By on June 3, 2015

Shelby GT350 Mustang 5.2L V8 TTAC Style

Future Shelby GT350 and GT350R Mustang owners will have plenty of firepower for the strip and track, thanks to Ford’s new 5.2-liter naturally aspirated V8.

The new flat-plane crankshaft engine generates 526 horsepower and 429 lb-ft of torque, delivering 102 horses per liter of displacement. Redlining occurs at 8,250 rpm, making the V8 the highest-revving unit used by any of Ford’s lineup, while 90 percent of its peak torque occurs between 3,450 rpm and 7,000 rpm.

The power generated by the 5.2-liter will be funnelled to the back via a Tremec TR-3160 six-speed manual, the only transmission available aboard the Shelby GT350 and GT350R. The six-speed uses a die-cast aluminum case and clutch housing for increased stiffness, and the dual-mass flywheel and dual-clutch disc were both optimized to reduce inertia and weight.

The engine itself is based on an aluminum engine block whose cylinder walls use Ford’s patented plasma transferred wire arc cylinder-liner technology, replacing iron cylinder liners with an electroplate coating. Further weight savings include a gun-drilled flat-plane forged-steel crankshaft, and a high-capacity composite oil pan whose baffling can handle sustained high-speed cornering and hard braking situations.

[Photo credit: Ford]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

58 Comments on “Ford Drops 526 HP, 5.2L V8 Into Shelby GT350, GT350R Mustangs...”


  • avatar
    ajla

    Wow, a Ford engine without a turbo. And it is a V8!

  • avatar
    jmo

    It’s like a V-8 S2000.

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    The perfect engine swap for the ND Miata :p

    • 0 avatar
      DearS

      Also: E90, E39, E46, Z8, and F30 BMWs
      Most any Jaguar, R8 V8, Most Mercedes, most GM cars, Most Ferrari etc…
      Basically 90% of RWD cars, perhaps!

  • avatar
    EvilEdHarris

    No doubt that this will be a fun engine to drive and play with. I am very curious as to what the maintenance schedule will be like given the vibration potential of a large displacement flat plane crank V8 engine.

    Overall I guess it doesn’t matter, because with limited production numbers; the majority of buyers will be collectors who won’t “drive” them anyway.

    The other major benefit of the GT350 besides the go fast parts is the redesign of the front end. In my not so humble opinion, the current mustang looks way to “weak” and has lots its muscle car presence from the front. The car looks great from every other angle. Happily the GT350 front end does not suffer from that issue.

  • avatar
    bball40dtw

    Starts at $47K…much want.

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    They need to put this in the new Continental, Navigator, MKT and MKS as soon as possible. If they would place in the COntinental I would start saving my pennies right now. This is the engine Lincoln needs. This was a 9-10 speed auto.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      This would be a horrible engine for anything other than a performance car. It’s peaky (doesn’t really make much power before 4000 rpm), loud, will vibrate a lot, and will probably be demanding on maintenance.

      Ford already has an engine that makes a lot more sense for large luxury cars and trucks — the 3.5 EcoBoost. There’s a new generation of that engine coming for 2017 with considerably more power. If you have to have a V8, the 5.0 Coyote would be a much better choice, although it lacks the low-end grunt of the 3.5.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        The next EcoBoost V6 might walk this thing. They are going to have a 600+ HP version. If the put a 550 HP/550 lb.ft version in a Mustang it would probably be faster than the GT350. It wouldn’t make such a glorious noise or rev to 8500 RPM though.

        The real soultion is ecoboost this beast. Then we all win.

      • 0 avatar
        redliner

        Agreed, horrible engine for anything other than playthings. A light-pressure twin turbo coyote V8 tuned for torque with about 500hp would be perfect for the new Continental.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Nah, this V8 wouldn’t be much good in a nonperformance application.

      The EB V6 will be fine for the Continental. Right now the GM turbo-6 feels stronger but I’d expect that to change when Ford does some engine updates.

      The Ford 6.2L is a lot of fun to romp on and would be awesome in a revived Galaxie or something to compete with the Charger but there is a 0% chance of that happening.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Even if they did revive a RWD sedan, it wouldn’t have the 6.2L. It would also most likely be a Lincoln.

        Like you said 0%

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Why the 6.2L? The new 3.5 will be better in every measure. At least the 5.0 has one advantage: a strong top end.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Well I obviously haven’t driven the new 3.5 EB.

          Currently, I find flooring it in the 6.2 to be more enjoyable than doing it in the EB-V6. The 6.2 goes insane from 3300 to 4700. A very good engine in the middle rev range. Plus it sounds great in an HD truck, I imagine it would be incredible with some effort put into the exhaust.

          On the other hand, the turbo V6 is done by 3500. It is fast, and works for a luxury car, but it isnt a lot of fun for me.

          I don’t have enough experience with the 5.0 to give an opinion on it.

  • avatar
    Steve_S

    OR its the next closest thing to an e9x M3. Just with more power and torque for less money.

