New Supercar is TwinTurbo ecoboost

[B.M.F.]

That is for sure. I understand the rationale behind choosing the 5.4L for the 05/06, but the car would have been absolutely phenomenal with something like the Voodoo in it.

Would have become a totally different car though and we wouldn't have all these 700-800-900-1000 hp GTs running around.

I bet a 1/3 or better less would not of been wrecked had they been 550hp na The vodoo engine is gonna sound sick in the GT platform no doubt about it.

 

[B.M.F.]

A 550hp Na Ford GT with Proper gearing would be an animal against all the other Na supercars like the 458 and such.. I will bet the car will come in at around 3200lbs with driver...

 

[Mike87]

McLaren? V6... no? Drove one a few weeks ago... felt pretty "super" (nothing like my FGT or CGT though...).

 

[Sinovac]

McLaren? V6... no? Drove one a few weeks ago... felt pretty "super" (nothing like my FGT or CGT though...).

No, it's a small V8.

 

[Indy GT]

With the proper gearing of the transaxle in a Ford GT i highly doubt the 5.2 will be a disappointment in a car that is lighter than the new GT350 mustang. That would be like saying putting a ford GT or coyote motor in a kit car or otherwise would be disappointing. It something that has been done ALOT with great success...

I already plan on doing it so its only a matter of time before it happens. I have a GT that I was going todo a coyote swap in like Jim Dunham did but as soon as this motor came to light those plans were put to the wayside.

BMF, I would be very interested in the results of swapping out the supercharged 5.4L for a 5.2L VooDoo engine as I am sure you can and will do. More power to ya! And I really did not say it could not be done, just that there might be a disappointment.

I am aware of earlier attempts of utilizing a FPC in a 4.6L engine which were in fact a pretty major disappointment to the team trying to utilize this crankshaft technology in larger displacement engines. The issue here is not engine weight or transaxle gear ratio in the GT at all, it is the engine itself.

As you are well aware, there are critical joints within the engine which much be maintained. The dynamic forces generated by the FPC arrangement generated vibrational loads within the engine which loosened main bearing caps, oil pan bolts, valve cover bolts among others. The inherent rotating forces shook the engine apart. Without fully understanding how to damp these modal harmonics with both active and/or passive systems, some of which may be external to the engine, the transplant of a 5.2L VooDoo engine might lead to short engine life. And this might be viewed as a disappointment for some.

But I still applaud your efforts to move forward with this swap effort. Keep our Forum updated with your progress and results. Perhaps you can design around these issues.:thumbsup

 

[Waxer]

So is this new GT going to be homologated prior to 2016 LeMans or is it going to be a prototype car at 2016 LeMans? I'm confused here.

If it's going to be a prototype at LeMans how is there going to be production availability in 2016?

If it's going to be homologated by 2016 then all things point to a very limited build since which I would think would drive prices up drastically for many reasons and out of my acquisition range especially with 2 kids in college now and trying to retire in the next 7 to 10 years.

Again, there was a lot of press, hype and information preceding the 2005/06 FGT that was working the public up into a lather.

There was ALOT of development effort and vendors were involved working furiously to get the FGT ready for release in the short time they had prior to the Centennial. If the same development effort has been going on with a "new" GT that is intended for "public consumption" Ford has achieved better secrecy than the WWII Manhattan project.

I think the 2005/06 FGT with its limited build, amazing and unabated desirability from the get go with its fascinating development story, roots to the original in aesthetic design, drop dead looks, prodigious performance makes it so special that the 2005/06 FGT will not be affected in value negatively and it will remain one of "the cars" to have and own for all time. It was an icon overnight and legend in its own time. If the new car is not a "retro" design and has a V6 eco boost engine with all the high tech nannies it will make the old FGT (it will now be the "old one" right?) old school and analog overnight and more desirable overnight IMHO regardless of any superior performance of the new car.

The 2005/06 FGT can seriously out perform an original. Who here would pass up the opportunity to own an original GT40? I rest my case.

