|
If a manufacturer puts its mind to it, I'm sure it'll be fine. Aftermarket tuners can get ~300 from 2-2.5L, though obviously there isn't consistent durability data.
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Weinertron posted:Is engine tech really so good that we can get 330HP out of a production 2.3 and expect full engine / turbo life? Numbers like that would make me afraid it would be really finicky about oil quality, have short change intervals and not be able to run on 91 if 93 octane wasn't available. Six years ago Mazda got 260hp out of the DISI turbo 2.3 with a tiny rear end turbocharger, and I suspect the current Ecoboost probably still shares a lot of that design. I've got 113k on mine with no major problems. The Mustang's larger engine bay would certainly allow for better packaging of the inlet and exhaust (higher-flowing intake and exhaust manifolds) and a proper front-mount intercooler (the DISI has a tiny top-mount). Combine that with some improved tuning, an improved high-pressure fuel pump, and probably a larger turbocharger, and I think 330hp is certainly within reason for a factory 2.3L turbo four these days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:I suspect the current Ecoboost probably still shares a lot of that design. I've got 113k on mine with no major problems. As far as I know, the only thing the Mazda engine and the EcoBoost have in common is that they're both 4 cylinders with DI and a turbo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:If a manufacturer puts its mind to it, I'm sure it'll be fine. Aftermarket tuners can get ~300 from 2-2.5L, though obviously there isn't consistent durability data. Don't forget, this is coming from the same company that gave us the 5.4 and the 6.0 diesel. With direct injection, turbocharging, and variable valve timing, those smaller engines can make some power; but I'd just wait until the first year or two are on the road before I would make a commitment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Devyl posted:Don't forget, this is coming from the same company that gave us the 5.4 and the 6.0 diesel. The Mod motors were exceedingly mediocre in NA form, fair enough. But look at the 5.0, 2.0 EB, 3.5 EB and 6.7 diesel. Also blaming Ford for the 6.0 is pretty comical, considering thats the engine that made Ford severe ties with Navistar and design their own diesel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
Elephanthead posted:The only thing that keeps me from buying one is I need a 4 door. I am to fing old to be crawling in and out of back seats to beat my children. I would buy that orange 4 door boss 302 today if it was for sale.  Here you go!
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
Q_res posted:As far as I know, the only thing the Mazda engine and the EcoBoost have in common is that they're both 4 cylinders with DI and a turbo. I dunno where you heard that, they're in fact the same engine and come from a time when Ford and Mazda shared everything. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MZR_engine
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 00:01
|
|
|
Huh, I could have sworn I read the 1.6/2.0 were a clean sheet engine design. Oh well, I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong. Still, I think the 2.3 DISI Turbo is an odd comparison for a 2.3 Ecoboost. Given how the 2.0 EB in the Focus ST compares to the 2.3 in the MS3, I think the EB version is very likely to make more power while getting better gas mileage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 00:28
|
|
|
Devyl posted:Don't forget, this is coming from the same company that gave us the 5.4 and the 6.0 diesel. With direct injection, turbocharging, and variable valve timing, those smaller engines can make some power; but I'd just wait until the first year or two are on the road before I would make a commitment. Isn't there an Ecoboosted 1.0L that makes 100hp? Just curious how that one was doing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
The 1.0 Ecoboost is a 3 cylinder, now that is a clean sheet design. It's tiny and comes in two tunes. 100hp and 125hp (Wiki says 123, but most reviews I've read have started quoting the higher number). I think the 1.0 would be brilliant in the Fiesta.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
I know it's a new 3 cyl, which is why it might be a better judgment on Ford's new era of turbo engineering.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 01:29
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Six years ago Mazda got 260hp out of the DISI turbo 2.3 with a tiny rear end turbocharger, and I suspect the current Ecoboost probably still shares a lot of that design. I've got 113k on mine with no major problems. The L3-VDT is a pretty incredible engine all-around. Not only is 260hp a conservative rating for MS3, but there is a good 20-30hp on the table just from an intake. A factory TD06-16g (which I believe is an Evo stock unit) should easily be good for 330hp off of the factory floor and leave enough headroom to make the V8 guys worry a bit. Realistically though, I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2.0L Ecoboost putting down roughly 260hp. Anything more than that would probably be detrimental to fuel economy and would destroy the stock V6 driveshaft. Oh god, I just thought of something: 330hp 2.3L turbo Mustang + BOSS 302 suspension goodies = SVO! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 02:17
|
|
|
