Should we conclude that the new 2011 Shelby GT500 engine is an improvement on our GT engine? It now equals our stock hp and has 10 more lbs. of tq. Do the new cylinder liners and the improved intercooler make for a real technology improvement. I don't know enough about engine technology to make a conclusion. After comparing stats, seems like a pretty good advancement.
FGT Engine vs 2011 Shelby GT500 Engine
- Thread starter PHXGT
- Start date
BlackICE
GT Owner
The jury is still out. Until the Mustang guys mod the engine to over 1000 HP with stock internals with the same durabilty as a FGT motor at the same power level.
Indy GT
Yea, I got one...too
I agree with Bill, IMO....no.
It also is important how you "define" improvement.
The new Mustang 5.4L does now make equivalent hp and torque is +10 ftlbs over our GT engine. But is that an improvement (0% increase in power and +2% increase in torque)?
Our GT engines were purposefully designed specific for the GT application. See SAE report 2004-01-1252. The all aluminum dry sump block with steel liners was designed from the ground up for and only for the GT.
While the PTWA cylinder coated wet sump 5.4L Mustang engine is I am sure a real gem (and I personally am very fond of ALL Ford's 5.4L engine family and the new 5.0L) I still think the FGT specific engine remains at the top of the engine pyramid as to engineering achievement.
Just my 0.02.
It also is important how you "define" improvement.
The new Mustang 5.4L does now make equivalent hp and torque is +10 ftlbs over our GT engine. But is that an improvement (0% increase in power and +2% increase in torque)?
Our GT engines were purposefully designed specific for the GT application. See SAE report 2004-01-1252. The all aluminum dry sump block with steel liners was designed from the ground up for and only for the GT.
While the PTWA cylinder coated wet sump 5.4L Mustang engine is I am sure a real gem (and I personally am very fond of ALL Ford's 5.4L engine family and the new 5.0L) I still think the FGT specific engine remains at the top of the engine pyramid as to engineering achievement.
Just my 0.02.
STORMCAT
GT
Ford Gt crate motor = $35 grand. GT 500 whole car = $44 grand.. Which is better,,?? Do the math ...:biggrin
- Aug 25, 2006
- 4,436
FRICKEN perfect STORMCAT
Now I will say more; the two engines are "not" close and no matter what the HP that Pony car is able to be tweaked to it will never be as robust or "purpose" built as was the Ford GT engine; I have been within and in fact I am within one at this time and the numerous factory aka OEM tweaks put into the Ford GT engine are many.
Now as for the Pony gal's impregnated sleeves; this = an easy to dispose of block aka meets the Green Peace program for recycling as the bores will not weather the test of time particularly if the boost is increased.
Is it an extreme bang for the buck; absolutely however it should never be placed in the same arena as the Ford GT; the Ford GT will weather the test of time whereas the Pony gal’s are sold as and expected to be “consumables”.
Takes care
Shadowman
BlackICE
GT Owner
Which one is a better value?
Marketing execs would love you to believe that the more expensive item is better than the cheaper one, but it many times isn't the case. The huge prices despairity of these engines is not due of the quality differences, but have more to do with the volumes produced and the market segments they are sold to.
Still, IMO the FGT engine is better built than the one in the GT500.
Last edited:
- Aug 25, 2006
- 4,436
Easy answer
The Pony gal is a better mechanical value as you can purchase her for a song; run her tell she is stinky and wet and then pass her on to another and the the cost of admission hence the cost to play will forever be modest however through which gal does one recieve more for less; this is the Ford GT as they were created on a significant budget that IMO was never even closely recovered with a laundry list of vendors that also bought into the dream as such they too over extended themselves with no real return but they too wanted to be a part of history followed by IMO a very significant fact; the gals were sold too inexpensively which is now playing heavily on the fact that their secondary value remains so high and will likely stay this way througjout they life.
Takes care
Shadowman
GT35065
GT Owner
Be nice now Bill, I'm picking up a 2011 GT500 race red with the SVT handling package today:lol True story, ordered it four months ago and it finally came in. Actually I am having a good friend who I met on this forum pick it up today because it took so long to build I am out of town. Hope the cylinder walls hold up because the last Mustang I bought new is a 1986 GT convert that I am still driving. Well sort of driving, it only has 41000 miles on it.
