Sinovac
GT Owner
Substantially revised front clip and fender vents. Oh my. Definitely not a badge and sticker job for the newest of performance Mustangs.
Ford Performance Heritage
- Thread starter dbk
- Start date
Sinovac
GT Owner
More nerdy deductive reasoning for Bonehead: the lowered hood is further evidence of a dry sump.
The videos show heat exchanger(s) behind the lower fascia vent(s) a la Track Pack GT500.
Last edited:
Xcentric
GT Owner
pacettr
GT Owner
Indy GT
Yea, I got one...too
Amen Dave.
But there is always someone out there in modificationville who knows sooooo much more than the Ford engine design team and can REALLY allow the engine to deliver its envisioned power.
To each their own.
But there is always someone out there in modificationville who knows sooooo much more than the Ford engine design team and can REALLY allow the engine to deliver its envisioned power.
To each their own.
Sinovac
GT Owner
I'm going to give you some mild ribbing for your perpetual worship at the alter of the infallible Ford engineer (all in the spirit of friendly discourse).
2112
Blue/white 06'
Indy GT
Yea, I got one...too
That’s fine and taken as friendly discourse.:biggrin
The Ford guys are not without fault by any means. FGT axle bolts (which I believe was really a quality escape of the transaxle vendor) and the Boss Track Key (which again can be pointed toward Ford Racing which is different than Team Mustang within corporate FOMOCO) come to mind as failures. But the FGT design team was the entity who finally figured out the root cause of the axle bolt failures. And fixed them. Further, even in the acutely compressed FGT design timeline the FGT engineers still managed to find time to technically document in SAE publications (11 total) the engineering design aspects of our car. Go find similar articles on the Corvette or Viper or for that manner any european supercar.
But (IMO by talking and listening to many of these technical individuals) they demonstrate consistent technical advancement (or attempt thereof) of the automotive state-of-the-art consistent with internal as well as federal requirements (which constantly change). The resources available to these designers (and I am sure it is on par with GM and probably Chrysler) in degreed technical manpower, testing facilities, budgets and computational resources is simply not comparable to a non OE provider. The high performance automotive vehicles offered for public sale like our stock FGT’s or high performance Mustangs can driven hard on the racetrack (as many owners can attest) without any detrimental effects or driven leisurely for a trip to the coffee shop. The vehicles have internal design margins which purposefully allow a wide spectrum of intended use.
Certainly any vehicle can be modified to reduce these inherent margins to allow greater performance in one aspect of the vehicle (like increasing horsepower) but it is at the expense of some other design attribute (like engine life or engine cooling and limp mode activation) which suffers with the modification. Nothing is free, including horsepower. And many times the depth of understanding a modifier has of the interrelationship of all the various systems supporting engine operation are not fully understood or appreciated. The owner of the modified vehicle becomes the test pilot. In this case one simple question, who knows more about the car; the original design engineering team or a automotive shop modifier?
That’s how I conclude the design team is really the best knowledge base.
The Ford guys are not without fault by any means. FGT axle bolts (which I believe was really a quality escape of the transaxle vendor) and the Boss Track Key (which again can be pointed toward Ford Racing which is different than Team Mustang within corporate FOMOCO) come to mind as failures. But the FGT design team was the entity who finally figured out the root cause of the axle bolt failures. And fixed them. Further, even in the acutely compressed FGT design timeline the FGT engineers still managed to find time to technically document in SAE publications (11 total) the engineering design aspects of our car. Go find similar articles on the Corvette or Viper or for that manner any european supercar.
But (IMO by talking and listening to many of these technical individuals) they demonstrate consistent technical advancement (or attempt thereof) of the automotive state-of-the-art consistent with internal as well as federal requirements (which constantly change). The resources available to these designers (and I am sure it is on par with GM and probably Chrysler) in degreed technical manpower, testing facilities, budgets and computational resources is simply not comparable to a non OE provider. The high performance automotive vehicles offered for public sale like our stock FGT’s or high performance Mustangs can driven hard on the racetrack (as many owners can attest) without any detrimental effects or driven leisurely for a trip to the coffee shop. The vehicles have internal design margins which purposefully allow a wide spectrum of intended use.
Certainly any vehicle can be modified to reduce these inherent margins to allow greater performance in one aspect of the vehicle (like increasing horsepower) but it is at the expense of some other design attribute (like engine life or engine cooling and limp mode activation) which suffers with the modification. Nothing is free, including horsepower. And many times the depth of understanding a modifier has of the interrelationship of all the various systems supporting engine operation are not fully understood or appreciated. The owner of the modified vehicle becomes the test pilot. In this case one simple question, who knows more about the car; the original design engineering team or a automotive shop modifier?
That’s how I conclude the design team is really the best knowledge base.
Xcentric
GT Owner
The design team of the GT gave us 100 extra hp on the GT, essentially free. Well, dirt cheap anyway. How long after GT production began was the FRPP pulley/tune available? Engines are made to be modded.
I was kidding about the TT...it seems superchargers, TTs and other aftermarket mods are somehow magically available on the day a car is announced.
It will be a sad day for sure when we can't mod our engines. The design team has a lot to worry about that many of us choose to not worry about.
I thank the design team for giving us strong motors that, IMO, were made to be modded.
