[Blackdevil77]

Originally Posted by LilAndyG23

I doubt ford will ever drop a v8 from the mustang. That's digging their own grave. As far as scrapping the coyote, it's likely... Seems like ford just can't figure out the recipe for a good motor, unlike the LS and LT's that have been around forever. Find a motor, build on it, stick with it. The coyote is great but if it is "maxed out" like someone else said, that's sad.

The coyote is a great engine and it's definitely not "maxed" out. It's limited by it's displacement, yes. Last time I went to the track there was a guy there running 10's with an N/A 5.0 stang that was street driven.

[LilAndyG23]

Of course it's not maxed out, but the way it was made to sound was that it's time to
Move on to the next. I always like to use nascar as an example, they make 850 hp out of a 5.8L naturally aspirated. And that isn't even the most of it. Formula one does it out of a much smaller engine. Forced induction, of course. But the limits are almost endless when we talk about making power. But the one of the best and truest sayings ever is there is no replacement for displacement!

[LilAndyG23]

The main thing is you have so much more versatility when you start off with a 6.2L engine, GM can capitalize and maximize on what that engine could do if they wanted to. The coyote doesn't have the same versatility though.

[xgnxs]

Originally Posted by LilAndyG23

I doubt ford will ever drop a v8 from the mustang. That's digging their own grave. As far as scrapping the coyote, it's likely... Seems like ford just can't figure out the recipe for a good motor, unlike the LS and LT's that have been around forever. Find a motor, build on it, stick with it. The coyote is great but if it is "maxed out" like someone else said, that's sad.

You never know, they might. They're definitely on a turbo V6 kick right now (F-150, GT).

[doc7000]

Originally Posted by LilAndyG23

Of course it's not maxed out, but the way it was made to sound was that it's time to
Move on to the next. I always like to use nascar as an example, they make 850 hp out of a 5.8L naturally aspirated. And that isn't even the most of it. Formula one does it out of a much smaller engine. Forced induction, of course. But the limits are almost endless when we talk about making power. But the one of the best and truest sayings ever is there is no replacement for displacement!

As has been stated before, there is a different between being able to build a one off fully built Coyote engine (I read an article where they were pushing over 500BHP from one) and something that has emission goals, fuel economy goals, and cost goals.

Not sure what a NASCAR engine has to do with the Coyote engine... or a Formula one engine but here we go.....

Current Formula one rules calls for a 1.6L 90 degree V-6 engine revving to no higher then 15,000rpms with turbo chargers and they use a hybrid system as well........

I think you were talking about the older V-8 and oven older V-10 engines used in Formula one. They came from 2.4L 90 degree V-8 engines in which some teams were running as high as 20,000rpms, those V-8 engines could exceed 700BHP @ 19,000rpms. Before that was a 3.0L V-10 engine and eventually were making north of 900BHP....

NASCAR runs 5.8L OHV V-8 engines, they were able to produce (with heavy restrictions) as high as 900BHP at about 9,000rpms revving to 10,000rpms (and maybe a bit above that market).

However none of these engines have anything to do with OEM Coyote in a $35,000 sports coupe.....

Even based on Ford engineers they had to make compromises so that they can bring the engine into production on the cheap (produce it on the same assembly lines as the modular motors). This is why they went with such a narrow bore on the engine (old Ford 302s had a bore of 4.000 inches and a stroke of 3.000 inches).

In other words this engine has to be able to meet durability targets set for it based on how it is built. If you go with lighter rotating mass you can spin at higher rpms (like the Voodoo engine) however that does come at an increase cost (GT350 starts at $50,000 so it can eat the cost).

This is why I said what will Ford do seeing as the 2016 Camaro SS has the same mass as the 2015 Mustang GT (base weight with manual is 3,705 pounds) while producing 20 more BHP and 55 more ft-lbs of torque. Not that someone can't take a 2015 Mustang GT and in the after market push horsepower and torque up higher. Just like it isn't as if someone can't take a 2016 Camaro SS and in the after market push horsepower and torque higher as well. For $10,000 LPE has a package that pushes the LT1 engine to 550BHP while keeping AFM on the engine. They also have a 600BHP and 630BHP package for the 6.2L LT1 engine, if you want to look at the after market for these engines.

I guess the other thing that Ford can do and should do in order to push the Coyote engine further from the factory is add direct injection.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by doc7000

...

I guess the other thing that Ford can do and should do in order to push the Coyote engine further from the factory is add direct injection.

But don't you know...to Coyote owners, DI is the devil. They don't want it dirtying up their valves.

