[unkillsam]

My problem is that I can't stand the argument that, because a brand doesn't do something, they can't. Sometimes that is the reality, but people pull that tired old yarn out more than is remotely justified, and this forum is no stranger to it. And I can't help but notice that while my argument that Ford not building a bigger Coyote is a choice bothers you, those arguing that it's due to some mysterious inability at Ford to add an inch to the deck height of an engine block don't. My point was simply that Ford doesn't build a bigger engine, or a pushrod engine, etc, etc, etc, for the same reason that GM doesn't do a myriad of things. That reason being that Ford doesn't see a compelling reason to spend the money necessary to achieve those things rather than spend that money elsewhere.

Perfect example? Following some of the logic laid out earlier in this thread GM must be avoiding the vast majority of the sub 40k dollar performance car market because they either stink at it, don't have the ability to even build those cars in the first place, or both. Or, perhaps we should say that Ford builds supercars like the upcoming GT because they can and GM doesn't because they can't. The reality? GM isn't in those markets because they choose not to be in those markets, nothing more and nothing less. Ford doesn't build a bigger Coyote because, year after year, they choose not to build a bigger Coyote; not because they have some corporate-wide mental block that prevents them from building a taller deck version of the same block.

There, feel better now?

Feel better about what. Ford loves to brag about the superiority of the F-Series compared to it's competitors. Whether it's payload, towing, having the most torque and horsepower. Their F-Series ad's are chock full of this kind of stuff.

Now I never see Mustang ads on the air in my market, but if I did, what would Ford be touting? Styling, nostalgia, price I suppose? The problem is that it almost every performance metric that you can objectively measure the Mustang gets beat up on by the Camaro. And that's because GM developed a better chassis and a better powertrain then Ford did.

I never stated that Ford can't do something, props to Ford for developing the 5.4 SVT Terminator Mustang, the 5.8 GT 500, and the 5.2 GT350R

But on the other side, you can't accept that when comparing GT vs Z28 (93-02) or GT vs SS (10-15) the Mustang has always been saddled with an objectively inferior powertrain.

Now if you take 2011 which is the first year the Coyote competed directly against the LS3..........using manually equipped cars to make the comparison even,

Coyote: 412hp at 6,500 rpm/390 torque at 4,250 rpm

LS3: 426hp at 5,900 rpm/420 torque at 4,600 rpm

And let's compare what is on sale now.

2015 Mustang 5.0: 435 hp at 6,500 rpms/400 torque at 4,250 rpm

2016 Camaro 6.2: 455 hp at 6,000 rpms/455 torque at 4,400 rpm

If you put the LT1 in the Mustang it would perform better. If you put the Coyote in the Camaro it would perform worse. Case closed.

 

[doh]

But on the other side, you can't accept that when comparing GT vs Z28 (93-02) or GT vs SS (10-15) the Mustang has always been saddled with an objectively inferior powertrain.

Wow, Just like GM's claims behind the 3 curtains, Best V8 HP, Best V8 fuel mileage, Best V8 towing. What about The Best HP, Fuel mileage, Towing and leave V8 out?

And I do believe that Mustang surpassed the F Bodies a few times. 1983-5 comes to mind, and well we will forget 2002-2009 era, that never happened. as well as 1964.5-1967.

So I don't believe that the 2 Companies will share engines, that decision was made way back in the 90's when Ford went Modular and GM (albeit late) the Gen III.

 

[unkillsam]

Wow, Just like GM's claims behind the 3 curtains, Best V8 HP, Best V8 fuel mileage, Best V8 towing. What about The Best HP, Fuel mileage, Towing and leave V8 out?

And I do believe that Mustang surpassed the F Bodies a few times. 1983-5 comes to mind, and well we will forget 2002-2009 era, that never happened. as well as 1964.5-1967.

So I don't believe that the 2 Companies will share engines, that decision was made way back in the 90's when Ford went Modular and GM (albeit late) the Gen III.

I specifically was comparing 4th Gen F-Body to 4th Gen Mustang and 5th Gen Camaro to 5th Gen Mustang.

There were many times that Mustang surpassed the F-Bodies, but I did make the caveat that I was comparing base V8 trims not top-of-the line. Camaro/Firebird never really had any special models that had some sort of special uprated powertrain in them, with the exception of 1997 when a few hundred SS F-Bodies has the Corvettes LT4 donated to them, 330 HP at a cost of over $38,000.

It wasn't until 2012 when the ZL1 debuted that a Camaro trim had a unique V8 engine option. The last time this was true was in 1992 when you had a choice between 2 305 engines and a 350 smallblock.

Meanwhile in that timeframe Ford had produced for the Gen4 Mustang the Mach 1, SVT Cobra, and Cobra R. For the 5th Gen they had the Shelby GT 500 and the BOSS 302.

