Jump to content

900hp Turbo Mustang at SEMA


Wings4Life(BANNED)

Recommended Posts

B99319751Z.1_20151102130431_000_GSCKVHHG


Ford Motor Co. will show 28 modified cars and trucks at this year’s Specialty Equipment Market Association Show, which begins Tuesday in Las Vegas.


Among the offerings are eight modified Mustangs, which focus on achieving maximum horsepower with the smallest possible engines. A majority of Ford’s souped-up ’Stangs use versions of the 2.3-liter Ecoboost engine.


The most eye-popping pony car is a four-cylinder Mustang designed by Bisimoto that gets up to 900 horsepower. The all-black Mustang has a number of modifications, including a Web Level 2.4 camshaft, MagnaFuel 750 fuel pumps and five O Motorsport 2200cc fuel injectors.


http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/ford/2015/11/02/ford-sema-cars-trucks/75043932/


  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to continue an earlier discussion about how I4 GTDI engines will be the rage for the pony cars soon.  Mustang has seen some success, exceeding their expectations, but as aftermarket tuning for them grows, so too will the customer interest.  It may take a few years as they become more affordable as used cars for many, who buy them discounted to adapt and tweak, but it is coming. And certainly more peformance from the automaker as well.  And with the upgrade path so easy and cheap, and with the price of V8's getting so high, it leaves many with little choice. And the new generations don't have that link back to classic V8 like many of us, so there is that as well.

 

yeah, 900hp is cool, but so too is taking 300hp up to about 450hp, in a saturday afternoon.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW, No offense to you Wings, thanks for posting this, but that is the WORST Butt Ugly Ricerfied Muttang I have ever seen. I think I will take a GT350 please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW, No offense to you Wings, thanks for posting this, but that is the WORST Butt Ugly Ricerfied Muttang I have ever seen. I think I will take a GT350 please.

YUP.

 

Well it looks good if you change the wheels and take the spoiler off... so it's less ricer and more like a Mustang.

 

I respect the whole 900hp thing but I think it looks terrible while putting down those numbers.

Edited by ccap41
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sema-Secion-Header-4.jpg

 

 

Gentlemen, I was hoping to steer the conversation into discussions about boosting for power, not style. Forget that image. It even looks like a photo-chop. 

 

 

Anyway, so what can the average buyer get with his money?  Well, if you start with a turbo I4 Mustang, you have a lot of room to grow in terms of output, for very little money out of pocket, and better yet, very little time. A quick google search already reveals endless aftermarket options to improve what was originally intended to be an engine that balances efficiency with performance. Swinging that bias more toward performance is the whole benefit of turbo charging.  Ford Performance has a pretty good selection of power systems that even maintain your warranty, so you can start low and upgrade later as you see fit, with zero downside.  And it’s always fun to feel your way through the upgrades, rather than just buy it as is.  You feel accomplished and that you contributed to it like any backyard mechanic proud of his baby.

 

FP site below.

 

https://fordperformanceracingparts.com/sema/

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm.

Like how the AM V-12 was 2 Duratec V-6's fuzes together; How about making a V-8 outa 2 of these 2.3EB's grafted into one?

Get on it Ford!

Im not sure why you're happy about Aston Martin perfecting what Ford started. Perhaps it should be Aston that does this magical straight-eight you're pining for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hmm.

Like how the AM V-12 was 2 Duratec V-6's fuzes together; How about making a V-8 outa 2 of these 2.3EB's grafted into one?

Get on it Ford!

Im not sure why you're happy about Aston Martin perfecting what Ford started. Perhaps it should be Aston that does this magical straight-eight you're pining for.

 

 

 

In your quest to troll yet another Ford thread, did you completely miss where he OBVIOUSLY stated a V8, not a straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary-I was correcting him. And by extension, you.

You see, grafting two V6 engines into a V12 allows for retaining much of the block architecture. But you cannot really graft together a pair of online blocks into a Vee configuration. Ergo, the straight-eight is the more logical thing to pine for given the source engines he mentioned.

Engines 101, you see :D

Edited by El Kabong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary-I was correcting him. And by extension, you.

You see, grafting two V6 engines into a V12 allows for retaining much of the block architecture. But you cannot really graft together a pair of online blocks into a Vee configuration. Ergo, the straight-eight is the more logical thing to pine for given the source engines he mentioned.

Engines 101, you see :D

 

A straight 8 is about as common as a 400lbs Victoria Secret model, but nice back-peddling.

 

Obviously he was referring to the top end, which is where the actual power is derived and lives. Thus, (2) 350 hp EcoBoost 2.3L cyl heads, swapped in place of coyote heads, which would theoretically produce 700hp with the right boost…and of course, the same flat plane crank.  But more is involved than just that.

 

Advanced Engine Design 501

 

Don’t mention it. :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary-I was correcting him. And by extension, you.

You see, grafting two V6 engines into a V12 allows for retaining much of the block architecture. But you cannot really graft together a pair of online blocks into a Vee configuration. Ergo, the straight-eight is the more logical thing to pine for given the source engines he mentioned.

Engines 101, you see :D

 

Actually, you're wrong. 

 

Much of the preliminary development of the Northstar came from grafting two Oldsmobile Quad-4 engines together at the base.   It didn't go into production that way, but you can't say that it can't be done.

