2015 Mustang
- Thread starter Mykl
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
Owned. Ford only owns 10% of them now, having sold off the majority of their stake in 2007.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
Owned. Ford only owns 10% of them now, having sold off the majority of their stake in 2007.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
That's reliably with the stock, alloy block, and STOCK internals/rotating assembly??
IF so, that is purdy darned great!!
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
That's reliably with the stock, alloy block, and STOCK internals/rotating assembly??
IF so, that is purdy darned great!!
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
Owned, as in past tense. The got rid of them in 07.
Now Aston Martin is getting cozy with AMG.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
if I remember correctly a former Aston Martin designer is working at Ford now.
Considering Ford owns a good chunk of Aston Martin, that wouldn't be surprising.
Owned, as in past tense. The got rid of them in 07.
Now Aston Martin is getting cozy with AMG.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
Last edited:
I really like the 2015 Mustang styling. I agree that it was time for it to evolve into something beyond the retro look of the past ten years or so. Yet, with just one look you know right away that it's a Mustang - the heritage cues come through strong. I also like the idea of it becoming a "world car" and not just something for North America. Ford seems to think it will sell in other markets and I don't see why it wouldn't. I think that's the reason for it being a little smaller and lighter, and that's not a bad thing.
I can't wait to test drive one. Hopefully by next summer they'll be available.
I came across a few Ford videos at Motor Authority.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1088908_2015-ford-mustang-official-details-photos-and-video
I can't wait to test drive one. Hopefully by next summer they'll be available.
I came across a few Ford videos at Motor Authority.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1088908_2015-ford-mustang-official-details-photos-and-video
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
That sure is a good looking Fusion Coupe...
See, EVERYONE seems to be jumping onto that critique bandwagon, but I for one LIKE the look of the Fusion, as it was the first Blue Oval with that A-M looking front clip treatment.
This pony takes it even further, and makes it even BETTER looking! ;!
That sure is a good looking Fusion Coupe...
See, EVERYONE seems to be jumping onto that critique bandwagon, but I for one LIKE the look of the Fusion, as it was the first Blue Oval with that A-M looking front clip treatment.
This pony takes it even further, and makes it even BETTER looking! ;!
I think the '15 Mustang is going to have more road presence than the 05-14 Mustangs. The rear haunches are going to give it a killer stance out in the real world, IMO.
I'm glad they got rid of the c-pillar portholes, glad they went to a true fastback look, I personally like the Fusion on steroids front end treatment.
This car will make the "Fusion coupe" crowd eat their words.
The 5.0 is getting new heads (supposedly cast with Boss 302-esque port profiles), larger valves, higher lift cams, improved cam phasers that supposedly work better at high rpm, and a new intake. I'll take one.
I'm glad they got rid of the c-pillar portholes, glad they went to a true fastback look, I personally like the Fusion on steroids front end treatment.
This car will make the "Fusion coupe" crowd eat their words.
The 5.0 is getting new heads (supposedly cast with Boss 302-esque port profiles), larger valves, higher lift cams, improved cam phasers that supposedly work better at high rpm, and a new intake. I'll take one.
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
That's reliably with the stock, alloy block, and STOCK internals/rotating assembly??
IF so, that is purdy darned great!!
Just depends on how you define "reliable".
With all the huffing and wheezing we heard from our 3 different egoboosted platforms in our family I would not want one in my new Stang.
Make mine a V8, please, and no 180 degree flat crank for me either...
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
That's reliably with the stock, alloy block, and STOCK internals/rotating assembly??
IF so, that is purdy darned great!!
Just depends on how you define "reliable".
With all the huffing and wheezing we heard from our 3 different egoboosted platforms in our family I would not want one in my new Stang.
Make mine a V8, please, and no 180 degree flat crank for me either...
Originally Posted By: Zako2
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
He could have had a V8...
but then he might be behind that El Camino
stock block, stock crank, factory iron head. Different 2.3 than the MZR of course.
Some of the 'Speed 6 guys are pretty close to 400 in street trim. I do not know how they keep the rear diff in the car at all with those kind of hp/torque numbers.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
He could have had a V8...
but then he might be behind that El Camino
stock block, stock crank, factory iron head. Different 2.3 than the MZR of course.
Some of the 'Speed 6 guys are pretty close to 400 in street trim. I do not know how they keep the rear diff in the car at all with those kind of hp/torque numbers.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Zako2
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
He could have had a V8...
but then he might be behind that El Camino
stock block, stock crank, factory iron head. Different 2.3 than the MZR of course.
Some of the 'Speed 6 guys are pretty close to 400 in street trim. I do not know how they keep the rear diff in the car at all with those kind of hp/torque numbers.
The car in question was probably rocking an 8.8. Most of the guys I know are pushing 500+ out of their 302's in the Foxes. But the V8 cars came with the 8.8 standard after 1986.
Originally Posted By: Zako2
Originally Posted By: Cujet
This 2.3 may be based on the engine in the Mazdaspeed 3, from some rumors floating around. If so, there are guys making 600+ HP out of those things. Plenty of "headroom".
Regardless, the engines tuned to 600HP, if they exist, do not qualify as "easily modded" stock engines. You're going to sink so much money and time into it and then realize "I could have had a V8.."
He could have had a V8...
but then he might be behind that El Camino
stock block, stock crank, factory iron head. Different 2.3 than the MZR of course.
Some of the 'Speed 6 guys are pretty close to 400 in street trim. I do not know how they keep the rear diff in the car at all with those kind of hp/torque numbers.
