An UNFAVORABLE review for the 2011 Mustang V6

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by Stew

Yeah, i think must be looking at the 80s through some funky rose colored 80s style sunglasses lol

must have been using a G-tech to measure 1/4 mile times...

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

must have been using a G-tech to measure 1/4 mile times...

lololol, this is true, or maybe their hindsite is slightly less than 20/20 and they have an "overly optimistic" memory

[The_Blur]

This is a terrible review that misses the point of owning a V6. The V6 Mustang is a huge improvement on the garbage Ford put out previously.

It is good to see so much respect in this thread. Keep it up, everyone.

[comiskeybum]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

This is a terrible review that misses the point of owning a V6. The V6 Mustang is a huge improvement on the garbage Ford put out previously.

It is good to see so much respect in this thread. Keep it up, everyone.

yeah its been 3 weeks since my accident. i miss my mustang but not the engine

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

yeah its been 3 weeks since my accident. i miss my mustang but not the engine

Well, it looks like Ford has solved that problem.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

The OHC design of the new Ford engines hasn't forced them to have peaky engines, they chose that because the lofty high RPM numbers sound good in an ad.

what's that mean?

[comiskeybum]

bottom line is that the v6 is a solid buy any day

[ULTRAZLS1]

LX notchbacks with zero options, 150 lb drivers, and in EXCELLENT conditions have hit 13.9 I believe. VERY VERY RARE from what I remember.

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

bottom line is that the v6 is a solid buy any day

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

LX notchbacks with zero options, 150 lb drivers, and in EXCELLENT conditions have hit 13.9 I believe. VERY VERY RARE from what I remember.

Yes I was trying to find the article. And extremely rare. They were stripper cars like the 4th gen 1LE, if that was the correct "code" cars. But they did get a 13.9 out of it.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Not necessarily. Example: Ford's 5.4L (OHC, 3-valve) engine makes less power than GM's 5.3L (OHV, 2-valve).

The 5.4L makes more low-torque, which shows that OHC and multi-valve doesn't necessarily have to be biased for high RPM power. A lot has to do with the intake, design of the heads, etc....The OHC design of the new Ford engines hasn't forced them to have peaky engines, they chose that because the lofty high RPM numbers sound good in an ad.

The 5.4 3v was designed back in like 98. It also uses an abnormally long, over square rod length, specifically for towing and low-end torque output. Notice it makes more torque than the 5.3 (390 ft lbs vs what 340?)... If I'm not mistaken, they both make 320hp... If it had a more square short block and a valvetrain that could rev, it would make some great power from all that torque, but truck engines aren't made for that. It's still more efficient...notice the 390 ft lb's it is capable of... If built for performance instead of truck use, it would be right around as powerful as the 5.0. All of the things i'm saying are just extensions in reasoning from the fact that the OHC design is more efficient than the OHV design. I think we have argued about this before. I'm not saying OHC is better, because there are benefits to having a lighter, higher displacement lower-tech engine and that's all it's about is power to weight, but OHC is more efficient, you can't argue it.

[assasinator]

when i dyno'd a 2005 5.4 3v i had in my stang it had 250rwhp at 4250rpm/340rwtq at 3650 rpm STOCK untouched, untuned. it makes more torque at the tires than most 5.3's make at the crank. the dyno was done on a dynojet in a chevrolet SCCA race car shop in smyrna tennessee. thats sae corrected UNTUNED. when i finished a few mods it made 277rwhp at 5100 and the same torque. not much really. but it was a near stock truck engine.

pullies, cmrc delete, modded intake manifold. nothing else. dyno shhet is gone, but im sure the shop will supply it. it made 325 rwtq at 2500. ran 8.5 at 82.5 mph untuned. pulled the motor before i dyno tuned it. bad gas mileage.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

it seems like this article completely crapped on every car that runs slower than 13.7's

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

it seems like this article completely crapped on every car that runs slower than 13.7's

True. And the 13.7 was mag times. These cars will be capable of mid 13's no problem with good drivers.

I think that is absolutely phenomenal for a v6. These things will put a spanking on an LT1 4th gen or a 2V GT. Thats just crazy. Heck, they wont exactly be an easy lazy shifting win against my car...to think I will have to be just a little nervous lining up against a v6 mustang LOL. Some bad drivers may get a very bad taste in their mouth if they face a skilled driver in a new mustang v6.

Maybe they are just v6 haters. Which is understandable in its own right I guess. But they should put things in perspective a little better.