 

Also, the VW W-12 is two VR6 engines (mostly an inline setup, only a 15 degree cylinder angle) grafted together at the base.

 

I'm sure others could pop in and submit other examples. 

 

Pontiac went the other direction in 1962 with the Tempest.  They cut one cylinder bank off a V8 to make a 4-cylinder. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wings.

I read what he said. It did not make sense. Therefore, I corrected him. I was well aware that the engine configuration was illogical. It seemed to fit the theme so I had some lulz.

And yes, Drew has a point. But I would argue that it is a more stretched one than mine. After all, it was Ford who developed the "Modular" V8 in 1991. But they didn't do inline engines off it-they used Zetec architecture instead.

And now I'm still having lulz, only some more because you didn't see what I was on about.

Edited by El Kabong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary-I was correcting him. And by extension, you.

You see, grafting two V6 engines into a V12 allows for retaining much of the block architecture. But you cannot really graft together a pair of online blocks into a Vee configuration. Ergo, the straight-eight is the more logical thing to pine for given the source engines he mentioned.

Engines 101, you see :D

 

Actually, you're wrong. 

 

Much of the preliminary development of the Northstar came from grafting two Oldsmobile Quad-4 engines together at the base.   It didn't go into production that way, but you can't say that it can't be done.

 

Also, the VW W-12 is two VR6 engines (mostly an inline setup, only a 15 degree cylinder angle) grafted together at the base.

 

I'm sure others could pop in and submit other examples. 

 

Pontiac went the other direction in 1962 with the Tempest.  They cut one cylinder bank off a V8 to make a 4-cylinder.

Alright, alright. Upon further review I'll step back from my previous statement.

GM: originating things even their fans thought were impossible. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wings.

I read what he said. It did not make sense. Therefore, I corrected him. I was well aware that the engine configuration was illogical. It seemed to fit the theme so I had some lulz.

And yes, Drew has a point. But I would argue that it is a more stretched one than mine. After all, it was Ford who developed the "Modular" V8 in 1991. But they didn't do inline engines off it-they used Zetec architecture instead.

And now I'm still having lulz, only some more because you didn't see what I was on about.

 

 

Erm... sorry to pile on you today.... but Wikipedia is your friend.

 

 

Ford Modular engine

 

 

Contrary to popular belief, the Modular engine did not get its name from its design or sharing of certain parts among the engine family. Instead, the name was derived from a manufacturing plant protocol, "Modular", where the plant and its tooling could be changed in a few hours to manufacture different versions of the engine family
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drew: I clicked on the link for that citation. It was an engine-builder site. I'll respect what the guy claims, but I'm old enough to remember the press previews when the 1991 Lincoln Town Car came out. I'm pretty sure Ford named it Modular for a different reason than the other gentleman claims.

Edited by El Kabong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drew: I clicked on the link for that citation. It was an engine-builder site. I'll respect what the guy claims, but I'm old enough to remember the press previews when the 1991 Lincoln Town Car came out. I'm pretty sure Ford named it Modular for a different reason than the other gentleman claims.

 

I'd be interested in seeing such claims by Ford as I don't recall any of the type you're talking about (V8 into V6 or I4).   The modular engines come in 2-valve, 3-valve, 4-valve, 4.6, 5.0, 5.2, 5.4, 5.8, and 6.8 versions, V8 and V10, SOHC and DOHC..... 

 

... sounds pretty modular to me even if the claim in the Wikipedia article is incorrect. 

 

Furthermore, it's a 90 degree V8.  My love for the 3800 aside, 90 degrees isn't really the best setup for a V6, so it's probably best that Ford didn't go that route anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was heavily involved with the so-called modularity V8 engines from Ford in the 90’s on the Triton engines.  Drew hit on most of their benefits, albeit, mostly from a cost/manufacturing benefit.   GM has taken that modularity design several steps further yet, with common front engine covers that work for V6 and V8, etc.  But at the end of the day, this is a cost reduction optimization only.  In a perfect world, true optimization happens when each engine is designed as it’s own entity without a single regard to other engines/programs/components/etc.  Finding that careful cost/performance balance in between the two extremes, is half of an engineers duties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drew: I clicked on the link for that citation. It was an engine-builder site. I'll respect what the guy claims, but I'm old enough to remember the press previews when the 1991 Lincoln Town Car came out. I'm pretty sure Ford named it Modular for a different reason than the other gentleman claims.

 

I'd be interested in seeing such claims by Ford as I don't recall any of the type you're talking about (V8 into V6 or I4).   The modular engines come in 2-valve, 3-valve, 4-valve, 4.6, 5.0, 5.2, 5.4, 5.8, and 6.8 versions, V8 and V10, SOHC and DOHC..... 

 

... sounds pretty modular to me even if the claim in the Wikipedia article is incorrect. 

 

Furthermore, it's a 90 degree V8.  My love for the 3800 aside, 90 degrees isn't really the best setup for a V6, so it's probably best that Ford didn't go that route anyway.

I'd love to post the old articles, but I couldn't even find them on Google. Bummer.

All the configs you describe do support my argument for how the Mod engines got their name. It's not a bad idea, as long as you can meet FE, NVH, and performance numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...