The car in question was probably rocking an 8.8. Most of the guys I know are pushing 500+ out of their 302's in the Foxes. But the V8 cars came with the 8.8 standard after 1986.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The 'Speed6 is AWD. The OE rear diff brace and mounts are woefully inadequate.
I really don't know if the Ecoboost 2.3 will be Mazda MZR based. But it makes sense that it would be.
I was talking about the Fox in the video
The 'Speed6 is AWD. The OE rear diff brace and mounts are woefully inadequate.
I really don't know if the Ecoboost 2.3 will be Mazda MZR based. But it makes sense that it would be.
I was talking about the Fox in the video
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
I love the look,but PLEASE no 4-bangers! The world doesn't need another nauseating "Mustang II". Keep the Mustang as a true American muscle car.
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I love the look,but PLEASE no 4-bangers! The world doesn't need another nauseating "Mustang II". Keep the Mustang as a true American muscle car.
I see where you are going with that...back to '74 when the mighty Mach 1 sported a German V6. No V8 available.
But in 1980, if you wanted a new fast new Mustang, you got the Turbo 4. The lone V8 was a 4.2l 255. It only came with an automatic. It was pathetic. I think the 200 inline 6 was actually quicker and faster than the 255 V8
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
It's hard to sell SVOs when you can buy an LX 5.0 for thousands less.
Sure, it had turbo lag....every turbo car at that time did to a certain degree. But it was a solid performer. (I always thought my Dodge Daytona spooled up faster than any turbo Ford...neither spool up as fast as my PT Cruiser and the PT an old design) Turbo lag did hurt the SVO somewhat vs a Camaro L69 305 but it made up for that in balance vs the cast iron block F-body.
I love the look,but PLEASE no 4-bangers! The world doesn't need another nauseating "Mustang II". Keep the Mustang as a true American muscle car.
I see where you are going with that...back to '74 when the mighty Mach 1 sported a German V6. No V8 available.
But in 1980, if you wanted a new fast new Mustang, you got the Turbo 4. The lone V8 was a 4.2l 255. It only came with an automatic. It was pathetic. I think the 200 inline 6 was actually quicker and faster than the 255 V8
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
It's hard to sell SVOs when you can buy an LX 5.0 for thousands less.
Sure, it had turbo lag....every turbo car at that time did to a certain degree. But it was a solid performer. (I always thought my Dodge Daytona spooled up faster than any turbo Ford...neither spool up as fast as my PT Cruiser and the PT an old design) Turbo lag did hurt the SVO somewhat vs a Camaro L69 305 but it made up for that in balance vs the cast iron block F-body.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I love the look,but PLEASE no 4-bangers! The world doesn't need another nauseating "Mustang II". Keep the Mustang as a true American muscle car.
I see where you are going with that...back to '74 when the mighty Mach 1 sported a German V6. No V8 available.
But in 1980, if you wanted a new fast new Mustang, you got the Turbo 4. The lone V8 was a 4.2l 255. It only came with an automatic. It was pathetic. I think the 200 inline 6 was actually quicker and faster than the 255 V8
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
It's hard to sell SVOs when you can buy an LX 5.0 for thousands less.
Sure, it had turbo lag....every turbo car at that time did to a certain degree. But it was a solid performer. (I always thought my Dodge Daytona spooled up faster than any turbo Ford...neither spool up as fast as my PT Cruiser and the PT an old design) Turbo lag did hurt the SVO somewhat vs a Camaro L69 305 but it made up for that in balance vs the cast iron block F-body.
Those SVO`s were super cool looking cars! I wonder how that turbo 4 held up to abuse compared to the V8`s? Ford had some killer looking turbo 4`s during that time,the SVO,turbo Thunderbird,and the turbo Taurus SHO (didn`t these also all have manual trannies?). Did they all share the same engine?
But yeah,my sister had a 77 Mustang II,and it was an embarassing pos!! Worst car our family ever owned.
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I love the look,but PLEASE no 4-bangers! The world doesn't need another nauseating "Mustang II". Keep the Mustang as a true American muscle car.
I see where you are going with that...back to '74 when the mighty Mach 1 sported a German V6. No V8 available.
But in 1980, if you wanted a new fast new Mustang, you got the Turbo 4. The lone V8 was a 4.2l 255. It only came with an automatic. It was pathetic. I think the 200 inline 6 was actually quicker and faster than the 255 V8
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
It's hard to sell SVOs when you can buy an LX 5.0 for thousands less.
Sure, it had turbo lag....every turbo car at that time did to a certain degree. But it was a solid performer. (I always thought my Dodge Daytona spooled up faster than any turbo Ford...neither spool up as fast as my PT Cruiser and the PT an old design) Turbo lag did hurt the SVO somewhat vs a Camaro L69 305 but it made up for that in balance vs the cast iron block F-body.
Those SVO`s were super cool looking cars! I wonder how that turbo 4 held up to abuse compared to the V8`s? Ford had some killer looking turbo 4`s during that time,the SVO,turbo Thunderbird,and the turbo Taurus SHO (didn`t these also all have manual trannies?). Did they all share the same engine?
But yeah,my sister had a 77 Mustang II,and it was an embarassing pos!! Worst car our family ever owned.
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
I will add to the above; less mass, and a Cossie 16V head with more boost.
Then there is the SVO.
The only things that would have made the SVO better is a more competitive price tag and the Merkur XR4Ti's Independent Rear Suspension.
I will add to the above; less mass, and a Cossie 16V head with more boost.
- Status