I'm just busting your chops, I know the engine in this Stang is not built to the same standards as the GT motor.
Rick
I'm just busting your chops, I know the engine in this Stang is not built to the same standards as the GT motor.
Rick
- Aug 25, 2006
- 4,436
LOL and congradulations
No worries as I have fairly thick skin and even more importantly; I am certain that you will have a great time with her.
Takes care
Shadowman
AJB
GT
Having been a Ford Chief Engineer and having held numerous other positions in Ford Motor Company, It would be very interesting to have Jamal talk to us at Rally V regarding the 2 engines.
I know we all love our FGT Motors, but they are now 5 years old compared to these new 5.4L Aluminum block Mustangs. Newer Technology, better manufacturing and a lot of engineering knowledge...I know the Ford Engineers well...they don't sleep much and they drink 100 octane added to the morning coffee ..I think this new engine will surprise all of us...
AJB
I know we all love our FGT Motors, but they are now 5 years old compared to these new 5.4L Aluminum block Mustangs. Newer Technology, better manufacturing and a lot of engineering knowledge...I know the Ford Engineers well...they don't sleep much and they drink 100 octane added to the morning coffee ..I think this new engine will surprise all of us...
AJB
GT35065
GT Owner
My friend that picked the car up for me said I'm going to love this car. Not just the power train but the interior and fit and finish of the car really impressed him. He has a Ford GT and a 2008 GT500 to compare it with. I am really looking forward to driving this car. With any luck all the guages will work too:thumbsup
BlackICE
GT Owner
Even if the fail after the warranty expires, I bet they don't cost much to replace.
- Aug 25, 2006
- 4,436
I like the new Pony gal and expect them to be both well received and a fricken blast to own and drive and yet I maintain my position.
AJB I agree that it has been 5 plus years and that much can and often does change over time "however" IMO when the team created the Ford GT and in this case specifically her heart the objectives were significant and the white papers support not only the thought process but even more so the results; they have a heart of a lion.
Now as for progress with items such as better and new technology; this is only interesting as it applies in an apples and apples situation; there is no doubt in my mind that the goal for the Pony gals was not as lofty and add to this we are smack dab in the middle of the recycle everything mode as such the new engines will be chunks of aluminum that have this ability and no cast iron liners etc.
I have lived through Alusil, Nikasil, Nicom, etc era all of which were the next best alternative to cast iron liners however to make this process work it requires lower tension and softer rings as such blow by is increased hence the ability for the engine to hold extreme pressure is reduced. Now because the crankcase systems are closed today most folks have no idea just how much blow by the typical engine has whereas in days gone past such blow by would never have been tolerated particularly when we used to have road draft tubes because you would see the smoke and the oil residue. For example and as I recall, Ford tolerates cylinder leak down percentages as high as 16% before it is deemed a problem this is a number that would have meant the need for a new engine in the past because most engine builders strive for a number under 5% on a warm engine. Today with the crankcase system being closed and the ignition systems able to burn oil and then any residual being turned to dust in the cats the ability to run low tension and softer rings has proven to be is possible. Now at the end of this engine’s service life it will be either “junk” or if sufficient space a candidate for Darten cast iron sleeves.
GM with the Vega found failure in time, BMW found failure in time, and sadly I expect that even though the new process to coat/impregnate the cylinder bores is on paper better it too will never offer the service life or extreme performance benefits as associated with a cast iron liner.
Takes care
Shadowman
Indy GT
Yea, I got one...too
Well said Bill and I agree with your comparison.
I too remember the Vega fiasco. GM lost a ton of money on warranty claims and had to eventually offer a 100K mile engine warranty to move these cars off the dealer lots. They bet on the coating technology and it did not pay off. As I have also stated before, aluminum block (of which most are) outboard engines engines have tried to use this technology as well to reduce weight and inprove recycleability with varing success.
