Interesting News- Ford Mustang & Falcon
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 562
From: Mich.
Originally posted by guionM
Nosed around on the Falcon's evolution, and the truth is that it's chassis is not a 1959 chassis, at least not in the way projected! If you think of your grandfather's axe that's had the handle replaced twice and the blade once, you get the idea of Falcon's chassis.
Over the years, the Falcon's chassis has been: widened; lengthened; had at least 2 new front ends & front suspension systems (not including the new one); had at least 4 rear ends including leaf springs, coil springs, the watts linkage from the 80s, the Cobra-like IRS, & the new control blade system (and I'm not including every change); changed crossmembers; chassis rails that have been changed over the years; at least 3 revised floorpans, including the newly designed one; revisions for crash survivability (known here as crash standards); NVH revisions; changes to adapt to new improved unibody assembly & related structural changes for varying body styles.
In short, calling the current Falcon a 1959 design is in the end completely false. Each new edition brought structural changes to the point where you simply can't take a new Falcon and bolt or weld any pieces or structural components to one from the 1970s, let alone 1959.
It's an evolutionary car.
It's
Nosed around on the Falcon's evolution, and the truth is that it's chassis is not a 1959 chassis, at least not in the way projected! If you think of your grandfather's axe that's had the handle replaced twice and the blade once, you get the idea of Falcon's chassis.
Over the years, the Falcon's chassis has been: widened; lengthened; had at least 2 new front ends & front suspension systems (not including the new one); had at least 4 rear ends including leaf springs, coil springs, the watts linkage from the 80s, the Cobra-like IRS, & the new control blade system (and I'm not including every change); changed crossmembers; chassis rails that have been changed over the years; at least 3 revised floorpans, including the newly designed one; revisions for crash survivability (known here as crash standards); NVH revisions; changes to adapt to new improved unibody assembly & related structural changes for varying body styles.
In short, calling the current Falcon a 1959 design is in the end completely false. Each new edition brought structural changes to the point where you simply can't take a new Falcon and bolt or weld any pieces or structural components to one from the 1970s, let alone 1959.
It's an evolutionary car.
It's
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,873
From: South Jersey
Originally posted by guionM
I think you're right about Ford's automatic trannies, I understand that's the reason the last DOHC Cobras didn't have automatics.
I think you're right about Ford's automatic trannies, I understand that's the reason the last DOHC Cobras didn't have automatics.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by guionM
Considering the Falcon's weight and the fact it isn't even the performance model, those numbers aren't great, but not that bad either (0-60 would probally be 7 flat). I think you're right about Ford's automatic trannies, I understand that's the reason the last DOHC Cobras didn't have automatics.
Just the same, the Cadillac CTS with a V6 and stick is actually quicker!
Considering the Falcon's weight and the fact it isn't even the performance model, those numbers aren't great, but not that bad either (0-60 would probally be 7 flat). I think you're right about Ford's automatic trannies, I understand that's the reason the last DOHC Cobras didn't have automatics.
Just the same, the Cadillac CTS with a V6 and stick is actually quicker!
) Thanks for pointing out the performance of the manual transmissioned Cadillac CTS. I've been disappointed by the European built MV6 engine since it premiered, but like many mediocre engines, it shines when you work it with a decent manual gearbox. Sadly, the Getrag tranny will disappear when the American-designed 260hp 3.6 liter V6 appears in the coming model year - not enough torque capacity.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 562
From: Mich.
Originally posted by WERM
SVT models are supposed to be about the driving experience, which cannot be realized to its fullest with a significant portion of it automated. None of their cars have offered automatic transmissions.
SVT models are supposed to be about the driving experience, which cannot be realized to its fullest with a significant portion of it automated. None of their cars have offered automatic transmissions.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by WERM
SVT models are supposed to be about the driving experience, which cannot be realized to its fullest with a significant portion of it automated. None of their cars have offered automatic transmissions.