Old school is cool in my book.

Hey, if I'm wrong and the FGT drops in value significantly I'll get to buy the yellow FGT I always wanted.

It's a win win for me the way I see it.

P.S. Happy New Year to all!

 

[cobra498]

BMF, I would be very interested in the results of swapping out the supercharged 5.4L for a 5.2L VooDoo engine as I am sure you can and will do. More power to ya! And I really did not say it could not be done, just that there might be a disappointment.

I am aware of earlier attempts of utilizing a FPC in a 4.6L engine which were in fact a pretty major disappointment to the team trying to utilize this crankshaft technology in larger displacement engines. The issue here is not engine weight or transaxle gear ratio in the GT at all, it is the engine itself.

As you are well aware, there are critical joints within the engine which much be maintained. The dynamic forces generated by the FPC arrangement generated vibrational loads within the engine which loosened main bearing caps, oil pan bolts, valve cover bolts among others. The inherent rotating forces shook the engine apart. Without fully understanding how to damp these modal harmonics with both active and/or passive systems, some of which may be external to the engine, the transplant of a 5.2L VooDoo engine might lead to short engine life. And this might be viewed as a disappointment for some.

But I still applaud your efforts to move forward with this swap effort. Keep our Forum updated with your progress and results. Perhaps you can design around these issues.:thumbsup

Interesting and excellent points, another approach would be to increase the displacement of the Coyote engine to 5.8 liters and then improve cylinder head flow, cam timing and fuel/spark systems. I have heard that 700 NA is easy with this combination from some OEM manufacturing people that have been experimenting with the engine. This would eliminate any vibration issues and give even better performance because you would still reduce the weight of the FGT substantially and have even more horse power than the flat crank engine. Jon Kaase won the engine masters challenge with a 6.7 liter modular based on our 5.4 engines. That engine made 600 lb/ft at 3400 rpm with a peak of 666 lb/ft and also made 720 HP. In a slightly different state of tune it made over 800 hp all naturally aspirated.
cam timing

 

[B.M.F.]

BMF, I would be very interested in the results of swapping out the supercharged 5.4L for a 5.2L VooDoo engine as I am sure you can and will do. More power to ya! And I really did not say it could not be done, just that there might be a disappointment.

I am aware of earlier attempts of utilizing a FPC in a 4.6L engine which were in fact a pretty major disappointment to the team trying to utilize this crankshaft technology in larger displacement engines. The issue here is not engine weight or transaxle gear ratio in the GT at all, it is the engine itself.

As you are well aware, there are critical joints within the engine which much be maintained. The dynamic forces generated by the FPC arrangement generated vibrational loads within the engine which loosened main bearing caps, oil pan bolts, valve cover bolts among others. The inherent rotating forces shook the engine apart. Without fully understanding how to damp these modal harmonics with both active and/or passive systems, some of which may be external to the engine, the transplant of a 5.2L VooDoo engine might lead to short engine life. And this might be viewed as a disappointment for some.

But I still applaud your efforts to move forward with this swap effort. Keep our Forum updated with your progress and results. Perhaps you can design around these issues.:thumbsup

I know there is major vibration issues with the fpc vodoo aswell... Really the material in motor mounts and transmount is the only important thing keeping the vibrations from transfering into the chassis, so at that point which ever chassis would be put in would be a moot point. The rest of the vibrations issues are going to be contained within what Ford has done to the block and harmonic balancer etc. Im really excited to see the motor and power numbers. We shall see now in ten days or so!
I will keep everyone up todate as i do plan on doing it!!!

 

[B.M.F.]