  • avatar
    MeJ

    Ok, I’m going to show my lack of understanding here. I know quite a bit about engines (helped my brother rip apart and rebuild an old 350 from a 77 Camaro) but I don’t understand what a Flat Plane Crank is. I’m studying the pictures here and all I see is a crankshaft. Is it the even counterweights that make it flat?
    Also, what are the advantages and disadvantages of such a crankshaft? I understand they’re used in racing.
    Thanks.

    • 0 avatar
      CarnotCycle

      Crossplanes have counterweights on the crank, and a specific imbalance which gives the V8 burble-sound.

      Flat-planes are just that – flat. They need balance shafts like a (typical) I4 to suppress vibrations, but with no weights on the crank a flatplane usually revs higher and is much ‘quicker’ spinning up and down the rev-range. The different firing order and harmonics also give them a unique sound. Ferraris have flat-plane V8’s.

      This Shelby 8 is, I think, the first American flat-plane crank V8 ever. B&B, correct me if I’m wrong on that please.

      • 0 avatar
        bumpy ii

        There were some flat-plane V8s back in the old days 100 years ago, but that layout was largely abandoned once the cross-plane was developed.

      • 0 avatar
        MeJ

        Thanks.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          A cross-plane, you can almost roll across a bench, while the flat-plane will just lay flat. Hench the need for counter-weights. Except most flat-plane engines go unbalanced, same as this one. Makes for a super lightweight V8.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        The flat plane crank in the photos has quite prominent and huge counterweights. What defines a cross plane is that while the outer crank pins are 180 degrees apart and the inner crank pins are 180 degrees apart, the inner pair are 90 degrees out of phase relative to the outer pair. Flat plane cranks alternate crank pins at 180 degree intervals, so they all lie in the same plane.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        It is the firing order that a dual plane crank requires that gives the traditional v8 burble. The crank design cause a pair of cylinders to fire in succession on each bank and a corresponding gap on the other bank. For example the old school small block Chevy’s firing order is 18436572 and even cylinders are on one back and odd cylinders are on the other. So for the odd bank the pulses are Bang, x, x, bang, x, bang, bang.

        It has nothing to do with the balance of the crank. Some dual plane v8 cranks are balanced as is while others are externally balanced where the flywheel/flex plate and/or harmonic balancer/crank pulley are imbalanced to create a balanced assembly.

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      If you look at a cross-plane V8 crank from the end, the offsets for the throws go up, down, left, and right. For a flat-plane V8 crank, the offsets only go left and right. The cross-plane runs smoother, but has more counterweights which slows it down. The flat-plane can rev higher, but doesn’t balance as well.

  • avatar
    kmoney

    The noise this things makes is awesome. There are some good running and driving videos of it on Youtube.

  • avatar
    carlisimo

    What does the “350” in the car’s name refer to?

    • 0 avatar
      gsf12man

      A reference to the original Shelby Mustang, also called GT350. (I think Shelby just liked the way it sounded).

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      “The 350 name didn’t have exotic or technical origins. It was arrived at when Shelby got exasperated by a tedious Ford name-the-car meeting. While staring through the window, he asked how far away the building was across the street. When it measured 350 feet, Shelby arbitrarily suggested the car be called the GT-350 — so it was.”

  • avatar
    Quentin

    I’d rather they have dropped 600lbs.

    That said, long live flat plane naturally aspirated V8s. Good on Ford for actually building a bespoke enthusiast-only engine. Turbo V6 engines are fine for sedan, trucks, and SUVs. This engine is no compromise. I’d take this every day of the week over anything Hellcat or LS/LT. Rev, baby, rev.

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      Ford’s 5.2 Voodoo is deep and heavy breather compared to the other two, because of the OHC/multi-valve head set-ups. Ford really took a gamble when it moved away from its’ little old small block, but constant updates have paid off. I can’t believe the specific power ratings of current engines – it’s incredible.

  • avatar
    runs_on_h8raide

    Oh, very nice! I’ll wait for the MMC so that all of the kinks are ironed out of this engine. Would love me some GT350R for apex shenanigans.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    They need to make a better platform for it

    Hold off with the pitchforks! GM has the Corvette. Ford needs to beat them to the punch with an MR car way way way below the GT with this engine.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Why would they want to throw cash down the toilet like that?

      • 0 avatar
        Pig_Iron

        @bball40dtw
        You mean like this?
        http://horsepowerkings.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/05-ford-gt-concept-detroit-1.jpg

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          That is not a Corvette competitor.

          The GT is a race car limited to 250 units a year. It will also sell for $400K+.

          Building a mass produced Corvette competitor is a completely different thing. In order to build a Corvette rival, Ford would need to push the product through more standard channels, build it at a Ford plant, and incur way more costs than they did with the GT.

          I also want to make it perfectly clear that I would love Ford to take on the Corvette and throw this engine in it.