SVT models are supposed to be about the driving experience, which cannot be realized to its fullest with a significant portion of it automated. None of their cars have offered automatic transmissions.
Last edited by redzed; Feb 22, 2003 at 03:21 PM.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by WERM
It's not a car.
Besides...Show me a body on frame truck with a smooth, slick shifting gearbox suitable for high performance driving....
It's not a car.
Besides...Show me a body on frame truck with a smooth, slick shifting gearbox suitable for high performance driving....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
Originally posted by redzed
In any case, trucks aren't suited for "high performance driving" anyway.
In any case, trucks aren't suited for "high performance driving" anyway.
I hope that the next gen Lightning will have an optional 6spd. I think the concept had one.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
About the 5.4L 3v showing up in the GT, what does that mean for the Cobra? it can't mean the current S/c 4.6L. Ford wouldn't give their GT a 5.4L and stick their Cobra with a smaller 4.6L, or would they? Wouldn't the falcons 390hp 5.4L Dohc or the lightnings blown 400+hp 5.4L be somewhat of a better motor as far as how it'd fit atop the mustang lineup?
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 562
From: Mich.
The Mustang is going to be right around 300+(duh right). VCT 4.6 S.O.H.C.,A side note.The current Explorer uses a Aluminum block.Mustang uses iron.This most likely what they are speaking of.People just jump to say 5.4.
Then again the 5.0 is "supposed" to be returning very soon as well.So that is what the Cobra will be having.
Then again the 5.0 is "supposed" to be returning very soon as well.So that is what the Cobra will be having.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
It's just a number...
I find it interesting that so many here are "discontented" with the 5.4-3V motor. Seems that many have a picture in their head of a 4-door, longbed, 4x4 truck frame and driveline with a Mustang body sat on it.
The 5.4-3V is an enhancement of the 5.4 lightning motor that's already taking candy from LS1's and pre-03 Cobras guys... think about it. YES, that version has an iron lung, but it also has a more lame cam and much lower compression to be huffer-friendly, and 8 less valves per engine. Oz has done a nice job making this block/head combo into a real performenr in N/A form, and it has the sky as potential after that. Oz has it goin' on and I - for one - am impressed with the caliber of engines Ford and Holden have produced in the last few years, and I expect this one to be a jewel like the rest - it WON'T be LAME... I'll bet on it.
Interestingly, you can put a shorter-throw crank in this gem and "de-stroke" it a tad to get the 5.0 displacement, and a little better rpm climb rate and redline. *stops to say small prayer here* You guys go ahead and pass it up on the showroom floor, but it just might be passing us all on the streets later... who knows? After all, Ford is well-known for running the Mustang program in a shoddy, carefree manner, pi$$ing-off all it's loyal buyers, and making all kinds of poor decisions about it's drivelines and bodywork, right?
That's why it's scheduled to die... when?
In so far as the original topic of this thread... Nice post Ude - thanks!
Don't know how I missed that one! It really gives me more hope for seeing another GTHO in the future (of which I'd buy one instantly if it comes here BTW). And I saw another peice of interesting info in that article that has my gears grinding again...
quote - "Perhaps its not coincidental, then, the 427 concept, like the next Mustang, uses the DEW98 platform for its underpinnings."
OH MY! I did not catch that the 427 concept was on DEW98 platform from NAIAS!
Z284ever and I went post-to-post about a month ago over the 427 engine, history, and potential uses. Z284 said something about hearing that the 2nd engine was destined for a Mustang, and I eluded to the '67 Shelby which had a 427. Well, I'm gonna up the ante on a future Shelby Mustang now.
I have recently heard that Shelby is entertaining the idea, but has expressed that he has NO INTENTION of building the cars on a separate line (much less in LA/Cali) as was done in '65 thru '70. (Shelby just turned 80 BTW ) He wants to spec a car and let Ford build them with his consent and guidance. (Good by me! 
