|
frozenphil posted:It was sarcasm. Just curious, has anyone tried to see if the SN95 IRS will bolt into an S197? Seems unlikely, but I'm thinking you could sell a retrofit kit for way too much drat money to a lot of idiots.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 17:54 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 07:45 |
|
frozenphil posted:Makes sense. I wasn't aware that DI used such high pressure. You've got to overcome the combustion chamber pressures, 60PSI isn't going to do that. It does allow for some crazy goddamn compression ratios and timing combinations with boost. I don't see the aftermarket (or their customers) reacting negatively to the idea of safe 11:1+ compression ratios with high boost on 91 octane.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 17:55 |
|
Q_res posted:Just curious, has anyone tried to see if the SN95 IRS will bolt into an S197? Seems unlikely, but I'm thinking you could sell a retrofit kit for way too much drat money to a lot of idiots. The what now? First year for the IRS in the Mustang was 1999 in the New Edge body style. The S197 uses a three point attachment system for the rear, two lower control arms and a single upper control arm. You'd need to devise a way of attaching the two upper mounts on the IRS to the single upper mount on the S197. frozenphil fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Sep 1, 2010 |
# ? Sep 1, 2010 18:56 |
|
frozenphil posted:The what now? First year for the IRS in the Mustang was 1999 in the New Edge body style. Yes, I know, only ever showed up in the SVT Cobras. I'm not sure what you're confused about though? I even said I doubted it was possible. EDIT: I don't even think it's a good idea if it was possible, by the way, just wondering if it was something you could try to make money off of. Q_res fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Sep 1, 2010 |
# ? Sep 1, 2010 19:14 |
|
turnerburna posted:my S197 is lowered about 1.5" - what size wheels do you have? Mine are factory 18s 18" wheels with 295-35-18 (rear) 265-35-18 (front)
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 19:47 |
|
I don't have a source for this, but I believe IRS on the Mustang is not as good as other IRS systems on other cars. It was just sort of an after thought to develop an IRS system for the cobras. I think there where some issues with it? correct me if I am wrong. Also.... if you have a solid axle, and just throw all of Maximum Motorsports suspension kits on it, you will get an equally awesome corner carver, with all brand new parts. no donor car required.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 19:51 |
|
Baby Hitler posted:Plus having decades upon decades of nozzle/flow/pressure/atomization development in diesels maximizing power and efficiency using the same technology. Standard ~3bar pintle tip fuel injectors haven't really changed since their first use in the 60s with D-Jetronic. It should be noted that direct injection on diesel engines actually operates at a far higher pressure than direct injection in gasoline engines, our transit bus engines (cummins ISL) maintain their common rail systems in excess of 1500 bar, or about 22,000 PSI, minimum. This is a big part of the reason advanced diesel engines have continued to offer comical increases in performance, even with the clusterfuck of an exhaust system that's required to keep them clean. See: Ford powerstroke engines pushing 800 lb-ft of torque in the F-250, Caterpillar's C15 offering in excess of 2000 lb-ft of torque. I cannot comment on any reason why you could not do a similar common-rail system in a gasoline engine, that's well outside my qualifications.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:01 |
|
kalvick posted:It was just sort of an after thought to develop an IRS system for the cobras. I think there where some issues with it? correct me if I am wrong. No, you're right. A lot of guys that drag race their IRS Cobras swap out for a live axle. I didn't think it was a good idea. I was just curious if it would work/why it wouldn't. I assumed it wouldn't because I hadn't seen anyone try to fleece people with it, which given the play "lol oxcart" poo poo gets online, seems like it would have happened. kalvick posted:Also.... if you have a solid axle, and just throw all of Maximum Motorsports suspension kits on it, you will get an equally awesome corner carver, with all brand new parts. no donor car required. I don't think anyone would suggest otherwise. In fact, the solid axle would almost certainly handle better in this case.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:03 |