 

[bballr4567]

You gotta have a really large NA engine to even come close to the midrange torque of a twin turbo v6 with smallish turbos.

While I certainly agree it's nice to have midrange torque, you really need to actually compare the two on a dyno chart. The both make peak torque about the same time. Both make about the same amount.

Plus, are you talking about the 3.5 or the 2.7? Even Ford pretty much agrees that towing anything of significance shouldn't be done with the 2.7 because it has like a 7k max towing capacity.

Yet, as MANY people have pointed out and will continue to do so, the TTV6 is a pretty machine for towing but all this fuel economy improvement usually goes out the window. You put the power down in a turbo vehicle and it needs the fuel.

Basically, it comes down to WHAT you do as to what truck would be best for you. A highway cruiser? Hauling 6k pounds every single day? It just depends.

 

[firefox]

I hope GM will quickly spread the 10 speed across the bard in all rear wheel drive vehicles. No more of this trickle down availability like they are doing with the 8 speed. No matter what engine or trim level you choose you should be able to get the latest and best GM have to offer. The need to quit lagging behind the competition in availability of equipment and try leading.

 

[unkillsam]

I hope GM will quickly spread the 10 speed across the bard in all rear wheel drive vehicles. No more of this trickle down availability like they are doing with the 8 speed. No matter what engine or trim level you choose you should be able to get the latest and best GM have to offer. The need to quit lagging behind the competition in availability of equipment and try leading.

I think GM needs to be careful with a mass roll-out of new technology like this. Both GM and Ford are rolling this 10-speed transmission out in very niche products, if there are problems there will be relatively few vehicles affected and both GM and Ford could fix the problem quickly instead of having hundreds of thousands of vehicles on the road with problems.

I must admit I do have my concerns about this new 10-speed trans. The 6L80 and 8L90 have proven themselves, in my eyes, to be steady and reliable transmissions. Ford to my knowledge does not have an in-house 8-speed and their 6 speed is licenced from ZF.

Now, this new 10-speed could prove to be the best transmission ever, I'm just curious why GM didn't take the lead on it's development and let Ford do the 9-speed FWD. Does anyone have any inside knowledge on that?

 

[doh]

Plus, are you talking about the 3.5 or the 2.7? Even Ford pretty much agrees that towing anything of significance shouldn't be done with the 2.7 because it has like a 7k max towing capacity.


Basically, it comes down to WHAT you do as to what truck would be best for you. A highway cruiser? Hauling 6k pounds every single day? It just depends.

A 2.7L, in the most popular form 4x4 Crew Cab, is rated up to 8000lb Conventional towing, 7900lb Fifth Wheel. Which is only 1100 lbs less than a 5.3L, and 1000lbs more than a 4.3L.

 

[bballr4567]

A 2.7L, in the most popular form 4x4 Crew Cab, is rated up to 8000lb Conventional towing, 7900lb Fifth Wheel. Which is only 1100 lbs less than a 5.3L, and 1000lbs more than a 4.3L.

When you say "only" it really makes it seem like a small amount but when the MAX towing capacity of the half tons are 12k it makes a difference. Plus, it actually has a towing rating from 7500-8500 depending on chassis and rear end gearing. I read the chart wrong (because there are SO MANY DAMN VARIABLES WITH FORD, lol) in my first post.

Point still stands. Pick the truck you want to do the work you want to do.




I still have no flipping clue how this changed into this conversation.

unskill, the 10 speed is the exact same design of the 8L90 except the addition of the two gears. Of course it gets some durability upgrades but it's the same.

 

[unkillsam]

When you say "only" it really makes it seem like a small amount but when the MAX towing capacity of the half tons are 12k it makes a difference. Plus, it actually has a towing rating from 7500-8500 depending on chassis and rear end gearing. I read the chart wrong (because there are SO MANY DAMN VARIABLES WITH FORD, lol) in my first post.

Point still stands. Pick the truck you want to do the work you want to do.




I still have no flipping clue how this changed into this conversation.

unskill, the 10 speed is the exact same design of the 8L90 except the addition of the two gears. Of course it gets some durability upgrades but it's the same.

How is it the same if GM designed the 8L90 in-house and Ford designed the 10-speed. Did GM say to Ford, here is all our research on developing the 8-speed, take that research and carry it forward? If that truly did happen GM is dumb in giving up in-house tech to the competition. Like I said, Ford did not even have an in-house RWD 6-speed trans, they are licensing from ZF.

 

[bballr4567]

How is it the same if GM designed the 8L90 in-house and Ford designed the 10-speed. Did GM say to Ford, here is all our research on developing the 8-speed, take that research and carry it forward? If that truly did happen GM is dumb in giving up in-house tech to the competition. Like I said, Ford did not even have an in-house RWD 6-speed trans, they are licensing from ZF.

