|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336 |
Originally posted by Stazi:
Turbo + 3L (or 2.5L) >> Duratec 3.5L
Compared to the compition of similar size, the 3.5L is actually pretty weak. Ford needs to step up to the plate and put some power in their lineup! Their designs are "blah" and their power is lacking ... Ford better pick it up of they will drop a spot in market share to Toyota.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Originally posted by fastcougar:
Originally posted by Stazi:
Turbo + 3L (or 2.5L) >> Duratec 3.5L
Compared to the compition of similar size, the 3.5L is actually pretty weak. Ford needs to step up to the plate and put some power in their lineup! Their designs are "blah" and their power is lacking ... Ford better pick it up of they will drop a spot in market share to Toyota.
I disagree. Who is making a 3.5L engine that totally eclipses the Duratec 3.5L in HP & TQ? And we're talking about midsize sedans here, so I'd rather not here the likes of 350Z's. The Lexus IS is the only one that comes to mind with it's 306hp. Then again, I believe they are starting in a bit of a higher price range. Sure there are a few that make 260 or maybe even 270HP, but the technology in the Duratec 35 looks much more advanced than those with the extra 10-20HP.
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,141
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,141 |
Why not Contact Bill J. he could probobly give specs on the trannies boilt pattern to see if the MTX-75 will even bolt up.
99 SE V6\5spd - 156 HP\157 TQ 15.166-90.84
Totaled 02/12/06
99 SVT # 1571 - 175 HP\153 TQ 14.999-91.88
Born 3/24/99 Reborn 3/18/06
Pietenpol Racing Technologies project vehicle
90 Festiva L 5spd, Blue(not for long), 103k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336 |
hmmm ... 1 full liter more of displacement and all this "technology" and all they can squeeze out of it more than a 2.5L SVT engine is 45hp (205 vs. 250)? That is weak! The only saving grace in this example is the torque, but that is definitely a byproduct of the displacement boost and nothing to do with the "technology". It's almost as weak as Ford's advertising department  Don't get me wrong, I'm a Ford fan, but they have got to wake up. Toyota is STRONG on their heals and making ho-hum cars with less power than the compition is not the way to do battle for the #2 spot. 2 years ago, I wouldn't be caught dead in Toyota Avalon, but now ... well, the car is just sexy and has power on tap and returns great fuel mileage while putting a smile on owners faces.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Originally posted by fastcougar:
hmmm ... 1 full liter more of displacement and all this "technology" and all they can squeeze out of it more than a 2.5L SVT engine is 45hp (205 vs. 250)? That is weak! The only saving grace in this example is the torque, but that is definitely a byproduct of the displacement boost and nothing to do with the "technology".
SVT 2.5L = 200HP, not 205HP. 
There's also a lot of untapped power with this motor, and a lot of potential. Ford specifically made this motor with a possible forced induction in mind. Will you think the same if in 3 years they come out with a 350HP option?
Originally posted by fastcougar:
It's almost as weak as Ford's advertising department
Ford's trucks pretty much sell themselves.
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,336 |
Perhaps you think that I am down on the motor ... I'm not ... I'm down on the way that Ford is presenting the motor. I know that the potential is there, but it's coming to market with a big f'ing cork in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Gotcha.. I thought you were pretty much stamping this motor with a big X.. I personally can't wait until it's available in the Fusion and aftermarket parts are available..
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710 |
a better apples -> apples comparison would be the non-SVT 2.5 to that 3.5. This isn't an SVT 3.5L  non-SVT makes 165-170 hp?
morbid
2000 Contour SVT (black)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Not only that, someone in pics and videos showed his pontiac with GM's new 3.5L and it is rated at 200/201 hp/tq.
Hello, welcome to Fords 97+ duratec 3.0's???
Also, in the higher price range where the LS 3.0 and the Jag 3.0, both pumping out more standard HP.
The Jag was what... 240HP?
Level of car, traction, shifting comfort, etc. all have to do with the power of the motor. I'd bet that the fusion 3.5L is detuned for a smaller more base engine so that they can afford to use a cheaper transmission and drivetrain.
If/when it pops up in the higher end models it will be pumping closer to 300 I bet.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,087
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,087 |
Let's not forget that this is a PZEV engine. That means that there is probably 30-40 HP to be found just from I/E mods alone (remember when the Focus 2.3L PZEV was modded?). Add to that the better gas mileage than the competition and the 250 HP starts sounding pretty good.
Matt
2002 Subaru Impreza WRX (WRB Stage 4+)
Old Rides:
1999 Sil-Fro SVT Contour 3.0L with goodies (Totalled 6/21/06)
1988 Bronco II (Sold)
You know you launch hard when you beat oncoming traffic through their own crosswalk lines.
|
|
|
|
|