I would be all for a 4-banger that put out the same numbers as my 2012 V6. Gas isn't getting any cheaper and most people would trade an NA-V6 for increased MPG. Add in the supposed weight reduction and suspension upgrades and you'll have yourself a sweet little daily driver/auto-x machine. The drag strip guys will always have their V8 for fivehundit horsepower. All they gotta do is make it look like a mustang and not some generic coupe that they threw a horse badge on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 03:40
|
|
|
And, if it actually works as well as I'm hoping, the BRZ/FR-S will have a new challenger to battle it out with on the track.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
oRenj9 posted:The L3-VDT is a pretty incredible engine all-around.  When people ask me what my plate means and I start explaining their eyes usually glaze over after a few seconds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 05:39
|
|
|
Why do I have to be English 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
im a sausage posted:Why do I have to be English Isn't one of the motivations behind the turbo-4 move the fact that Ford wants the Mustang to go worldwide?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:Isn't one of the motivations behind the turbo-4 move the fact that Ford wants the Mustang to go worldwide? All new Ford cars I believe are developed to be sold worldwide which so it would make sense that a 4 cylinder is available. I'd bet money that the 4 cylinder will make more power than the 6 it replaces.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 16:12
|
|
|
B-but I want a v8  Even if it would cost £100 to go to the shops in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
Can someone give me the rundown on s197 balljoints? My 2007 is getting a pop/clunk from the front end during low speed turning. I assume this is the balljoints. From what I can tell, I need to replace the entire LCA, right? And I can get the GT500 LCAs and they are a direct-fit upgrade, right? How hard are they to change? Does anything need to be press-fit? I assume not because it's all one piece. Basically I'm trying to figure out if I can do it with hand tools and jackstands in my garage. I've had a hard time finding any pictures of the process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
im a sausage posted:B-but I want a v8 Unless you live out in the sticks, the V8 gets quite usable mileage: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32245&id=32247&id=31203&id=31767 (Included a Volkswagen and a Prius for comparison, since US EPA and UK gas mileage ratings aren't comparable)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
I know any sort of enthusiast forum is the wrong place to ask about the V6, but I'd like to hear some stories from 2011+ V6 owners. Do you wish you got the V8 every time you drive, or is 280 lb-ft enough torque for a big soft pony car like this used as a daily driver and commuter? Also, I'm having a really hard time finding if the base GT comes with any suspension / brake / transmission changes compared to the base V6. Is the $8000 price increase really all just for the engine? Coming from a 140hp Miata, all of the power numbers look huge to me. My budget could accommodate a GT if the V6 is really subpar, but I'd prefer to keep more money in my pocket to turn the Miata into a track rat. I'm looking at either Miatas or Mustangs, and the current Miata is just way too long in the tooth to be a competitive value.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:I know any sort of enthusiast forum is the wrong place to ask about the V6, but I'd like to hear some stories from 2011+ V6 owners. Do you wish you got the V8 every time you drive, or is 280 lb-ft enough torque for a big soft pony car like this used as a daily driver and commuter? Coming from a Miata you'll want at least the performance package on the V6 which I believe gives you the GT suspension, brakes, and a 3.31 ratio in the rear diff. It costs at least a couple of thousand. The higher ratio really helps the 3.7 which likes to rev. So, yes the $6000 increase is absolutely worth it, my '11 GT is still scary fast and I love the hell out of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 17:57
|
|
|
Why don't you test drive one of each and decide that way? I have a 2012 V6 and it's enough, even though for a bit more $ I could have gotten the V8. Insurance and MPGs and all that poo poo, 5.3 sec 0-60 is fast enough for me and my daily driving. This isn't the old days where the V6 was a wheezing shitbox, but more power is more power. Pros and Cons man, Pros and Cons. Edit: oh yeah, personal experiences. I've never had a time when I've wished I'd gotten the V8 and I've had the Traction Control reign me in a few times when I've gotten a bit too frisky. You can definitely get in trouble with the 6 pot, not that I condone driving aggressively in that one twisty part of your morning commute, you know the one, yeah 
Rabble fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Aug 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:Unless you live out in the sticks, the V8 gets quite usable mileage: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32245&id=32247&id=31203&id=31767 As it happens I do live in the sticks, but blasting past people in a roaring v8 would make the fuel costs worth it 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
Those Mustang numbers seem legit. My GT gets around 14 MPG, but gently caress Honda's bloated numbers. My 08 Accord was definitely a good few MPG below the advertised 21. I mostly do city driving. I've estimated I will only pay a couple hundred dollars more in gas per year, not including track days and "stuff".