) Knowing that the 427 is already suited on a DEW platform is just too much. Ford PLEEEZE bring this thing to life! A Mach 1, GT, and a new Shelby - all in a showroom with 0.5 miles on them - your choice! All that's missing is the go-go-girls in their tie-dies and knee boots, bead-chains on everything, Doobies, and $.25/gal gas!!!
:wipes drool from chin, chugs a brew, and scratches self violently while smiling profusely!:
The 5.4-3V is an enhancement of the 5.4 lightning motor that's already taking candy from LS1's and pre-03 Cobras guys... think about it. YES, that version has an iron lung, but it also has a more lame cam and much lower compression to be huffer-friendly, and 8 less valves per engine. Oz has done a nice job making this block/head combo into a real performenr in N/A form, and it has the sky as potential after that. Oz has it goin' on and I - for one - am impressed with the caliber of engines Ford and Holden have produced in the last few years, and I expect this one to be a jewel like the rest - it WON'T be LAME... I'll bet on it.
Interestingly, you can put a shorter-throw crank in this gem and "de-stroke" it a tad to get the 5.0 displacement, and a little better rpm climb rate and redline. *stops to say small prayer here* You guys go ahead and pass it up on the showroom floor, but it just might be passing us all on the streets later... who knows? After all, Ford is well-known for running the Mustang program in a shoddy, carefree manner, pi$$ing-off all it's loyal buyers, and making all kinds of poor decisions about it's drivelines and bodywork, right?
That's why it's scheduled to die... when?
In so far as the original topic of this thread... Nice post Ude - thanks!
Don't know how I missed that one! It really gives me more hope for seeing another GTHO in the future (of which I'd buy one instantly if it comes here BTW). And I saw another peice of interesting info in that article that has my gears grinding again...
quote - "Perhaps its not coincidental, then, the 427 concept, like the next Mustang, uses the DEW98 platform for its underpinnings."
OH MY!
I did not catch that the 427 concept was on DEW98 platform from NAIAS!Z284ever and I went post-to-post about a month ago over the 427 engine, history, and potential uses. Z284 said something about hearing that the 2nd engine was destined for a Mustang, and I eluded to the '67 Shelby which had a 427. Well, I'm gonna up the ante on a future Shelby Mustang now.
I have recently heard that Shelby is entertaining the idea, but has expressed that he has NO INTENTION of building the cars on a separate line (much less in LA/Cali) as was done in '65 thru '70. (Shelby just turned 80 BTW
) He wants to spec a car and let Ford build them with his consent and guidance. (Good by me! ) Knowing that the 427 is already suited on a DEW platform is just too much. Ford PLEEEZE bring this thing to life! A Mach 1, GT, and a new Shelby - all in a showroom with 0.5 miles on them - your choice! All that's missing is the go-go-girls in their tie-dies and knee boots, bead-chains on everything, Doobies, and $.25/gal gas!!!:wipes drool from chin, chugs a brew, and scratches self violently while smiling profusely!:
Last edited by ProudPony; Feb 24, 2003 at 10:22 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
I don't think a 5.4 Mustang wouldn't affect Cobra at all Riceeating5.0. The Aussie Boss 5.4 (which is actually developed and built by Ford here in the USA) puts out about 360 horses, while the Cobra does way over 400 (it's rated at 400, but dynos 390 at the rear wheels), so there's a good spread.
That being said, I'm not quite convinced the 5.4 will be in the Mustang GT (unless the 4.6 will be available on the base or mid-grade model). I got word a month ago that the Boss version would be back in the new Mustang lineup (probally as a regular production line), and I suspect this is where the 5.4 will end up.
It probally has something to do with the fact that it says Boss 260 (it's Kilowatt rating) on the engine.
That being said, I'm not quite convinced the 5.4 will be in the Mustang GT (unless the 4.6 will be available on the base or mid-grade model). I got word a month ago that the Boss version would be back in the new Mustang lineup (probally as a regular production line), and I suspect this is where the 5.4 will end up.
