I don’t see any reason not to offer a larger variety of performance Mustangs with varied engine options. Of course, they MUST keep a V8 in the lineup, period.

There is no reason to shackle the Mustang to an overly-rigid ‘formula’ of what a Mustang is supposed to be. The concept needs to evolve, and the idea of an option sheet that would potentially give the choice of the 3.5L V6, EcoBoost 4, EcoBoost 6, and V8 would widen the appeal of Ford’s MOST appealing car. Why would product variety /choice a bad thing?

nothing matches the power delivery, torque curve and smoothness of a v8, even if it makes less power

1/3 of first gen Mustangs came with wheezy inline 6s(170, 200, 250 cube) single barrel carb and cylinder heads with integral cast intakes. I don’t think anyone of those 6s produced more than 120 real horses.

85% of the V-8 cars came with two barrel, small block V-8s that produced less than 200 real world horses.

An efficient practical new ‘Stang would only going back to its original roots.

Nissan’s 3.5L NA puts out over 300.
Nissan’s 3.7L NA puts out 330HP.

And yes, I have to say it… the GT-R, anyone? Sure, it’s expensive as hell, but it’s also a 3.7L TT putting out shameful amounts of power compared to this.

IDK, maybe it’s a step in the right direction, all things in mind. But I don’t see how +40 HP and torque from TWIN turbos is anything to be proud of, when comparing the same displacement to the competition… especially since, almost 2 decades ago, twin turbos 80HP to the same engine.. by my math, a modern 3.5L tt should be capable of 380 HP. But what do I know, I’m only a hobbyist.

(smile) but maybe a twin turbo Ford will encourage forced induction from other manufacturers… (sees his new 370Z/G37 TwinTurbo around the corner).

Still…V6, next Mustang…where have I heard that before?

@ Landcrusher

I know turbo reliability has vastly improved over the last decade, but I still don’t trust Ford to build one that will outlast the warranty for very long.

That would be a good indication of the company’s right to survive. Dearborn should place a call to Göteborg and ask Volvo to pretty please with a cherry on top send over some of their powerplant engineers. They can’t afford to botch this.

Thanks for that. I was kind of thinking that would be what Ford was going to do, but I want to make this quite clear to Ford:

Ditch the 4 liter. Seriously, man. Good luck on the next Mustang. I probably couldn’t afford the EcoBoost in my wildest dreams, but 400 hp/415 lb. ft sounds really good.

Next gen SVO ahoy!

And that’s exactly what the Mustang is getting in early 2009. A 3.5 or 3.7 (it’s not confirmed what exactly, but it is a Hurricane).

The 3.5 EB in RWD configuration will be capable of closer to 400 hp/415 tq with the right transmission.

Maybe moving to more reasonable drivetrains will help modernize them, but that would involve making them lighter, more aerodynamic, and with smaller engines. And then they wouldn’t be nostalgia/patriotism-inducing anymore.

There’s a reason why the old muscle cars died out… it’s called “physics”.

The route Ford is going is vastly preferable to the news that GM is considering stuffing their little 260hp four cylinder turbo in the Camaro. News which has sent shockwaves throughout the GM community and Camaro faithful. That engine will be boosting and revving hard to move that beast if GM goes through with it.

As cool as turbo V6s are they tend to use just as much fuel as V8s when used as intended, for performance. As a former 3.8L turbo Grand National owner (hencE the screen name) I can tell you that the more you dip into the throttle and boost the more you need to prepare to dip into your wallet.