That is why I don't think the whole "ford did this and GM did that" thing is right. It doesn't make sense at all.

But yes, the 10L90 (why not call it that now) is based strictly on the 8L90. It will be interesting once all the technical sheets are released.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/01...upcoming-ford-and-gm-10-speed-transmission-reaches-the-internets/#ixzz436NIi6Cy

This was posted over a year ago. Only thing missing is the actual gear ratios. GM has already said it provides a 7.39 spread compared to the 7.03 (I think that is right) over the current A8 in the Camaro SS right now.

 

[firefox]

I think GM needs to be careful with a mass roll-out of new technology like this. Both GM and Ford are rolling this 10-speed transmission out in very niche products, if there are problems there will be relatively few vehicles affected and both GM and Ford could fix the problem quickly instead of having hundreds of thousands of vehicles on the road with problems.

I must admit I do have my concerns about this new 10-speed trans. The 6L80 and 8L90 have proven themselves, in my eyes, to be steady and reliable transmissions. Ford to my knowledge does not have an in-house 8-speed and their 6 speed is licenced from ZF.

Now, this new 10-speed could prove to be the best transmission ever, I'm just curious why GM didn't take the lead on it's development and let Ford do the 9-speed FWD. Does anyone have any inside knowledge on that?

I understand what you are saying but look how long the 8 speed have been out and there are still rear wheel vehicles you can't get it in. Jus saying they need to do better with the new tyranny.

 

[syr74]

But on the other side, you can't accept that when comparing GT vs Z28 (93-02) or GT vs SS (10-15) the Mustang has always been saddled with an objectively inferior powertrain.

Nonsense, the S197 with a Coyote in it will regularly beat up on a 5th gen SS at the strip. In fact, a comparison of best 1/4mile stock times is surprisingly not all that close. Weight alone isn't sufficient to account for the difference here, so remind me again who had the objectively superior powertrain at that time? This reminds me of the old 5.0L vs 350TPI debates. Yes the Chevy made more hp, but I was there and I well remember exactly how that song and dance went down.

the 10 speed is the exact same design of the 8L90 except the addition of the two gears. Of course it gets some durability upgrades but it's the same.

Actually no, it isn't. To be fair the ZF8 speed and the 8L90 share more than a little in basic design, although there are some obvious differences. In more than a few of those areas the Ford designed 10 speed looks more like the ZF than the 8L90. These are not identical designs with two gears added to one by any means.

 

[Extreme4x4]

I get it................... If the tranny works great and has no issues, it is a GM design. If it has problems and / or is a POS................. Ford designed it.

There, I figured it out.

 

[bballr4567]

Ok, fine it isnt. You've shown me the way syr.

Beat up on the SS? That's an interesting way to put it.

 

[syr74]

Ok, fine it isnt. You've shown me the way syr.

It's simple enough to look up the stick diagram of all three transmissions with a simple Google search which makes it plainly clear what the overall layout is like. The 10R80 looks almost nothing like the 8L90e inside, the clutches and most everything else is in a completely different spot but, surprise, the Ford designed unit looks almost exactly like the ZF 8 speed until you get past the first two gear sets. I honestly wonder sometimes if people here think GM was the first company to use round tires. Not everything is copied from GM....I promise.

Beat up on the SS? That's an interesting way to put it.

Automatic equipped Mustang GT's would get into the mid to high 12's about as consistently as the C5 SS would get into the high 12's to low 13's in my experience. With mediocre drivers you couldn't really tell a difference, but with good drivers you most certainly could. Ironically, the new GT is a much better car, but it is also slower than the car it replaced. A c5 SS will hang with the new GT through the 1/4 from what I've seen.

 

[63GrandSport001]

I get it................... If the tranny works great and has no issues, it is a GM design. If it has problems and / or is a POS................. Ford designed it.

There, I figured it out.

Honestly, both companies have had input in the design and development of both the 9 speed FWD transmission as well as the 10 speed RWD transmission. Engineering isn't black magic now days, if you have the right facilities along with well train engineers and you give them the money and time then they can engineer whatever anyone else can engineer. There are a number of reasons why a car company would farm out such work on equipment, the 5.2L voodoo engine is a perfect example. Ford could have farmed out the design and development of said engine to another company, they looked at the money that they were willing to spend and how much they can realistically make from a vehicle with said engine. With more time and money then some of the design compromises that they had to made might not have had to have been made. At the end of the day that is what they came up with and so far the GT350 is a hit on the market place and the voodoo engine is a really cool engine.