[doc7000]

My prediction for 0-60 on the 2.0T I think based on the powertrain test in the 2016 CTS may prove to be a bit on the slow side.

A 2016 2.0T 8 speed auto AWD CTS ran from 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, that is at 3,916 pounds......

Lets say that the Camaro comes in at 3,500 pounds even for the 2.0T that still represents 400 pounds less mass to move. I predicted 5.5 seconds to 60MPH however with 400 pounds less weight and 7 more Horsepower (268 vs 275) we might see a best run of 5.4 seconds for the 2.0T engine.

[Noob]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

But don't you know...to Coyote owners, DI is the devil. They don't want it dirtying up their valves.

what about dirtying the valves in LT1 engines ?
any problems yet ?

[Jeffro19]

Originally Posted by doc7000

My prediction for 0-60 on the 2.0T I think based on the powertrain test in the 2016 CTS may prove to be a bit on the slow side.

A 2016 2.0T 8 speed auto AWD CTS ran from 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, that is at 3,916 pounds......

Lets say that the Camaro comes in at 3,500 pounds even for the 2.0T that still represents 400 pounds less mass to move. I predicted 5.5 seconds to 60MPH however with 400 pounds less weight and 7 more Horsepower (268 vs 275) we might see a best run of 5.4 seconds for the 2.0T engine.

Slow? I think that is pretty quick for the T4 on the camaro.

[doc7000]

Originally Posted by Jeffro19

Slow? I think that is pretty quick for the T4 on the camaro.

When I said that my prediction was a bit slow I mean because I predicted 5.5 seconds to 60MPH for the 2016 turbo but now I think with the 8 speed auto it may get there sooner then that. This means that at least at lower speeds the 2016 I-4 turbo Camaro should be able to accelerate just as fast to a bit faster then the 2010-2015 V-6 Camaro. All while probably getting 33ish MPG on the highway and still be a fun little car to toss around corners.

[doc7000]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

But don't you know...to Coyote owners, DI is the devil. They don't want it dirtying up their valves.

Ford fans are an interesting bunch, Ford will tell them whatever and they will buy into it. Meanwhile the 2.3L ecoboost engine in the Mustang uses direct injection, and the coyote engine was designed to take direct injection (based on an article from a Ford fan publication). I only assumed that they didn't need it so they figured why add the cost to the engine, though if the 5.2L Voodoo had direct injection it would have made a bit more power then 526BHP. If you got rid of the durability requirements for the engine and added direct injection then hell 600BHP probably would have been within reach.

Build wise the Voodoo engine is similar to that of the Ferrari F430 engine (which didn't have direct injection either). Ferrari doesn't have to make sure that their engines are reliable up to and over 100,000 miles because that really isn't something that people expect from a Ferrari. People may not expect this from the GT350 Mustang however Ford (like many other mainstream car makers) extends their same practices for regular cars to their sporty cars.

The F430 obviously has a 4.3L engine which produces 80ft-lbs per liter, the Voodoo engine makes 82ft-lbs per liter. The 4.3L Ferrari engine pushes its torque higher up in the band hence it is making 483BHP @ 8,500rpms. The Ferrari engine is making 298ft-lbs of torque at 8,500rpms, it is making 87% of its peak torque at 8,500rpms. If the Voodoo engine was making 87% of its torque at 8,250rpms then it would produce 373ft-lbs of torque and 586BHP at that same rpm. This would push its torque peak up a bit (the Voodoo peaks torque at 4,750rpms while the 4.3L Ferrari at 5,250rpms).

However it looks like that Ford made the choice to peak torque a bit lower and have Horsepower peak at 7,500rpms instead of pushing things up a bit and have even more horsepower at 8,250rpms.

[13vertss]

My guess for the SS
0-60 4.1 sec auto and 4.2 6 speed.
1/4 mile 12.2 trap 116mph auto, 12.4 trap 115mph 6 speed.
Weight 1ss curb 3704, 2ss 3735 curb

[Red Chief]

Originally Posted by huggercamaro21

I dont want to count my chickens yet, but the SS is going to murder any Mustang GT they make. Now, the real question; is the beating the SS is going to give the Mustang worth the extra price. My vote is yes, but I am biased haha.

I think it's definitely worth it. The price of upgrades for a Mustang owner to compete is going to be alot higher...

[LesserO2Evils]

Originally Posted by 13vertss/r's

My guess for the SS
0-60 4.1 sec auto and 4.2 6 speed.
1/4 mile 12.2 trap 116mph auto, 12.4 trap 115mph 6 speed.
Weight 1ss curb 3704, 2ss 3735 curb

Those are identical to what I proposed(for the A8).