Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Front Page Articles' started by SID297, Dec 17, 2018.
I think the Coyote is fine the way it is, just drop it in a truck, it will do fine!!!!
Sure, and that makes a lot of sense for the truck line, not for the Mustang though. The Camaro is able to be so competitive because GM is able to amortize the cost of basically the entire car; Cadillac has the alpha chassis on 2 vehicles I think, the LT1 and v6 engines are spread across several brands and platforms, same with the auto transmission... Ford really only has the engine and automatic transmission costs of the mustang covered by the trucks, but if the 5.0 goes to a mustang only engine, I could see that impacting the future performance potential of the mustang... Either that or the 5.0 going away in favor of a TT v6 offering, but I doubt it since the 5.0 really is a spectacular engine.
I like both the ideas of a larger NA motor and an eco boost 5.0
Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
I'm working on a story featuring info about a prototype "EcoBoost" 5.0.
It would be no different than the 5.4 was. The 5.4 only was used in special production mustangs. The new 5.7 would not replace the 5.0 as a standard mustang engine.
Its already in a truck and it doesnt tow nearly aswell as the ecoboost 3.5.
The 5.0 has to rev out to make the power. A truck engine news to have lowend tq and make full tq at 3500 or less
Would LOVE to see a tall deck Coyote in the trucks. Unfortunately, I'll still be driving my current 5.0L truck for another 8 years or so; so it won't be bringing me to the market regardless.
I stand can't understand why this is not a thing yet (see my comments in the 2020 GT500 section). With Ford's line of Ecoboosts and many many Euro cars with Twin Turbo V8s, how is the new redesigned GT500 not a Twin Turbo V8? I just can't wrap my head around it. This would of been end game against the Demon/red eye/hellcat/heldabeast. You could do the stock key/track key option again with one low boost and one with added boost.
You're still not following me. If the 5.0 becomes only a Mustang engine and not a mustang and truck engine, where else are they going to share the cost as far as the mustang engine is concerned?
The mustang does not share a chassis with any other vehicles as far as I know.
The 2.3L is shared between the ranger, explorer, mustang, and maybe some other SUVs I'm not thinking of.
The 10r80 is shared with the mustang, F-150 and the Lincoln SUVs
Currently the 5.0 is shared between the mustang and F-150.
If the 5.0 goes to a Mustang only engine, then 50% of the mustang's powertrain options (excluding specialty models) are specific only to the mustang; being the MT-82 and 5.0 engine respectively. That's not going to bode well for the future of the mustang, they really need to be able to spread the cost of the 5.0 engine out and the F-150 product line is the best place to do that.
I know this thread is about a 5.7L engine in the F-150, but it has to be viewed from a "full picture" approach.
Look how much room there is between the heads and frame rails and you'll understand exactly why. Going Hot V would basically be starting from the ground up and cost an insane amount of money.
I think Ford put a patent on eco beast, I was guessing twin turbo v8 when I heard that
The cost of developing has already been shared. At this point you dont need to share the 5.0 with the truck division. Which the 5.0 is now alot less trucks. The 2.7 has become the leading number of the engine options for the trucks.
Being the fact that the 5.7 would share alot of the same features as the 5.0 it could easily be done. Mind you im not a fan of the mt82 and its flaws.
I still think they'd love to do it, it's just still a matter of packaging for assembly and warranty purposes. Mercedes can pass along the cost of slower production time and repair hours on a TT V8 AMG much easier than Ford can with their assembly process of other run of the mill Mustangs. If they can ever figure out how to efficiently package all the the cold side piping to quickly drop in/out the crate, we're in business. It's a matter of time.
Put the 5.7 in the trucks and Bronco and keep the 5.0 in the Mustang where it belongs since purist are always gonna want a V8 Mustang.
5.7 for the F150, and I still say the Raptor needs to get the 7 liter. Make it happen, Ford. I will NEVER buy an eco-junk, I don't care how much power it makes.
5.7 in mustang with a cow hood
It's only the right thing to do.
Put the LS to it's final grave.
Should have been an aluminum block, direct injected, 4 valve 6.2. It would have been an evolutionary path similar but faster than the 4.6 2V to the 5.8 4V. And it would be superior to any tall deck Coyote power wise. Wouldn't cost much more than a tall deck Coyote (relatively speaking) since the machining line was there. We've been handcuffed by the damn bore centers since what, 1992?..... its enough to make you hate Ford if you dwell on it. An inch in block length would have changed everything.
Out of curiosity, what is it that makes them junk?
IMO the "5.7 coyote" should, and never will be a thing. Like you brought up in the original post, there would be a lot of parts to be designed, changed. Block, timing set, crank, rods, block, intake, and wiring. All of those things are a big thing to tool, and in this time frame with ford pushing the EcoBoost it just isnt palatable.
As for why I dont think it should be a thing. 4v. Honestly, unless boosted, a 4v engine doesnt belong in a low rpm truck motor. A 2v rendition like he 6.2 would be great.
Dont get me wrong, a 5.7 4v coyote based engine sounds wicked. Heck, something like that in a car would drive me to take out a loan and ruin my credit on something I can afford, but it just wont happen.
Sent from my SM-G955U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
This opinion always interests me. Why does the valve arrangement matter?