|
Q_res posted:Yes, I know, only ever showed up in the SVT Cobras. I'm not sure what you're confused about though? I even said I doubted it was possible. I was confused because you asked about the SN95 IRS when the SN95 chassis never had an IRS. Most people who actually race Mustangs don't give a poo poo about IRS. Your only market would be to magazine reviewers; people who would never buy a Mustang in the first place. frozenphil fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Sep 1, 2010 |
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:09 |
|
frozenphil posted:I was confused because you asked about the SN95 IRS when the SN95 chassis never had an IRS. Many people still consider the New Edge an SN95. Part of this is because Ford still calls it the SN95 platform. Was there even a difference in the platform between the original SN95 and New Edge? I thought it was just an exterior redesign.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:17 |
|
kalvick posted:I don't have a source for this, but I believe IRS on the Mustang is not as good as other IRS systems on other cars. It was just sort of an after thought to develop an IRS system for the cobras. I think there where some issues with it? correct me if I am wrong. It's not as good as an IRS actually designed as part of a vehicle since the design team was under constraints that the entire IRS subframe had to bolt up to existing mount points for the solid axle setup. That severely limited them on packaging space and led to a lot of compromises that they weren't too thrilled about. It's not terrible (and probably not the worst) but it isn't as good as it could be. I've also heard that the entire S197 (I think) series was supposed to be IRS from the base model right up through the Cobra, but that idea killed off since they would lose the drag strip demographic. Looking at all the posts with nothing but new 1/4 mile times it seems like they made the right decision while doing some really good work to get it close to the M3. It's pretty impressive all around.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:19 |
|
ApathyGifted posted:Many people still consider the New Edge an SN95. Part of this is because Ford still calls it the SN95 platform. The interior, engines, transmissions, and in some cases rear ends, are different. What exactly does it take to make a new generation of car if changing the exterior, interior, and driveline don't do it? The base chassis is all they share in common, but that didn't change from 1979 through 2004. If you make the distinction that the Fox Body is a different generation than the SN95, then you also must acknowledge that the New Edge is a different generation than the SN95.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:30 |
|
frozenphil posted:I was confused because you asked about the SN95 IRS when the SN95 chassis never had an IRS. Taking an angle-grinder to the sheetmetal does not a new chassis make. Though usually I refer to the 94-98 as Fox-4 and the 99-04 as SN95, just for the purpose of distinction. Still largely the same car though. ApathyGifted posted:Many people still consider the New Edge an SN95. Part of this is because Ford still calls it the SN95 platform. When Fox-4/SN95 was on the drawing board there were three different 'looks' being considered. 'Jenner', 'Schwarzenegger', and 'Rambo' going from the softest, roundest look in Jenner to the over the top aggressive look of Rambo. The 94-98 was basically a mix of Jenner and Schwarzenegger, the 99-04 is more or less a toned down Rambo. But yeah, same car. New Edge guys just try to disown the 94-98 cause it was embarrassingly slow in GT trim. frozenphil posted:If you make the distinction that the Fox Body is a different generation than the SN95, then you also must acknowledge that the New Edge is a different generation than the SN95. Q_res fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Sep 1, 2010 |
# ? Sep 1, 2010 20:38 |
|
IOwnCalculus posted:The only real disadvantages with DI are the cost (which is coming down as they get more common) and the fact that with no fuel going past the intake valve anymore, they can get pretty loving crusty. I was thinking of this the other day. What's to stop you from seafoaming your DI car once a year? Problem solved?
