PDA

View Full Version : 500HP at the wheels with just the basics



Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 02:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoNftuJ2Nzs&feature=youtu.be

Video explaining the mods done to their Ecoboost Mustang to get 500hp at the wheels, all its got is just the basics mods such as intake, exhaust, intercooler, Precision 5858 turbo and a tune.

This looks like the go to Mustang for people like me.

On the dyno at 3:58.

13726548
12th July 2015, 03:01 PM
I reckon .. 12sec 1/4's for minimal mods makes my BA I6 look like puss....

Bluestuff1
12th July 2015, 03:33 PM
is the Ecooboost that far away from turning up in the " v8 supercar" pitts soon ?

WASP
12th July 2015, 03:35 PM
I would have thought the cost of all those mods puts it squarely in the price range of the 8 without the worry that youre driving something which is a ticking time bomb. Add the cost of a new block and rebuild when needed etc.. Wouldn't it be easier to put an exhaust and tune in the coyote version to make a lazy 500 hp? Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti the EcoBoost Mustang. It would make a great package for those looking for a lower cost option that doesn't cost a fortune to run. I guess that's my point. Modding one like this makes it cost just as much, if not more to own and run.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 03:40 PM
I would have thought the cost of all those mods puts it squarely in the price range of the 8 without the worry that youre driving something which is a ticking time bomb. Add the cost of a new block and rebuild when needed etc.. Wouldn't it be easier to put an exhaust and tune in the coyote version to make a lazy 500 hp? Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti the EcoBoost Mustang. It would make a great package for those looking for a lower cost option that doesn't cost a fortune to run. I guess that's my point. Modding one like this makes it cost just as much, if not more to own and run.

Agree, in fact id say it puts the price north of the price of the V8 while making the car temperamental and at the same time killing the vehicle warranty, for not much gain...

At the end of the day the more power per liter of displacement you try to extract the less reliability and drivability you have.

As they say, there's no replacement for displacement.

Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 03:55 PM
Obviously there is a replacement for displacement because Ford is pushing Ecoboost engines, even the Ford GT has the Ecoboost engine.

My Focus held up alright having north of 80 different tunes in the vacinity of 40% more power at the wheels, about the same amount of times on the dyno, its been down the 1/4 6 times and I thrash the crap out of it every day and it hasn't broken yet.

I reckon if you're just going to bash around the street in it (like 99% of people) its probably going to hold up fine for the average person at 500hp.

Only one of my cars is stock the rest have been modified, its half the fun of owning a car IMO.

Whats the price difference between V8 and Ecoboost?

I'd be buying the Ecoboost and budget around $10K on performance mods.

Its not really that expensive when you put them out on paper:

Turbo back exhaust - $1000
Intercooler - $1000
Turbo - $2000
Tune - $2000
Intake $750
Labour - $1500

Plus a bit left over in case you want to do some extras, its not overly that expensive.

You can have a V8 Mustang with an exhaust and a tune or you can have something a bit different that will probably put the V8 at the bottom of the pack where it belongs.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:08 PM
Of course Ford (and others) are pushing smaller displacement FI engines, they're lighter and greener.

Imagine an ecoboost 5.0 Coyote.... It would have the potential to make more power than you could ever dream of being able to use.

Technology being equal 5 is always > than 2.3... Its simple maths.

Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 04:10 PM
Of course Ford (and others) are pushing smaller displacement FI engines, they're lighter and greener.

Imagine an ecoboost 5.0 Coyote.... It would have the potential to make more power than you could ever dream of being able to use.

Technology being equal 5 is always > than 2.3... Its simple maths.

If it was so great why didn't they do it for the Ford GT?

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:12 PM
If it was so great why didn't they do it for the Ford GT?

Wasn't needed. Ford are moving towards smaller engines due to CAFE...... Its marketing driven.

Are you trying to suggest smaller capacity engine have the potential to make more power /litre of displacement than larger engines??

WASP
12th July 2015, 04:14 PM
Those are fighting words Damo ..lol.You haven't allowed for new block, pistons and a rebuild when it's needed. Also I put money on that turbo 4 pot drinking more fuel that the 8 as well once it's upwards of 400 HP plus. The Mustang isn't light. However you're right. Tinkering is all part of the fun. It's not rational or logical in most cases. It's more about driving and ownership enjoyment.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:18 PM
Those are fighting words Damo ..lol.You haven't allowed for new block, pistons and a rebuild when it's needed. Also I put money on that turbo 4 pot drinking more fuel that the 8 as well once it's upwards of 400 HP plus. The Mustang isn't light. However you're right. Tinkering is all part of the fun. It's not rational or logical in most cases. It's more about driving and ownership enjoyment.
Absolutely.

