Mustang SVO to return!!!?

ausrutherford · 07-03-2008, 11:31 AM

For the 2010 model year, according to a source, the Mustang will have an SVO offering. The model should be powered by a...wait for it...2.5 I4 Ecoboost MAKING 300 HP!!!! AND it will also lose 500 POUNDS over the 4.6 V8 that we have to today. Holy Crap we have a winner!

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/03/r...ecoboost-four/

GMfan1111 · 07-03-2008, 11:48 AM

Normally I'd question fords thinking on putting a 4 cylinder into the stang but in this case if it helps it drop 500 pounds and still give 300 horsepower then I'll be more than willing to drive one

blank disk · 07-03-2008, 11:48 AM

That sounds great. A lightweight, efficient and nimble little stang that also shreds it rear tires. Perfecto

blank disk · 07-03-2008, 11:49 AM

The mores stang variations the better.

big swede · 07-03-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ausrutherford

For the 2010 model year, according to a source, the Mustang will have an SVO offering. The model should be powered by a...wait for it...2.5 I4 Ecoboost MAKING 300 HP!!!! AND it will also lose 500 POUNDS over the 4.6 V8 that we have to today. Holy Crap we have a winner!

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/03/r...ecoboost-four/

It says it could lose 500lbs which won't happen. The 4.6 that is currently in the Stang has an aluminum block and heads so by switching to a 4 cylinder turbo with the associated plumbing, turbo, intercooler, etc... you won't drop 500lbs. Now if Ford makes an effort to shed weight in other places it could happen but I doubt it. Look at the 4 cylinder G6 which should actually be lighter since it's FWD (3500lbs) or the upcoming RWD T4 Genesis which is about the same.

I would be shocked if the Mustang lost more than 300lbs. If they could actually get it to 3000lbs with 300hp I would seriously consider one but I won't have to worry about that.

mooseman · 07-03-2008, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big swede

It says it could lose 500lbs which won't happen. The 4.6 that is currently in the Stang has an aluminum block and heads so by switching to a 4 cylinder turbo with the associated plumbing, turbo, intercooler, etc... you won't drop 500lbs. Now if Ford makes an effort to shed weight in other places it could happen but I doubt it. Look at the 4 cylinder G6 which should actually be lighter since it's FWD (3500lbs) or the upcoming RWD T4 Genesis which is about the same.

I would be shocked if the Mustang lost more than 300lbs. If they could actually get it to 3000lbs with 300hp I would seriously consider one but I won't have to worry about that.

I believe the V6 'stang with the iron block 4.0L SOHC truck motor comes in at 3300lbs for the manual tranny version. I coudln't imagine with some aluminum or high strength steel bits on the hood, trunk, and maybe fenders along with the smaller motor, attention to wheel/tire weight that it couldn't get well under 3100lbs.

big swede · 07-03-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mooseman

I believe the V6 'stang with the iron block 4.0L SOHC truck motor comes in at 3300lbs for the manual tranny version. I coudln't imagine with some aluminum or high strength steel bits on the hood, trunk, and maybe fenders along with the smaller motor, attention to wheel/tire weight that it couldn't get well under 3100lbs.

Anythings possible but possible and probable are two different things. Besides I doubt the iron block V6 is 300lbs lighter than a GT and the GT is right at 3600lbs with a tank of gas. I could see the turbo 4 coming in at 3300lbs though.

wescoent · 07-03-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big swede

Anythings possible but possible and probable are two different things. Besides I doubt the iron block V6 is 300lbs lighter than a GT and the GT is right at 3600lbs with a tank of gas. I could see the turbo 4 coming in at 3300lbs though.

Mustang GT: 3450

Mustang V6: 3300

Those are the factory weights for manual transmission Mustang coupes. Add 50 lbs for an automatic.

Ach · 07-03-2008, 02:17 PM

Even at 3200-3300 lbs. this will be a boon to steering, handling and economy. I actually find this a lot more interesting than a Mustang equipped with a giant Boss V8.

Michael_S · 07-03-2008, 03:17 PM

Nice, but it's just a rumor so far.

Quote:

Originally Posted by big swede

It says it could lose 500lbs which won't happen. The 4.6 that is currently in the Stang has an aluminum block and heads so by switching to a 4 cylinder turbo with the associated plumbing, turbo, intercooler, etc... you won't drop 500lbs. Now if Ford makes an effort to shed weight in other places it could happen but I doubt it. Look at the 4 cylinder G6 which should actually be lighter since it's FWD (3500lbs) or the upcoming RWD T4 Genesis which is about the same.

I would be shocked if the Mustang lost more than 300lbs. If they could actually get it to 3000lbs with 300hp I would seriously consider one but I won't have to worry about that.

The article says "by dropping the massive 4.6L V8 and using higher strength steel."

Higher Rhymes · 07-03-2008, 04:06 PM

This is probably a very real possibility because of the other 4 cyl. coupes that are either out or coming out..
GM has a few, Hyundai has one, Nissan has two on the market right now, etc. etc.

Also.. hasn't America caught on with using aluminum yet?

Michael_S · 07-03-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Higher Rhymes

Also.. hasn't America caught on with using aluminum yet?

I believe Aluminum is a lot more expensive than steel. That's why luxury cars use more of it than lower end models.

Higher Rhymes · 07-03-2008, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael_S

I believe Aluminum is a lot more expensive than steel. That's why luxury cars use more of it than lower end models.

Thanks, ya learn something new every day.
That's interesting though..

