I'd take the Mustang over its V8 competitors too!

I cant believe TheDonEffect compared a Camaro's plastic to BMW/Mercedes!! Wow!

 

Ford just needs to bring us the Focus RS once and for all.

 

Oh yes, I went there. Honestly though, the merc plastics arent that much better, it's just a better design so it looks a lot better. Really, only audi has impressed me with the quality of their interiors, but even then I'm not blown away by them like I used to be, especially with accord interiors looking and feeling the way they do now.
In the end, they're all the same brittle cold plastic, it's how they mold it and color it is what gives people the impression of quality. Audis have a way of making the texture come off soft when you rub them in most areas, but seriously it's all the same.
The stang really stepped up in certain area that bothered me alot, namely the speaker grille on the doors, god those things even looked awful, but the plastic aroudn the centerconsole is still straight off of a coleman cooler (from what I remember), same grainy texture whereas the camaro was smoothed everywhere.

 

If one is honest about things like "interior quality," yes, TheDonEffect is right. Or at least I agree with him on a lot of points. But BMW uses "Coleman cooler" plastic. A lot of it. Go drive a 135 with the M package. Then think real hard about the $40K+ price tag and the way the car looks both inside and out. Black plastic galore inside, covering everything. Pebbled just like a cooler. Just like a 3 series. The outside looks like they stole the design from the Hyundai dumpster during Genesis coupe development.

Last I checked, the basic assumption about Mercedes is they cost a whole lot more than a Camaro. They spend a whole lot more on interior comfort than GM or Ford for a given price point. If you compare 400+ hp coupes, what's going to cost more, a Camaro, Mustang, or a Mercedes? Guess where that extra money went?

If you can't understand why a Mercedes or Audi for the same money comes with a V6 but has a nicer interior, you're not equipped to comment.

Nobody thinks the same about the guy who gets out of a V8 Mercedes as they do about the guy that gets out of the V8 Camaro or Mustang. There's always the assumption that the Mercedes owner has more money, or at least access to it. That's one main reason people buy 4 and 6 cylinder Mercedes instead of a better driving car from someone else for the same money. The interior is one more reason, but if interior was the driving force, said people would stay home.

I'm kind of excited for the new 5 liter Mustang. It doesn't compete mod-wise with the LS engines because it's much smaller. There's no replacement for displacement. It'is a tired phrase, but it's as true today as it's ever been.

The current 4.6 is the culmination of Ford's experience in mass-produced V8's. The previous 5.0 was so successful because it was a big bore, short stroke design, which people who understand engines knows is the secret to success. The 4.6 is a "square" engine, essentially factory stroked to the optimum already. It's like they took a small displacement V8 and worked it over before selling it from the factory. Because that's pretty much what they did. Even today, there is no compelling reason to buy aftermarket heads. A set of cams is all you need in there (springs depending on the cam), with porting if you want the absolute most for the most amount of money. (Obviously as well as supporting mods like headers/exhaust, etc. just like every other engine.)

I have been unable to find bore and stroke data on the new Coyote engine, but I'd guess it has a bigger bore than the current 4.6. I'm pretty sure it's the same 5.0 Cammer that Ford has been selling as a 400 hp competition crate motor for almost ten years now. Basically they used racers to QC what is now the new stock engine. I'd expect a price bump of several grand for the new motor, but cheaper than a GT500 by quite a bit. It'd cost you ~10K to buy that motor from your local Ford dealer, but they'd be happy to roll the cost into financing on your 2010 Mustang GT. And you'd have the same factory warrantee as every other Mustang. Now they are simply advertising the option, as I see it.

And seriously, no engine-swapped Civic really competed with a factory stock Mustang GT. I mean are you really going to compare a stripped out, tuned to detonation, FWD with maybe 200 crank hp on what, a drag slick? to a factory stock RWD V8 with wider factory tires trapping higher in the quarter by at least 5 mph and able to keep ahead of the Civic from anything above 30mph in any kind of contest? Seriously? I've raced modded Civics, and there was ever only one fast one, and it was seriously quick. But having owned a Civic, I can say he was still driving a Civic, and I can guarantee you his comfort level was far, far below mine no matter how fast his car was. A car engineered to top out at 120 on a good day just does not compare in any way to a car that just gets going at 100. I just don't see an engine swapped Civic as a valid alternative to a V8 Mustang in any way. It sure as hell isn't cost effective unless you live in fantasy forum land. And what you have to live with is unbearable for most people. And unsafe as hell to anyone who's driven a car just as fast but designed to be that way from the factory.

The DSM comparison is valid only in the sense that the two cars weighed about the same and were close in power, with the DSM having AWD. Mod them both and they are both fast. Mod just one, and that one has a clear advantage. But heat soak is a bitch. A long twisty road may show the DSM out front at first, but the longer you drive it with your foot in the gas, the slower it gets. The NA Mustang GT didn't have that problem. It's called "staying power" in other sports.

If you've ever owned a turbo car and driven it hard for a while you'd know what I am talking about. Intercoolers just make it worse in my experience - they ensure the air gets progressively hotter the harder and longer you drive. A bigger delta between pre- and post-heatsoak, if you will, vs. a non-intercooled set-up.

And hard launches + DSM AWD isn't a long-term solution. Especially not modded. You might be able to afford a new trans, but you can't get it repaired between stoplights and still win. Ask a first-gen US WRX owner, or a R34 GTR owner if you can't find reference to DSM trans failures - the issue wasn't limited to DSM's.

I guess I just think cars aren't directly comparable in a "this one is best" manner. They each have advantages. There are days I wish Ford would have stuck with cams in the block rather than go OHC. But then I also really enjoy what I have, no matter how the power is made. There is something sweet about a higher revving motor, and all the better if it makes usable power across a very broad powerband like a V8 can. And also something sweet about fast turbo fours, and that god-like 3rd gear pull of an LS1 is just killer. Time is short, why pick favorites?

 

the 5.0 Coyote is a completely new engine, the only two things in common with the 4.6 is the deck height and the bore spacing (so Ford woudn't have to do major changes on the engine assembly line)

 

yeah you're right, the 5.0 Cammer crate motor had a bore and stroke of 3.7" x 3.54", vs. the new motor which is 3.63" x 3.65". The final specs weren't available untl after my last post, hence my conclusion that the Cammer 5.0 and the new one were the same except for the variable cam heads.

I have a feeling the bore was reduced because the cylinder walls were quite thin in the crate motor.

I'm not sure "completely new" is really accurate, but close enough. The crate motor was based on the then-current Cobra motor, but the block was a completely new casting to accomodate the bigger bore. I'm guessing the new motor is a new block as well, and I'm sure everything else is different than the current 4.6 SOHC. But it really is a derivative, considering the bore spacing and deck height. And the square design, with the bore and stroke almost the same.

Either way, good move for Ford IMHO.

 

The new 5.0 also has a brand new aluminum cylinder block and heads designed to maximize performance while keeping weight down. Both have been carefully designed using both finite element analysis (FEA) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools. The FEA tools have allowed the engineers to design in strength where it's needed while removing material where it's not. The result is a block that's heavily ribbed for rigidity and a deep crank-case that extends down to the bottom of the crankshaft. The 5.0 has four-bolt main bearing caps and the deep crank-case allows the side bolts to fit through the wall into caps that add extra rigidity and support. The configuration happens to be similar to that used on General Motors' LS9 and LSA engines in the ZR1 and CTS-V. Cast-iron cylinder liners, meanwhile, are pressed into the aluminum block to insure a good wearing surface.

The crankshaft is made of forged steel and is fully counter-weighted to aid smoothness. The connecting rods are forged powdered metal and the pistons are hyper-eutectic (translation: they contain a higher concentration of silicon, which helps reduce thermal expansion). As a result, the tolerances between the piston and bore can be tighter and allow for better sealing. Another change made to improve reliability and durability is cast-in coolant crossovers. In the past, a separate tube was inserted to provide a path for coolant to cross from one bank to the other, which added an extra assembly process as well as increasing the potential for leaks.


here's where I'm getting my info..

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/28/deep-di...0-v8/#continued

 

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlR8hbpkHkw [/media]

 

anyone heard any 1/4 mile times yet?

 

Black is the only color for this beast.