If its about tinkering and having fun it doesn't matter what you use.

But the simple fact is the more capacity you have at your disposal the easier it is to extract power reliably and maintain drivability.

Bluestuff1
12th July 2015, 04:19 PM
this is why i will always like a big lazy V8..

Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 04:24 PM
Wasn't needed. Ford are moving towards smaller engines due to CAFE...... Its marketing driven.

Are you trying to suggest smaller capacity engine have the potential to make more power /litre of displacement than larger engines??

You don't need larger displacement engines thanks to forced induction which is what I'm suggesting. If they can do the job with the Ford GT with 3.5L V6 they don't need to bother with a Ecoboost variant of the new 5L.

We've seen this happen multiple times, first it was the Jap Imports showing large displacement engines how its done, even in the 1990s the 302W was struggling against the SOHC I6 from Tickford (except for AU), and then again in the 2000s with XR6T/F6 vs XR8 and the FPV V8 counterparts.

NA V8s are dinosaurs.

Not only are manufacturers getting decent numbers out of smaller FI engines, its even better for those of us who take to the aftermarket to improve on what we've got, its made it easier for everyone.

They aren't even using E85 or water/methanol injection on that 500hp Mustang yet.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:29 PM
You don't need larger displacement engines thanks to forced induction which is what I'm suggesting. If they can do the job with the Ford GT with 3.5L V6 they don't need to bother with a Ecoboost variant of the new 5L.

We've seen this happen multiple times, first it was the Jap Imports showing large displacement engines how its done, even in the 1990s the 302W was struggling against the SOHC I6 from Tickford (except for AU), and then again in the 2000s with XR6T/F6 vs XR8 and the FPV V8 counterparts.

NA V8s are dinosaurs.

Not only are manufacturers getting decent numbers out of smaller FI engines, its even better for those of us who take to the aftermarket to improve on what we've got, its made it easier for everyone.

They aren't even using E85 or water/methanol injection on that 500hp Mustang yet.
Damo, you are ignoring the KW/Litre of displacement ceiling.

There is only so much power you can safely and reliably make per litre of displacement.

N/A engines in general are on the way out, regardless of engine configuration. There is nothing about the design of a V8 engine that places it at a technology disadvantage to a V6, I6 or I4....

V8's are on the way out simply because they can get the same power from smaller FI engines, but if you applied the same tech to say a Coyote it would be an animal.

Whatever power they can extract from that 2.3 EB engine you could get double from a EB or TT Coyote.

Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 04:32 PM
There would be a reason why Ford wouldn't have done it to the 5L, maybe budget constraints?

The only people getting around with turbo V8s seem to be the higher end Euros or diesel stuff.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:34 PM
There would be a reason why Ford wouldn't have done it to the 5L, maybe budget constraints?

The only people getting around with turbo V8s seem to be the higher end Euros or diesel stuff.

CAFE.


Large capacity engines are on the way out due to emissions regulations and marketing perceptions....

Franco Cozzo
12th July 2015, 04:38 PM
Those are fighting words Damo ..lol.You haven't allowed for new block, pistons and a rebuild when it's needed. Also I put money on that turbo 4 pot drinking more fuel that the 8 as well once it's upwards of 400 HP plus. The Mustang isn't light. However you're right. Tinkering is all part of the fun. It's not rational or logical in most cases. It's more about driving and ownership enjoyment.

We don't know how long they will last yet, if the car spends a lot of time at the 1/4 it will probably need all those things but if its a daily driver 99% of the time where it does the odd traffic light GP and blast onto the freeway, it could be alright? Time will tell.

WASP
12th July 2015, 04:40 PM
With most factory applications Ford would have set targets in terms of optimum weight, power, torque fuel usage etc. when developing a the GT. If the TT V6 could meet those targets their would be no business case for the TT8.

4Vman
12th July 2015, 04:47 PM
With most factory applications Ford would have set targets in terms of optimum weight, power, torque fuel usage etc. when developing a the GT. If the TT V6 could meet those targets their would be no business case for the TT8.