          • 0 avatar
            anomaly149

            No market for it. The Corvette is the king of its castle, even if the Ford got half of those sales all you get is two questionably low volume cars instead of one mildly justifiable low volume car.

            I doubt there are new sales in the wings waiting, a new car would almost certainly just take Corvette sales.

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      Ford Shelby GR-1
      http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ford-shelby-gr1-04-1.jpg

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    This is the most exciting engine on the market, provided Ford is actually producing it in sufficient numbers. I heard a rumor the GT350 is just a bauble for friends of the Ford family. Has Ford figured out how to make an overhead cam V8 that’s smaller than a Merlin yet?

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Well the 2016 model exists only to be collectable. They are only making 100 GT350s and 37 GT350Rs. I’m sure plenty of Ford family friends and Ford execs will be in that group of 137.

      The 2017 model goes to demand based production, so they’ll pretty much build them to order.

      And no, all the Mod engines are GIGANTIC.

  • avatar
    Chan

    Cool engine and completely unexpected from Ford, BUT…

    What is up with those headers? It’s as if they wanted a specific sound out of it, and had 2 of the exhaust ports routed differently from the other 2 cylinders on the same bank.

    With equal-length headers, I wonder if this would sound suspiciously similar to a Ferrari V8.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      Seriously. Those unequal length headers are an own-goal.

      • 0 avatar
        wmba

        http://articles.sae.org/13709/

        • 0 avatar
          JimC2

          “Even the unequal-length headers we selected, to some extent, to help with catalyst light-off,”

          Well, if he says so. Not too often you hear anyone touting *unequal* length headers. I’m still skeptical but it sounds like Ford put a lot of thought into their design.

          • 0 avatar
            wmba

            There’s even more to it than that.

            Whatever that crankshaft is in the pictures above, it is not a normal flat plane V8 crank. If it were, then throws two and three would be side-by-side. These are 180 degrees apart. As are one and four.

            If you want to see a typical flat-plane V8 crank, here are some pictures, including a Ferrari F355 example:

            http://www.gt40s.com/forum/gt40-tech-engines-induction-exhaust/26188-flat-plane-crank-sbf-3.html

            Ford has made a single-plane crank that seems unique compared to everyone else’s past efforts. Might explain the heavy counterweights, and may well change the firing order and vibration behavior.

    • 0 avatar
      maxxcool7421

      Purely scavenging routing …

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scavenging_%28automotive%29

      sound I am sure plays in as well.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Pure scavenging routing on a flat-plane V8 would either require equal length runners into a merged 4 into 1 collector or equal length pairs for 1&5, 2&6, 3&7, and 4&8. This pairs the right cylinders with each other, but sacrifices scavenging between 1&5 and 2&6.

        • 0 avatar
          JimC2

          Yyyyeah, they sure did a weird thing with that manifold. I would love to know why they did that on such a high specific output engine. Equal length headers on inline-4 engines aren’t complicated or groundbreaking new science…

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes but this is not an inline 4 this is a 90 degree V8 so there are packaging issues. The way that things are routed on the driver’s side reeks of getting clearance for the steering shaft. No other reason to make the tube for #6 tuck back in against the block like that as well as the combined #5 & #7 do something similar.

        • 0 avatar
          LeadHead

          Check out the crankshaft more carefully. It’s not like a Ferrari crankshaft (inline 4-cylinder style) where the center two, and outer two journals are paired.

          Instead journals 1 and 3, and 2 and 4 are paired. I suspect they did this to try and improve balance.

          This means that the traditional flat-plane V8 or I4 style exhaust pairings will not work.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            I see what you’re getting at, but there is also no way that what they did will work any better. They should have gone with a 4-2-1 where all overall lengths are equal.

          • 0 avatar
            JimC2

            “They should have gone with a 4-2-1 where all overall lengths are equal.”

            That or 4-1 would fit more or less just as well, regardless of firing order or the way the crank journals are paired. Instead Ford went the way they did for reasons they thought were the right ones.

    • 0 avatar
      Chan

      Looking at the crankshaft picture, the firing order is going to be different from the Ferrari V8, which is basically 2 inline-4s sharing a crankshaft.

      This is more like four V-twins.

  • avatar
    STS_Endeavour

    I wish they’d drop it into more of their cars.

    Say, does Ford still make the Modular?

  • avatar
    Numbers_Matching

    last gasp of the ‘large’ displacement naturally aspirated V8s?


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ObviouslyCarGuru: Boy, a whole bunch of you poor babies heads are gonna explode when country hating politicians are...
  • stuki: Subpar infrastructure has always been a problem in third world countries.
  • SCE to AUX: “Anyone with a Tesla who cheers when the Blue Angels do a fly-by at a sports game should have to...
  • Hydromatic: Iraq proved the U.S. can knock around small armies with almost laughable ease, but chokes when faced with...
  • ToolGuy: OK, but when TVA was formed they put hands in a lot of pockets, and much more. Growing up, the dad next door...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States