It probally has something to do with the fact that it says Boss 260 (it's Kilowatt rating) on the engine.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Let's start with what we know.
Mustang GT will have around 300hp. Cobra will have 400+. There are strong indications that an "intermediate" V8 model (Mach 1 is a front runner), will come somewhere in between.
Let's add our speculation.
*For Mustang GT a 4.6 3v is a possibility, or a 5.4 3v.
*I think it's safe to assume an intermediate V8 of around 350hp would have greater displacement than 4.6. Let's say 5.0 or 5.4.
*If Cobra doesn't pack a blower......it will need a highly tuned 5.0 or 5.4.
*And then of course there are those rumors of a limited production V10 Mustang (Shelby?!)
Now let me hear this argument about Camaro only having one V8 again?
Mustang GT will have around 300hp. Cobra will have 400+. There are strong indications that an "intermediate" V8 model (Mach 1 is a front runner), will come somewhere in between.
Let's add our speculation.
*For Mustang GT a 4.6 3v is a possibility, or a 5.4 3v.
*I think it's safe to assume an intermediate V8 of around 350hp would have greater displacement than 4.6. Let's say 5.0 or 5.4.
*If Cobra doesn't pack a blower......it will need a highly tuned 5.0 or 5.4.
*And then of course there are those rumors of a limited production V10 Mustang (Shelby?!)
Now let me hear this argument about Camaro only having one V8 again?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
To add to what Z284ever just said...
I have official word now that Mach 1 WILL be back in 2004.
The decision for 2005 is not yet made...
Leaves me wondering even more about either a BOSS 302 or Mach 1 option for 2004...
It is my OPINION at this point, that we will see Shelby's name on a Ford car soon. If he consents to licensing Ford to do a Mustang, I think it would be positioned alonside the Cobra performance-wise. If it gets the 427ci V10, I'd say it's going above the Cobra market-wise, aiming straight for cars like the Vette, Viper, and semi-exotic imports. And don't snicker about a cheesy Mustang going after those higher-level cars either, because that is EXACTLY what Shelby did with them in '65-'70 and was very successful at it too. I'd expect virtually nothing but the skin on the car will be the same as the base units.
Enjoy...
Sebring
Daytona (note the Camaro too!)
Phoenix
Sears Point (notice the Vettes and the Mercury Marauder! )
24 hrs @ Daytona
Pebble Beach (look at all the Mustangs, AC Cobras, and Vettes... )
After just witnessing the cars of yore in action, I would expect nothing less of a new Shelby Mustang, should he decide to have another Mustang with his name on it again. And if he does do this... I'll have my name on one as sure as I'm breathing!
I have official word now that Mach 1 WILL be back in 2004.
The decision for 2005 is not yet made...
Leaves me wondering even more about either a BOSS 302 or Mach 1 option for 2004...
It is my OPINION at this point, that we will see Shelby's name on a Ford car soon. If he consents to licensing Ford to do a Mustang, I think it would be positioned alonside the Cobra performance-wise. If it gets the 427ci V10, I'd say it's going above the Cobra market-wise, aiming straight for cars like the Vette, Viper, and semi-exotic imports. And don't snicker about a cheesy Mustang going after those higher-level cars either, because that is EXACTLY what Shelby did with them in '65-'70 and was very successful at it too. I'd expect virtually nothing but the skin on the car will be the same as the base units.
Enjoy...
Sebring
Daytona (note the Camaro too!)
Phoenix
Sears Point (notice the Vettes and the Mercury Marauder!
)24 hrs @ Daytona
Pebble Beach (look at all the Mustangs, AC Cobras, and Vettes...
)After just witnessing the cars of yore in action, I would expect nothing less of a new Shelby Mustang, should he decide to have another Mustang with his name on it again. And if he does do this... I'll have my name on one as sure as I'm breathing!