Ford and GM went in on two transmissions and the choice was made that Ford would head up the development on the RWD transmission and GM would head up development on the FWD transmission. We don't know why but we can speculate on why that choice was made. Maybe GM made the calculations and figured that they needed the FWD transmission more then the RWD transmission with their 8 speed transmissions in production and all.

 

[63GrandSport001]

I agree vis-à-vis sports cars like the Corvette, and I was looking at the layout of the Camaro engine bay with the supercharged ZL1 in it when I made that comment. Zero question there is more than enough room in that engine bay for a Coyote without dramatically altering anything about the styling or cowl height, it's enormously oversized as are the engine bays of most rwd cars that size in our era. I wouldn't expect any dimension but height to be an issue with any of the recent Ford smallblocks, and the 5.0L isn't a tall enough variant to cause a problem in that car. Corvette? Maybe.

You have to understand that for the ZL1 the car uses a raised hood which much like the Z06 Corvette gives room for the supercharger, however comparing fitting the Coyote in the Camaro compared to the LT1 engine the issue is where the heads are. You gain a lot of height at that location, this picture really sums up the issue and that they possibly would have to raise the hood on the outer locations to fit the Coyote engine and not in the center.

Looking at this picture of the 2016 Camaro SS engine bay the Coyote engine would certainly cause clearance issues for the 2016 SS Camaro....

 

[unkillsam]

Nonsense, the S197 with a Coyote in it will regularly beat up on a 5th gen SS at the strip. In fact, a comparison of best 1/4mile stock times is surprisingly not all that close. Weight alone isn't sufficient to account for the difference here, so remind me again who had the objectively superior powertrain at that time? This reminds me of the old 5.0L vs 350TPI debates. Yes the Chevy made more hp, but I was there and I well remember exactly how that song and dance went down.


Actually no, it isn't. To be fair the ZF8 speed and the 8L90 share more than a little in basic design, although there are some obvious differences. In more than a few of those areas the Ford designed 10 speed looks more like the ZF than the 8L90. These are not identical designs with two gears added to one by any means.

I disagree with your assertion that weight alone is not sufficient to account for stock quarter mile times. The Mustang GT weighed 3,575 lbs while a Camaro SS weighed 3,908 lbs. 333 lbs can make a very large difference.

Now lets take a look at the other side of it. For 2016 the Mustang gained weight to 3,705 lbs. The Camaro weights 3,685. With the Mustang weighing 20 pounds more, it's about the difference of each car racing each other, one with a 1/4 tank of gas and the other with 3/4 tank of gas.

The new Camaro consistantly beats the new Mustang now that the Mustangs weight advantage is null and void.

And let me be clear I never said the C5 Camaro was a better car then the Mustang. In fact, like you pointed out, the Mustang was a quicker car when it transitioned from the 3v 4.6 (which was woefully inadequate) to the 4v 5.0 in 2011.

GM launched the Camaro without the suspension dialed in, they did not get that figured out till MY2012 I believe to fix the chronic understeer and wheel-hop issues. If looking objectively in 2011 at a choice between a Camaro SS and a Mustang GT, probably the only thing that would make me buy the Camaro is the LS3, it's a know quantity TO ME. Otherwise the Mustang was the better car.

All I said was that the Camaro had the better powertrain, that's it.

 

[JBsZ06]

Amazing how the 6 th gen camaro is so wide in its product line depth.

Hard to decide between the camaro v8 1LE or the all conquering ZL1 10 speed automatic....

Probably both are class leading in their respective market segment.

I'm assuming 43 grand for the 1LE and 65 grand for the ZL1...both approximates and just a guess on my part...

Of course at these price points the competition. From dodge and ford are impressive as well and really just have slightly different priorities

I'm still stunned at these price levels these cars are so hot in their sales and so high in demand...

 

[doh]

You have to understand that for the ZL1 the car uses a raised hood which much like the Z06 Corvette gives room for the supercharger, however comparing fitting the Coyote in the Camaro compared to the LT1 engine the issue is where the heads are. You gain a lot of height at that location, this picture really sums up the issue and that they possibly would have to raise the hood on the outer locations to fit the Coyote engine and not in the center.

Looking at this picture of the 2016 Camaro SS engine bay the Coyote engine would certainly cause clearance issues for the 2016 SS Camaro....

Pictures say 1000 words, and not to veer this thread to ENGINES again. But the way you are typing, the Mustang will have to look like a F650, in order to fit a Coyote.

I think the hood line of the Mustang looks just fine, fitted with a Coyote. And if a Push Rod engines are truly superior for performance and packaging, Why does GM use OHC engines in all of their Compacts? Well Cars in general where space is an issue. While in trucks, where there is plenty of space they still use Push Rod engines?

Why does Ford's Technology allow it to match power curves with nearly 1/2 of the displacement? 3.5L verse 6.2?