Interesting and excellent points, another approach would be to increase the displacement of the Coyote engine to 5.8 liters and then improve cylinder head flow, cam timing and fuel/spark systems. I have heard that 700 NA is easy with this combination from some OEM manufacturing people that have been experimenting with the engine. This would eliminate any vibration issues and give even better performance because you would still reduce the weight of the FGT substantially and have even more horse power than the flat crank engine. Jon Kaase won the engine masters challenge with a 6.7 liter modular based on our 5.4 engines. That engine made 600 lb/ft at 3400 rpm with a peak of 666 lb/ft and also made 720 HP. In a slightly different state of tune it made over 800 hp all naturally aspirated.
cam timing

I have 2 4'' stroke cranks for the coyote motor that would make one 358 cubes.. This was my first plan of action for my Na GT project although the FPC motor would sound more exotic!!

 

[2112]

Interesting and excellent points, another approach would be to increase the displacement of the Coyote engine to 5.8 liters and then improve cylinder head flow, cam timing and fuel/spark systems. I have heard that 700 NA is easy with this combination from some OEM manufacturing people that have been experimenting with the engine. This would eliminate any vibration issues and give even better performance because you would still reduce the weight of the FGT substantially and have even more horse power than the flat crank engine. Jon Kaase won the engine masters challenge with a 6.7 liter modular based on our 5.4 engines. That engine made 600 lb/ft at 3400 rpm with a peak of 666 lb/ft and also made 720 HP. In a slightly different state of tune it made over 800 hp all naturally aspirated.
cam timing

Less weight, less heat, what's not to like? What rpm was the H.P. Rated at?

Like to see this done.

 

[BlackICE]

Less weight, less heat, what's not to like? What rpm was the H.P. Rated at?

Like to see this done.

Most likely also less streetable at low RPMs too, but would be a great option for driving on the track.

 

[Bart Carter]

I have a Keith Craft Dart AL block stroked Windsor. Dynoed 607 HP at only 6200 RPM. Weighs 342 lbs. This would be my engine choice. I don't know about the weight difference, but should be a lot less. Of course I don't see how I would bypass SMOG.

 

[cobra498]

Most likely also less streetable at low RPMs too, but would be a great option for driving on the track.

Engine Masters is all about drive-ability so they reward area under the curve, engine made 515 lb/ft at 3000 rpm 666 lb/ft at 5100 and 718 HP at 6500
it would be every bit as streetable as a stock GT.

 

[B.M.F.]

Less weight, less heat, what's not to like? What rpm was the H.P. Rated at?

Like to see this done.

upwards of 7500rpms. You would need 4.10 rears gears in a gt or custom transmission gears to make it work properly

 

[BlackICE]

Engine Masters is all about drive-ability so they reward area under the curve, engine made 515 lb/ft at 3000 rpm 666 lb/ft at 5100 and 718 HP at 6500
it would be every bit as streetable as a stock GT.

What torque does it make at 1000 to 2500, used in stop and go traffic?

 

[B.M.F.]

What torque does it make at 1000 to 2500, used in stop and go traffic?

doesnt matter. The GT gearing does not favor a na motor. 1st gear is way tooooooo long. Gearing would have to be changed to make a Na motor work in one of these cars. My Gt makes about 500na and it sucks with the blower belt off it!!

 

[BlackICE]

doesnt matter. The GT gearing does not favor a na motor. 1st gear is way tooooooo long. Gearing would have to be changed to make a Na motor work in one of these cars. My Gt makes about 500na and it sucks with the blower belt off it!!

I have 3.9 gears. I don't think I would ever change the motor even if it did work well, can't pass CA smog test.

 

[B.M.F.]

I have 3.9 gears. I don't think I would ever change the motor even if it did work well, can't pass CA smog test.

im working on getting 3.90s made just need to find a few people who want to do it but now cars are so expensive no one is modding or driving them like they used to! im gonna drive the crap out of them for a long long time yet!!!

 

[BlackICE]

im working on getting 3.90s made just need to find a few people who want to do it but now cars are so expensive no one is modding or driving them like they used to! im gonna drive the crap out of them for a long long time yet!!!

I don't know about resale value, but as for as driving value, 3.9 gears are wonderful. Everyone that owns the car to drive, but not to sell in the future, should buy 3.9 gears without a doubt!

 

[Waxer]

Isn't all this off topic?