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 21:18 |
|
Q_res posted:Taking an angle-grinder to the sheetmetal does not a new chassis make. The Fox Body has the same chassis as the New Edge. Do you consider them to be different generations? The New Edge differs from the SN95 in the same ways as the Fox Body differs from the SN95.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 21:20 |
|
Skyssx posted:I was thinking of this the other day. What's to stop you from seafoaming your DI car once a year? Problem solved? Maybe, but I've heard that it doesn't work that well - it's the backside of the intake valve, not the side in the combustion chamber.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 21:30 |
|
frozenphil posted:The New Edge differs from the SN95 in the same ways as the Fox Body differs from the SN95. Saying this doesn't make it true, in fact, it's objectively not true. drat near 60% of the chassis was redesigned for 1994, nothing close to that happened in 1999. Hell, all you have to do is park a 98 next to a 99 to see they're the same drat car. Even Ford itself disagrees with you. Well we're at it, didn't all the mod motor GT SN95s (96-04) use the T45 transmission and 8.8" rear end? And I'd like to hear more about the huge 98 to 99 changeover from the 3.8 Essex V6 and 4.6 SOHC Mod motor to the 3.8 Essex V6 and 4.6 SOHC mod motor. Yeah, the V6 got split port injection in 99 and the V8 got new heads, but it's a little bit disingenious to claim they changed motors based on that. Ultimately, it all comes back to this Q_res posted:...same car. New Edge guys just try to disown the 94-98 cause it was embarrassingly slow in GT trim. Q_res fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Sep 1, 2010 |
# ? Sep 1, 2010 21:35 |
|
Q_res posted:Saying this doesn't make it true, in fact, it's objectively not true. drat near 60% of the chassis was redesigned for 1994, nothing close to that happened in 1999. Hell, all you have to do is park a 98 next to a 99 to see they're the same drat car. Even Ford itself disagrees with you. Engines and suspensions for a Fox Body will bolt up to an SN95 or New Edge car. The only thing that changed with the chassis was the roofline and body mounting points. The same thing happened with the 98 to 99 switch-over. The New Edge cars switched to the 3650 transmission. The Cobras got an IRS in '99, the GTs got a slightly wider rear end as well. You admit that the engines received different heads and intake manifolds but that makes them the same in your eyes? The New Edge Cobras went to an iron block from an aluminum one, and in some cases got forged internals and a supercharger. The GT got different heads, cams, pistons, and cranks. The fuel system is also different from SN95 to New Edge. I'm sorry if changing everything about the car but the name, the engine block, and the rear end size doesn't make a new generation of car in Ford's or your eyes, but it does to everyone else. Again, what makes a 1993 Mustang a different generation than the 1994 Mustang? They use the same engine, transmission, rear end, and suspension. Apart from sheetmetal, roofline, and spindles they are the same car. The '98 and '99 Mustangs differ in more ways than the '93 and '94 Mustangs differ, they visual difference just isn't as big.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 22:22 |
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Maybe, but I've heard that it doesn't work that well - it's the backside of the intake valve, not the side in the combustion chamber. Yeah, you'd need something that you spray or pour into the intake or at the throttle-body to get better application onto the valves.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 22:50 |
|
frozenphil posted:Engines and suspensions for a Fox Body will bolt up to an SN95 or New Edge car. fake edit: I had a big long rear end post written out, but I'm tired of making GBS threads this thread up. Feel free to PM me about it if you want, I guess.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 23:16 |
|
Phil, unless you can find a concrete definition for what exactly is required to be considered a new generation, this whole arguing business is stupid. Until then it's a subjective thing, and you need to stop getting all pissy about people having a different definition for it, especially when theirs is backed by the actual manufacturer. Lots of people consider the New Edge an SN95. Lots of people consider the SN95 a Fox Body. Lots of people think every Mustang from 1979 to 2004 is the same generation, including whoever the hell wrote the first ever article I read about the S197 (They talked about how the Mustang hadn't been updated in 25 years). Deal with it. The sad thing is that given how involved you are in the Mustang community, you had to have known this in the first place- so there was no reason at all for you to be confused when Q_Res' question came up. It just smacks of trolling.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2010 23:22 |
|
Skyssx posted:I was thinking of this the other day. What's to stop you from seafoaming your DI car once a year? Problem solved? Toyota's DI engines in their Lexus models have another set of injectors in the manifold that solve the problem. http://books.google.com.hk/books?id...jection&f=false