Yep, that's it in a nutshell.

The TTV6 was the perfect fit based on hitting a set of numbers and gave them the opportunity to showcase new and future technology/packaging they can pass onto their road products.

13726548
12th July 2015, 07:01 PM
Tinkering is all part of the fun. It's not rational or logical in most cases. It's more about driving and ownership enjoyment.

Qouted for truth !!

defective
13th July 2015, 06:08 PM
Smaller engines generally rely on more tech do develop more power per litre than bigger capacity engines.

Ever taken a s2000 for a blast? Those things hammer, and they're a n/a 2.0. Slap a snail in and they're ridiculous.

Build them right, and they're just as capable of high mileage as the big motors.

Bluestuff1
14th July 2015, 08:22 AM
Iv had this discussion every decade after a recession, the manufactures abandon the v8 in favour of hitech 4&6 cyl.
Then some one wakes up and realise that the super hi tech they have just perfected to produce big HP in the 4, s and 6,s
can be applied to the 8,s and we go full circle again .

Ecoboost makes big power out of a small motor, but surely if its obviously applied to a big motor, its going to make even bigger power...

The descions to go smaller are usually driven by politics inside companies, or by government edits ...
The reason ford dropped the xr8 first time around was as much the costs of meeting emissions etc, than any other.

There Is No Substitute For Cubic Inches Displacement..

Start with some thing small and make it bigger, start with some thing bigger and make it HUDGE....lol

project 064
14th July 2015, 09:51 AM
Smaller engines generally rely on more tech do develop more power per litre than bigger capacity engines.

Ever taken a s2000 for a blast? Those things hammer, and they're a n/a 2.0. Slap a snail in and they're ridiculous.

Build them right, and they're just as capable of high mileage as the big motors.

So what happened with the early Sierra engines? DJR spent months trying to get longevity out of those engines.:confused:

jpd80
14th July 2015, 06:00 PM
So what happened with the early Sierra engines? DJR spent months trying to get longevity out of those engines.:confused:

The early sierra engines were tuned as per UK specs with much to and fro
until DJR decidd to go it alone. With a little help from McClaren who shared
sponsorship from Shell. Dick went on to have the fastest Sierras in the world.

And that was with a race engine, not a road car.

project 064
14th July 2015, 06:20 PM
The early sierra engines were tuned as per UK specs with much to and fro
until DJR decidd to go it alone. With a little help from McClaren who shared
sponsorship from Shell. Dick went on to have the fastest Sierras in the world.

And that was with a race engine, not a road car.
Quite true, I used that engine as an example, now do you remember the Wherret turbo Sigma's, turbo Exa's, turbo Pajero's?
Not exactly sparkling performance, with lots of issues.
The turbo Commodore was a Nissan Engine I believe, not just a case of throw a turbo on an engine.
Dick blew a lot of engines, spent a lot of money keeping these Sierra engines alive.

defective
14th July 2015, 07:23 PM
Quite true, I used that engine as an example, now do you remember the Wherret turbo Sigma's, turbo Exa's, turbo Pajero's?
Not exactly sparkling performance, with lots of issues.
The turbo Commodore was a Nissan Engine I believe, not just a case of throw a turbo on an engine.
Dick blew a lot of engines, spent a lot of money keeping these Sierra engines alive.

Wherrit turbo sigmas were an Aussie only anomaly, and you guys got ripped. The rest of the world got the proper turbo sigma with 4g63" big brakes, IRS etc etc
Those 80s turbo cars were unreliable because they had primitive efi, (some still had carbies lol) primitive ignition and people didn't understand how to tune or maintain them.
As technology improved, and knowledge improved then obviously reliability came with it.

But stock for stock, those cars you describe as having 'not exactly sparkling performance' would absolute hammer 95% of the stock Aussie big cars.
I'm a bit of a starion fan boy, had a dozen or so of them. In 1982 they had massive vented disc brakes all round, good IRS (that didn't chew bushes every other day) proper sports seating, voice alerts, proper premium sound etc etc.
the only real weak point they had was a propensity to crack heads.
That motor is a bit like the old 4.1 in that it's a very vbasic form of what's still sold today.

4Vman
14th July 2015, 07:27 PM
Ah, the irony in the Wherret Sigma not being what it was cracked up to be.....


http://www.seahorsesoc.org/images/pip-christine.jpg