the V8? No. Would I rather have a 350hp ecoboost 6? Yes. But the turbo 4 has potential. With that said Ford could put a ecoboost 6 in the next mustang without it being the current 3.5. Whose to say it wouldn't have a smaller 3.0t? Weighing less, better MPG then the current 3.7 and making more hp.
 
REPCobra10

REPCobra10

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,132
Location
Tamarac, FL
97desertCobra said:
I'm willing to bet that 250 hp rating is under rated. I would be inclined to agree with you here, being that I had a '10 Chevy Cobalt SS/TC that was rated at 260-bhp, but put down 250-hp to the wheels, stock! The Cobalt SS/TC was a turbocharged 4-cylinder, as well, produced from 2008-2010. It was a good contender when modified, to be sure!

The EVO X and the STi both make 300hp with turbo 4's. Consider a 3,000lb mustang with rwd making 300rwhp(asuming light mods for sake of arguement) and tell me that would not be a really fun DD? It certainly would be, but I don't see a 3,000-lb Mustang coming anytime soon.

But the turbo 4 has potential. Agreed! I never said that it didn't have potential. No where did I state that the 4-cylinder EcoBoost didn't have potential, nor did I bash it. Look at my first rebuttal to your commentary, as I have experience with other turbocharged 4-cylinder power plants. In fact, all that I said was that the EcoBoost 6-cylinder > the EcoBoost 4-cylinder. I'm pretty sure that most would agree with that sentiment.

With that said Ford could put a ecoboost 6 in the next mustang without it being the current 3.5. True, but why not stick with what works and what they already have being used in their F150 and other vehicles in their line-up? As the old saying goes; "Don't fix what ain't broken!"

Whose to say it wouldn't have a smaller 3.0t? I don't know? Not me, because I didn't say that.
Click to expand...

Any turbocharged power plant has potential. There is no denying that. Don't be so quick to be defensive because I wasn't trying to be offensive...:beer:
 
Last edited:
Mach1USMC

Mach1USMC

SVT Powered
Established Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
7,506
Location
Pensacola Florida
91svtbird said:
Already exists .....just buy one of those 365hp Taurus SHO's.....:eek:
Click to expand...

FOCUS MAN!!!! (not the car Focus - YOU mentally Focus!!).... we're talking Mustangs here. Not family Sedans.:nonono:

The Ecoboost out of the F150 is the same basic one used in the Taurus right?

Anyhow, if an Ecoboost goes in the Stang it should be THAT one.
 
Low Class Yuppie

Low Class Yuppie

Active Member
Established Member
Premium Member
Party Liquor Posse
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
562
Location
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio
REPCobra10 said:
:shrug: I'm not sure why you're comparing the 4-cylinder EcoBoost to a N/A 6-cylinder. I, as well as others, were stating that we'd like to see the Mustang available with an EcoBoost option that the F150 uses, which is a turbo 6-cylinder, not a N/A 6-cylinder. So, with that being said; turbo 6-cylinder > turbo 4-cylinder. Also, in case you didn't notice, the EcoBoost 4-cylinder is rated at 250-bhp and the N/A 6-cylinder that is currently employed by the V6 Mustang is rated at 305-bhp. So, your argument that the EcoBoost 4-cylinder makes more power than the N/A V6 in the Mustang now falls flat on its face in that aspect...
Click to expand...

It dosen't need to to make more power than the outgoing 6 if they put it in a chassis that isn't such a fatass.
 
Mach828

Mach828

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2010
Messages
1,417
Location
Albuquerque
It won't be an ecoboost v6. It will be a 4 cylinder.

You did read that they are working on a special project high power NA 6 cylinder right? So why would they offer an NA and boosted v6?

My bet is 280-300hp ecoboost 4 cylinder (with some sort of specialty name), 360hp v6 as the base Mustang, and the 420hp coyote for the GT.
 
TORQJNKY

TORQJNKY

Active Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
5,503
Location
Chesapeake, VA (Louisiana native)
Reno Five-O said:
I really wish they would stop using that stupid picture from the italian concept from years ago...It's annoying seeing everyone cry about how it looks like a camaro and think that it's what the new mustang is going to be like.
Click to expand...

The Italian concept design is a more believable short term design. It sure as hell will not look like this in 2014.
 
FineLineMtrSprt

FineLineMtrSprt

I like bacon!
Established Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
4,755
Location
Bunker Hill,WV
I dont know why people want to bitch. Some act like they said theres going to be no v8 option. Also people need to realize the more base model stangs they sell the more v8 models they can afford to make and come out with. They will still offer a v6 model and even if they dont...if the 4cyl has the same performance what does it matter?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)


Top