And the reduced ring tension necessary for these applications is a very important technical consideration when assessing engine life, delivered power over the expected engine life or potential to increase engine power by increased combustion pressures (bigger supercharger, turbocharging, increasing supercharger rotor speed, modified spark advance, higher compression pistons, etc.). Steel liners as our FGT engines have are much more amenable to higher combustion pressures as many of our owners have modified their engines to produce.
I truly hope Ford's new PTWA cylinder coating process works out as expected. I have every reason to believe it will as their engine designers are very good. (Look what they gave us in our GT's) And as Andy relates from first hand knowledge, they eat, drink and live the engine details. The new Mustang engine will be good but IMO never eclipse our GT engine.
I too would be very interested in seeing a presentation at our rally on a comparison of the two powerplants.
I too remember the Vega fiasco. GM lost a ton of money on warranty claims and had to eventually offer a 100K mile engine warranty to move these cars off the dealer lots. They bet on the coating technology and it did not pay off. As I have also stated before, aluminum block (of which most are) outboard engines engines have tried to use this technology as well to reduce weight and inprove recycleability with varing success.
And the reduced ring tension necessary for these applications is a very important technical consideration when assessing engine life, delivered power over the expected engine life or potential to increase engine power by increased combustion pressures (bigger supercharger, turbocharging, increasing supercharger rotor speed, modified spark advance, higher compression pistons, etc.). Steel liners as our FGT engines have are much more amenable to higher combustion pressures as many of our owners have modified their engines to produce.
I truly hope Ford's new PTWA cylinder coating process works out as expected. I have every reason to believe it will as their engine designers are very good. (Look what they gave us in our GT's) And as Andy relates from first hand knowledge, they eat, drink and live the engine details. The new Mustang engine will be good but IMO never eclipse our GT engine.
I too would be very interested in seeing a presentation at our rally on a comparison of the two powerplants.
Last edited:
AJB
GT
Shadowman/Indy...I like your info and comments. That is why my suggestion to have Jamal speak to us may be timely. He could start with these comments and then elaborate. Many of us may have the new Mustangs in our garages by then (I am negotiating for a Black/red striped SVT car now) and his advice could be helpful.
Have a great July 4th everyone..!
AJB
Have a great July 4th everyone..!
AJB
Cobrar
GT Owner
I am not certain, but believe that the PTWA process was also utilized on the new Mustang 5.0 engine as well. If that is the case, and the PTWA technology is not limited to just the GT500, then Ford must have some extensive durability info on it already. For better, or worse, we'll certainly know how it works with that kind of volume out there.
Indy GT
Yea, I got one...too
Cobrar-
The new 5.0L Mustang V8 incorporates the same iron sleeve architecture as does our FGT engine.
It does appear to be a great engine and a high rever. Amazingly the engine designers optimized the mechanical components to deliver an impressive 11:1 compression ratio for the new engine while still being able to run on regular gas. And as some may realize higher CR's are related to higher overall engine thermal efficiency. Thus these engineers understand and appropriately applied the theory of "mechanical octane" to the combustion chamber and piston head design.
I had some right seat time with Mr. McGowen in one of the Mustang 5.0 test mules at Spring Mountain and was very impressed. (with the engine that is.....Mark's driving is, well, ALWAYS impressive).
The new 5.0L Mustang V8 incorporates the same iron sleeve architecture as does our FGT engine.
It does appear to be a great engine and a high rever. Amazingly the engine designers optimized the mechanical components to deliver an impressive 11:1 compression ratio for the new engine while still being able to run on regular gas. And as some may realize higher CR's are related to higher overall engine thermal efficiency. Thus these engineers understand and appropriately applied the theory of "mechanical octane" to the combustion chamber and piston head design.
I had some right seat time with Mr. McGowen in one of the Mustang 5.0 test mules at Spring Mountain and was very impressed. (with the engine that is.....Mark's driving is, well, ALWAYS impressive).
Last edited:
Cobrar
GT Owner
Thanks Indy, I appreciate the clarification. That puts 'prove-out' of the technology where it should be - limited in application/scope and in vehicles where it's fairly easy to track and get solid data.