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 00:28 |
|
frozenphil posted:The New Edge cars switched to the 3650 transmission. In 2001, the 1999 and 2000 V8 cars (GT and non-R Cobra) used the T-45.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 01:02 |
|
Back to poo poo people care about : Dyno graphs for the 624hp Whipple kit (9psi) are out now. quote:543/466 SAE. Tests done at 90 °F ambient, engine at full temp. 93 octane. 100% stock from wheels, tires, exhaust, etc. Only the SC kit, full operating temps, 190deg F. Also, these are closed air boxes, not open filters, hood down testing.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 01:38 |
|
Got a present for my car today Picked up the composite race shift knob, and some new front speakers because one of my tweeters and one of the 5x7s were shot. Shifts like butter.. mmmmm Henchman 21 fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Sep 2, 2010 |
# ? Sep 2, 2010 02:36 |
|
Kinda related to the Mustang, here are the first official pics of the Supercharged 5.0lt V8 that is being used in the Aussie Falcon:
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 09:18 |
|
335kw? Fuuuuuuuuck. I wonder what HSV is going to come back at them with? LS9 would be the obvious choice, but it'd need to be backed right off, power-wise.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 11:21 |
|
You Am I posted:Kinda related to the Mustang, here are the first official pics of the Supercharged 5.0lt V8 that is being used in the Aussie Falcon: 335kw = 449hp Basically the same as the 525hp Whipple kit. I bet the Aussie engine got lower compression pistons and a forged shortblock though.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 15:20 |
|
frozenphil posted:335kw = 449hp quote:The Boss runs the standard 5.0 block and heads, but has unique cam timing and a different exhaust valve. There are stronger connecting rods, unique pistons, a cast stainless steel exhaust manifold (instead of fabricated steel), a different front end accessory drive, an engine oil cooler and a unique winged oil pan that holds 8.66 quarts of oil. It runs at a significantly lower compression ratio of 9.25-to-1 instead of 11-to-1. This has the intercooler on top of the blower, like the ZR-1.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 16:05 |
|
More info from the land of OZ:c_in_oz posted:2 Spec levels... entry level GS which will retail for around 55K $AUS, and GT Spec for close to 70K $AU... expected Hi-Po intercooled variant next year.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 16:47 |
|
Using some pen and paper, I drew out the new firing order. It doesn't seem to match any of the common ones, so it's actually new instead of just a flip, rotate, sequence shift, etc. Is it just for the Oz motor, or for all 5.0s?
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 20:32 |
|
That's the same firing order I've seen before for Coyote. It's also the same firing order as the old Flathead V8,
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 21:17 |
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:335kw? Fuuuuuuuuck. I wonder what HSV is going to come back at them with? LS9 would be the obvious choice, but it'd need to be backed right off, power-wise.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2010 23:49 |
|
frozenphil posted:335kw = 449hp Something isn't adding up. Do they rate HP at the wheels instead of at the motor? 449hp out of a supercharged 5.0 running 5lbs of boost?? USDM NA 5.0s are making 412hp, no way in Christ is that blower only making an additional 37hp. But since you said it was the same as the 525hp Whipple kits, I'm assuming you meant that those kits made ~450whp. In short, I'm confused
|
# ? Sep 3, 2010 01:17 |
|
TurboLuvah posted:Something isn't adding up. Do they rate HP at the wheels instead of at the motor? Also remember a lot of car companies are conservative on their power outputs due to insurance and idiots in the media. Remember the shitfest over the Mazda RX-8 and how it didn't seem to match its factory output?
|
# ? Sep 3, 2010 01:51 |
|
The new Boss has put me into a dilemma. On one hand, I can get a lot of go fast parts for my existing Mustang, and probably even a suspension setup from Griggs. On the other hand, RED WHEELS.
|
# ? Sep 3, 2010 03:22 |
|
TurboLuvah posted:Something isn't adding up. Do they rate HP at the wheels instead of at the motor? As You Am I said, Aussie manufacturers under rate their engines like it's 1969 still. Their engine power numbers are usually closer to wheel power numbers.
|
# ? Sep 3, 2010 04:25 |
|
Brembos look ridiculous behind 17" drag wheels.
|
# ? Sep 4, 2010 20:26 |
|
Yeah, but the cowl hood looks god drat amazing.
|
# ? Sep 4, 2010 20:48 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 07:45 |
|
frozenphil posted:Brembos look ridiculous behind 17" drag wheels. Man, I dunno. I understand the logic about skinny tires, drag wheels, etc.... for a drag race car.... but I also know how important it is to have really good brakes. If you didn't say anything, I would say that car looks amazing. now I am gonna be looking at the front wheels and the back wheels and not be sure what to think. Also its better than my car, so I cant complain.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2010 01:18 |