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 18:42
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:I know any sort of enthusiast forum is the wrong place to ask about the V6, but I'd like to hear some stories from 2011+ V6 owners. Do you wish you got the V8 every time you drive, or is 280 lb-ft enough torque for a big soft pony car like this used as a daily driver and commuter? The current v6 makes as much power as the previous v8. That said, test drive the v6 and the GT. Keep in mind that the v6's resale value will plummet fast and hard since Ford makes so many of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:I know any sort of enthusiast forum is the wrong place to ask about the V6, but I'd like to hear some stories from 2011+ V6 owners. Do you wish you got the V8 every time you drive, or is 280 lb-ft enough torque for a big soft pony car like this used as a daily driver and commuter? I don't daily drive or commute, and I'm coming from a 100hp 1997 Mitsubishi Mirage (think Corolla knockoff), and my 2012 V6 Premium is amazing The engine sound is nice (although not amazing like a big V8), the power is nice to have (although not amazing like a Corvette), and the highway mileage is almost as good as the old car (went from 36mpg to 30mpg).I don't expect I'd have any incremental enjoyment over a faster and more expensive Mustang, since I'm either going the speed of traffic or have the cruise set on the highway. There's no cachet to a higher-end one because I'm in Miami and no Mustang is a Lamborghini or Bentley, and I still appreciate that I can drive a nice-looking but mildly impractical coupe without inconvenience. Also if you do get one don't get it in a boring rental color like grey or white. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:I know any sort of enthusiast forum is the wrong place to ask about the V6, but I'd like to hear some stories from 2011+ V6 owners. Do you wish you got the V8 every time you drive, or is 280 lb-ft enough torque for a big soft pony car like this used as a daily driver and commuter? I just got a 2013 v6 and I'm loving it. It could be because I came from an old-rear end 4 cyl 89 celica but I'm really happy with the choice. For me it came down to going with the barebones v8 or the v6 with all the creature comforts. You're not going to be throttling into the back of your seat but she's got some get up and go for when you want/need it. I guess it really depends on if you've spoiled yourself already.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I just got a 2013 v6 and I'm loving it. It could be because I came from an old-rear end 4 cyl 89 celica but I'm really happy with the choice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
Whatever comes stock with the premium package. I was figuring I'd have to replace the speakers but it turns out the stock ones are actually really decent, I was pleasantly surprised with that. Actually I've been really surprised with the interior and overall quality in general. The older generation of American cars left a really bad taste in my mouth and I was expecting the worst. When people say Ford has turned it around they really aren't kidding. I think you said it best as a 'nice-looking but mildly impractical coupe' For the price I couldn't be happier with what I got. edit: My only complaint is the button to open the hidden compartment in the armrest is right where my elbow rests when I drive. I got the standard transmission so that thing pops open a lot. Necc0 fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Aug 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
Oh yeah, the cupholders are definitely made for the slush box drivers but that's going to be a V8 problem too. Gotta agree with the interior quality on the premium package though, everything is well thought out and feel great in the hand. My favorite feature of the car has to be the built in wide angle mirrors in the side view assembly, that should be standard safety equipment on all cars IMO. One other thing to note about the V6 vs V8, the transmissions are different. I believe the V8 utilizes a skip shift program that gates off a gear if the car thinks you should skip it for better fuel economy, the V6 is a basic box made in china.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 13:43
|
|
|
Obviously I can't knock it until I try it but that sounds like it'd be incredibly annoying 9 times out of 10
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 16:07
|
|
|
Rabble posted:Oh yeah, the cupholders are definitely made for the slush box drivers but that's going to be a V8 problem too. And it certainly isn't made for smokers. I use a bottle in the cupholder, but it's still awkward as gently caress to ash properly since you practically have to look at it. Would a nice little ashtray right in front of the shifter been so loving hard to add? My parents' cars have like four built-in ashtrays each, I have none.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 16:34
|
|
|
PT6A posted:And it certainly isn't made for smokers. I use a bottle in the cupholder, but it's still awkward as gently caress to ash properly since you practically have to look at it. Would a nice little ashtray right in front of the shifter been so loving hard to add? My parents' cars have like four built-in ashtrays each, I have none.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Obviously I can't knock it until I try it but that sounds like it'd be incredibly annoying 9 times out of 10 If it's anything like the GM version (and it probably is), removing it can be as simple as unplugging the solenoid. That solenoid probably also saved you a gas guzzler tax, so don't hate on it too much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
PT6A posted:And it certainly isn't made for smokers. I use a bottle in the cupholder, but it's still awkward as gently caress to ash properly since you practically have to look at it. Would a nice little ashtray right in front of the shifter been so loving hard to add? My parents' cars have like four built-in ashtrays each, I have none. I did not think anyone really used those ashtrays, it takes dedication to smoke in a car with the windows up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 17:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:And it certainly isn't made for smokers. I use a bottle in the cupholder, but it's still awkward as gently caress to ash properly since you practically have to look at it. Would a nice little ashtray right in front of the shifter been so loving hard to add? My parents' cars have like four built-in ashtrays each, I have none. http://www.fordparts.com/Commerce/P...d&model=Mustang
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
sanchez posted:I did not think anyone really used those ashtrays, it takes dedication to smoke in a car with the windows up. What about not being a disgusting son-of-a-bitch who throws his flaming refuse out of his window? Or, you know, not wanting to gently caress up the burn on a cigar by exposing it to 100 km/h wind every few minutes? EDIT: I don't feel I need to spend another $20 on something that won't be any better than the glass bottle I'm using right now. The problem is the awkward angle you have to put your arm in to reach the ashtray when it's in a cupholder, and the fact that you might need to turn your head to make sure you're not dropping your ash or trying to extinguish your smoke on various parts of your car's interior instead of the ashtray, instead of a simple glance down from the dash. PT6A fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Aug 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
What is $20? One pack of smokes or one cigar? Designing things to accommodate smokers is long gone. You will see a tofu storage tray before ashtrays ever become standard again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 18:58
|
|
