Ford Mustang GT350R

[NASTY99Z28]

Originally Posted by ilirg

You are just being a Ford Fanboy, that's where your predictions are coming from. Everyone else here are enthusiasts that appreciate both sides and having a grown up conversation.

A fan boy? That's hilarious!!! You do realize I've never owned a Ford and I've had a camaro or trans am at all times for 15yrs now. As soon as I can I will buy a 5th gen for a daily driver because it's on of my favorite cars out. Nothing I have said has been immature so I'm not sure what you mean by "grown up" conversation. Seems to me that just because I'm stating facts from past cars and making my predictions based on them that you and a few others are bothered by it.

[ilirg]

Doesn't bother me, you just come off awfully one sided. Your "predictions" come off more as fact. Going off what manufacturers did in the past is dumb, mustangs have irs now, dodges have nice interiors, stakes have been raised and I don't see GM succumbing to second best with out a fight. Will they make a straight line beast that can outrun the hellcat or gt500, probably not, but they might make the best all around performing car and continue to out sell the competition which is their ultimate goal. With that said, the gt350 is a nice kick in the butt for GM.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

Even though his numbers are incorrect, he is correct. Torque ratings for a transmission can't be interpreted the same as the peak torque of an engine. The torque rating of a transmission is the failure force given resistance. The pound rating is the resistance to movement against which the force (torque) is applied. 400 ft-lbs applied against 4000 lbs of resistance will result in a different outcome than 400 ft-lbs applied against 10000 lbs.


Remember, gearing is a torque multiplier. So you can get a similar experience from a motor that develops less peak torque at higher RPMs via gearing (transmission and differential).

You are right. Looking at the spec sheet(s) they list maximum input torque based on a specific first gear and weight. So Speed is right that with a lower weight or first gear, engine torque can be higher. ATS-V makes 445 lb-ft with this same trans and a estimated 3,700 lbs curb weight. Joe is right in that this isn't a piece doesn't will allow room for tuners to play. IMO anyway

On a track, this car should shoot out of a turn like a lighting bolt. Low weight, high HP at speed in the right rpm band. Torque won't be the factor. It just won't be fast on the street.

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

You are right. Looking at the spec sheet(s) they list maximum input torque based on a specific first gear and weight. So Speed is right that with a lower weight or first gear, engine torque can be higher. ATS-V makes 445 lb-ft with this same trans and a estimated 3,700 lbs curb weight. Joe is right in that this isn't a piece doesn't will allow room for tuners to play. IMO anyway

On a track, this car should shoot out of a turn like a lighting bolt. Low weight, high HP at speed in the right rpm band. Torque won't be the factor. It just won't be fast on the street.

Yeah this transmission, even with a lighter car, doesn't give a ton of wiggle room. Ford did say they had to modify it significantly, so we'll just have to wait until Ford announces exactly what they did to it.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

My point was that the 5.2 probably won't make much more than 400 lb ft of torque. Nothing more nothing less.

Edit: Maybe not. The ATS-V also has the TR3160 so clearly there are variants with much greater torque capacity.


You can compare them but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Dual over head cam allows more horsepower from smaller displacement due to the greater flow through two valves instead of one.

I was about to bring up this very point. Hameedi himself commented that the 3160 has been "modified fairly significantly to cope with the demands of the flat plane crank engine."

As of now, we can only speculate on what those demands are, but they know full well what tq output is and have apparently worked with Tremec to build a complimentary transmission. I for one see no reason why they would be stuck with one of the "off the shelf" versions of the 3160.

But, some will be determined as hell to find fault with that they don't want to like.

[gen6waiter]

350R looks the part but dang, the ricer wing kills the look for me.

[crysalis_01]

It would be R.I.C.E. if it were purely cosmetic. The very fact that it's on a car to provide functional downforce in a track setting would mean it's the opposite of rice. I do disdain the use of words where they do not correctly apply.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by gen6waiter

350R looks the part but dang, the ricer wing kills the look for me.

Yea , the wing kills it for me too! But I do understand that for it to be a performer like ford wants it too, that is needed!

[keith.wilkinson.10]

Originally Posted by Q'smuscle

Ugly! The GT350 is the only 15 mustang that I would get !

Ya the GT and the Fusion look too much alike.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by keith.wilkinson.10

Ya the GT and the Fusion look too much alike.

Yup ! Along with all the other cars and vans in Ford's lineup! I do like the look on the Fusion but not on a mustang!

[87GNX]

The one feature I like about the 15 mustang is the rear, the rest of it doesnt get me excited. Hopefully the 2016 camaro looks the part or the 2014 GT500 is going to be my next car, problem is finding one cheap!

[woodside783]

Originally Posted by Q'smuscle

I have a feeling that this thread is going to go as long as the Hellcat challenger thread! Lol...

I bet it will to

Wonder what bugs will show up in the engine the first year. Love the car, and that it is n/a. I just don't know if chevy will make another n/a 500+ engine. Time will tell with both cars

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

I was about to bring up this very point. Hameedi himself commented that the 3160 has been "modified fairly significantly to cope with the demands of the flat plane crank engine."

As of now, we can only speculate on what those demands are, but they know full well what tq output is and have apparently worked with Tremec to build a complimentary transmission. I for one see no reason why they would be stuck with one of the "off the shelf" versions of the 3160.

Exactly.

Also, for all the custom things going into this car (5.2L FPC, carbon fiber wheels, etc) I do not think they would allow themselves to be limited by some "off the shelf" low tq. trans.

[NASTY99Z28]

Originally Posted by ilirg

Doesn't bother me, you just come off awfully one sided. Your "predictions" come off more as fact. Going off what manufacturers did in the past is dumb, mustangs have irs now, dodges have nice interiors, stakes have been raised and I don't see GM succumbing to second best with out a fight. Will they make a straight line beast that can outrun the hellcat or gt500, probably not, but they might make the best all around performing car and continue to out sell the competition which is their ultimate goal. With that said, the gt350 is a nice kick in the butt for GM.

If it comes off one sided that because it is but not because I'm a fan boy but because gm has been busy building an all around car and not a straight line killer. And you are correct dodge and Ford have stepped up big time but it seems like they are willing to always go a little further then gm. With the mustang now haveing mag ride AND irs the best all around crown may be much harder for gm to hold onto. Ford has had the power and weight advantage but lacked in suspension and ride (irs&mag ride). Now that they have the same goodies with less weight a high revving one off engine and will cost less that's a HUGE WIN for Ford. Like I said before I'm a gm guy at heart and always will be but I enjoy all cars even Honda's so I'm not even close to being a fan boy I just call it how I see it. Or as some would say how my tarot cards read.