I was kidding about the TT...it seems superchargers, TTs and other aftermarket mods are somehow magically available on the day a car is announced.
It will be a sad day for sure when we can't mod our engines. The design team has a lot to worry about that many of us choose to not worry about.
I thank the design team for giving us strong motors that, IMO, were made to be modded.
If I was going to mess with one, it would be the base car. I haven't driven one yet, but mine should be here in the not too distant future so I hope it's pretty good. It was given a really glowing review in the Road and Track Performance Car of the Year test. and only the 911 GT3 was chosen ahead of it. The only thing it doesn't have is a big HP number, and the 5.0L is proven if you want to crank it.
The upmarket models are way more focused around overall balance and have a reasonable amount of power as it is. Power train is one of the defining characteristics of the car, and I think it's best served being left alone or only lightly modified, lest the overall intent get upset.
Sinovac
GT Owner
Indy,
Let me ask some questions.
Do we agree that automotive engineers are constrained by factors beyond their control such as cost limitations?
Would you agree that because of cost constraints engineers are not permitted to implement the best engineering solution in every application?
Would you also agree that there is subset of customers who would gladly pay at the point of initial purchase the additional cost of the best engineering solution which was not incorporated into a vehicle due to cost constraints?
Can we agree that a vehicle engineered with no constraints might perform better that the one you or I can now buy at the dealership?
I know you're familiar with value engineering. Would it be fair to say that value engineering is employed in the manufacture of automobiles and that such engineering doesn't necessarily result in the best engineering solution?
I've focused on cost, but the same questions can be posed relative to other considerations.
Let me ask some questions.
Do we agree that automotive engineers are constrained by factors beyond their control such as cost limitations?
Would you agree that because of cost constraints engineers are not permitted to implement the best engineering solution in every application?
Would you also agree that there is subset of customers who would gladly pay at the point of initial purchase the additional cost of the best engineering solution which was not incorporated into a vehicle due to cost constraints?
Can we agree that a vehicle engineered with no constraints might perform better that the one you or I can now buy at the dealership?
I know you're familiar with value engineering. Would it be fair to say that value engineering is employed in the manufacture of automobiles and that such engineering doesn't necessarily result in the best engineering solution?
I've focused on cost, but the same questions can be posed relative to other considerations.
2112
Blue/white 06'
I see the logic, but over the last 10 years, the Mustang evolved into 2 distinct subsets (more accurately, they always have, yet with little body variation) Upmarket and base. And tho I think all are worth upgrading, the upmarket cars are closer to the end objective and IMO are significantly more attractive.
Tho I love the new car from the B pillar back (and the IRS), I am still struggling with the front third. Hoping the GT250/500 BOSS cars have a revised look like they did in 07'
Last edited:
Yeah, I agree, but this car is a break from what they've traditionally done with Mustang. Starting with the 4.6L and then really with the 5.4L, those cars were meant to be sledgehammers, easy modifiable to make loads of power. It's hard to even find them stock, much like the Ford GT. The 5.8L was slightly less so, but that motor makes so much freakin power already that it hardly needed it. They've kind of beat that horse to death, so on to other adventures.
Ultimately, I'll still be interested to see what people do with it, but I think if your goal is big power/drag racing/roll racing you'd honestly be much better served starting with a base model car (which I know may be unsatisfactory to some because the range toppers always look better). I agree there is some funkiness to the base car overall appearance in places, but I think it's a really good starting point cosmetically.
Ultimately, I'll still be interested to see what people do with it, but I think if your goal is big power/drag racing/roll racing you'd honestly be much better served starting with a base model car (which I know may be unsatisfactory to some because the range toppers always look better). I agree there is some funkiness to the base car overall appearance in places, but I think it's a really good starting point cosmetically.
twobjshelbys
GT Owner
The 2013 and 2014 GT500s were already 625HP (I recall that being what was stated but we all know that Ford tended to be conservative). I know in the early days people spent lots of money on Whipples etc, but I didn't hear much about people doing power mods to the 13-14 cars they were plenty stout as they were.
The 5.0 has some breathing room but I wouldn't want to go too far without going to better internals.
If you saw the Ford display at SEMA almost one whole end of the area was dedicated to the modded Mustangs. Then they had the whole Ford Racing display for suspension mods. It's obvious that even the 2015 has lots of room for people to spend their money. I still don't understand why the don't ship the car with the short throw shifter though.
Last edited:
2112
Blue/white 06'
Agreed, and even more so regarding the suspension.
When the 05's came out, I loved the styling. When the GT500's arrived, I almost disliked the 05' in comparison. That became far less of a divide as the refreshed cars came out, but I still am expecting the upmarket car to be all that and more.
I said B pillar above, I meant to say A pillar. Refinement of the nose hood is what I am hoping for in the 350/BOSS.
13-14 was 662 hp officially. The day I picked mine up I took it straight to Livernois Motorsports and it pulled 601 rwhp. Later the same day I took it over to Ford Motor Company's dyno and it made 613 rwhp. Had about 100 miles on it. The cars would pick up quite a bit of horsepower with the usual mods.
That's a fair expectation. As usual, everyone will say "the base car should look like THAT!" :lol
2112
Blue/white 06'
I think leaving lots of room for the aftermarket is a super wise marketing move. Cost of entry lower and tons of press as each upgrade comes out.