Fusion2.3H · 07-04-2008, 01:57 PM

http://www.ussautomotive.com/auto/steelvsal/hood.htm

Above is a quick pricing analysis comparison between aluminum and steel. I changed the prices to reflect current pricing $1.43/lb for Aluminum and and $0.56 for 10-20 Steel, non-SAE grade.

Aluminum cost : $42.32
Steel cost: $32.43
Volume: 1,440,000
Tot. Price Aluminum: $60,940,800
Tot. Price Steel: $46,699,200
Added Cost: $14,241,600
Weight Saving: 49%

Higher Rhymes · 07-04-2008, 07:52 PM

Now even though ~20,000,000 is a boat load of money to some, the benefits outweigh the pennies spent.

1) Aluminum cannot "rust".. it can erode/corrode, but cannot "rust" [in the oxidized sense] because of it's structural make-up
2) Aluminum (when protected by aluminum oxide) can last lifetimes longer than steel against the forces of nature (we've all seen cars from the 70s and 80s that look 50 yeas old)
3) MASSIVE weight savings
4) Aluminum is more malleable than steel, allowing for those crazy looking concepts to actually look like the production versions

damn.. BMW knows how to play the game.

07-03-2008, 11:31 AM	#1 (permalink)
ausrutherford Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: South Carolina Drives: 2007 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited 2007 Jeep Commander Posts: 5,509	Mustang SVO to return!!!? For the 2010 model year, according to a source, the Mustang will have an SVO offering. The model should be powered by a...wait for it...2.5 I4 Ecoboost MAKING 300 HP!!!! AND it will also lose 500 POUNDS over the 4.6 V8 that we have to today. Holy Crap we have a winner! http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/03/r...ecoboost-four/

07-03-2008, 11:48 AM	#2 (permalink)
GMfan1111 6.0 Liter L76 V8 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: in a undisclosed bunker somewhere in the metro detroit area Drives: 2001 Chevy Malibu LS Posts: 2,262	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? Normally I'd question fords thinking on putting a 4 cylinder into the stang but in this case if it helps it drop 500 pounds and still give 300 horsepower then I'll be more than willing to drive one __________________ “The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair” "A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools". - Douglas Adams - Current ride: 2001 Chevy Malibu LS (happy 99,000 miles )

07-03-2008, 11:48 AM	#3 (permalink)
blank disk 5.3 Liter Vortec V8 Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,274	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? That sounds great. A lightweight, efficient and nimble little stang that also shreds it rear tires. Perfecto __________________ "The Lincoln MKS has an exceptional exterior. Not good but exceptional." -Gm786

07-03-2008, 11:49 AM	#4 (permalink)
blank disk 5.3 Liter Vortec V8 Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,274	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? The mores stang variations the better. __________________ "The Lincoln MKS has an exceptional exterior. Not good but exceptional." -Gm786

07-03-2008, 02:17 PM	#9 (permalink)
Ach 4.6 Liter Northstar V8 Join Date: Mar 2006 Drives: Ford SVT Contour BMW 635CSi Posts: 1,641	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? Even at 3200-3300 lbs. this will be a boon to steering, handling and economy. I actually find this a lot more interesting than a Mustang equipped with a giant Boss V8. __________________ The Fleet: 2007 Lincoln MKZ 2000 Ford SVT Contour 1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee 1985 BMW 635CSi The Past: 1997 Lincoln Mark VIII LSC 1995 BMW 530i 1998 Olds Aurora 1994 Infiniti Q45t 1988 Cadillac Sedan DeVille 1989 Acura Legend Coupe L 1989 Olds Eighty Eight Royale

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
GM Inside News Forum Advertisement

07-03-2008, 04:06 PM	#11 (permalink)
Higher Rhymes 2.4 Liter SIDI ECOTEC Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 182	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? This is probably a very real possibility because of the other 4 cyl. coupes that are either out or coming out.. GM has a few, Hyundai has one, Nissan has two on the market right now, etc. etc. Also.. hasn't America caught on with using aluminum yet?

07-04-2008, 01:57 PM	#14 (permalink)
Fusion2.3H 1.4 Liter Turbocharged ECOTEC Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 72	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? http://www.ussautomotive.com/auto/steelvsal/hood.htm Above is a quick pricing analysis comparison between aluminum and steel. I changed the prices to reflect current pricing $1.43/lb for Aluminum and and $0.56 for 10-20 Steel, non-SAE grade. Aluminum cost : $42.32 Steel cost: $32.43 Volume: 1,440,000 Tot. Price Aluminum: $60,940,800 Tot. Price Steel: $46,699,200 Added Cost: $14,241,600 Weight Saving: 49% Last edited by Fusion2.3H : 07-04-2008 at 02:00 PM.

07-04-2008, 07:52 PM	#15 (permalink)
Higher Rhymes 2.4 Liter SIDI ECOTEC Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 182	Re: Mustang SVO to return!!!? Now even though ~20,000,000 is a boat load of money to some, the benefits outweigh the pennies spent. 1) Aluminum cannot "rust".. it can erode/corrode, but cannot "rust" [in the oxidized sense] because of it's structural make-up 2) Aluminum (when protected by aluminum oxide) can last lifetimes longer than steel against the forces of nature (we've all seen cars from the 70s and 80s that look 50 yeas old) 3) MASSIVE weight savings 4) Aluminum is more malleable than steel, allowing for those crazy looking concepts to actually look like the production versions damn.. BMW knows how to play the game.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode