5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 02:28 PM
  #1  
whiteout 5.0's Avatar
whiteout 5.0
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 484
From:
Default 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

the mustang 5.0's come with 4942cc's ive been led to believe. Why wouldnt they call it the 4-9 mustang instead of the 5-0? Was it that difficult to make it a true 5.0 like the shiddy 305 gm motor...atrue 5.0 displacement motor. Why ford why did they lie to us???
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 02:30 PM
  #2  
5.0stanger's Avatar
5.0stanger
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,956
From: Howard City, MI
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

sounds better
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 03:12 PM
  #3  
Twister's Avatar
Twister
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,645
From: So-Cal
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

actually it is 4944cc...A true 5000cc engine is 305ci. Ford built a 300ci inline 6 that was marketed as a 4.9 before they called the 302 a 5.0. Ford thought that it would be better to be able to market the engines independantly. Besides, they used the old Brittish engine ploy of rounding up....
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 03:41 PM
  #4  
bluegill's Avatar
bluegill
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51
From: Michigan
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

Your talking 3 cubic inches, hardly worth losing sleep over. All the makes over the years have round up or down a couple of cubic inches. Was Ford going to retool to give the 302 a slight overbore just so it would be exactly 305 cu/in..? The 300 6cyl was also in production, it was actually 301.6 cu/in. They called it a 4.9, they were off by 2.5 cu/in the other way. Who cares...

Mike
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 03:43 PM
  #5  
SSKiller's Avatar
SSKiller
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,677
From: Scottsdale, AZ
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

punch it to a 306 and call it a day.....
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 03:50 PM
  #6  
FordMustangXBA's Avatar
FordMustangXBA
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,092
From: Connecticut
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

All companies do it. My 4wheeler is marketed as a 600 when it's actually 598cc. It's not a big deal, lol.
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 04:30 PM
  #7  
Twisted's Avatar
Twisted
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,768
From:
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

ORIGINAL: FordMustangXBA

All companies do it. My 4wheeler is marketed as a 600 when it's actually 598cc. It's not a big deal, lol.
True. All companies do that...particularly motorcycle manufacturers. The old Suzuki Gixxers were 748ccs and 749ccs depending on the year, yet they were all called 750s. I think the 1100s were actually 1058ccs, and were rounded up to 1100. I don't think any 600cc bike ever made has actually been 600ccs. What difference does it make?
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 04:36 PM
  #8  
squad272's Avatar
squad272
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 293
From: NJ
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?


ORIGINAL: bluegill

Your talking 3 cubic inches, hardly worth losing sleep over. All the makes over the years have round up or down a couple of cubic inches. Was Ford going to retool to give the 302 a slight overbore just so it would be exactly 305 cu/in..? The 300 6cyl was also in production, it was actually 301.6 cu/in. They called it a 4.9, they were off by 2.5 cu/in the other way. Who cares...

Mike

yeah , and if it was a 4.9 the "Vanilla ICE" song would make no sense
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 04:41 PM
  #9  
Twisted's Avatar
Twisted
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,768
From:
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?


ORIGINAL: squad272


ORIGINAL: bluegill

Your talking 3 cubic inches, hardly worth losing sleep over. All the makes over the years have round up or down a couple of cubic inches. Was Ford going to retool to give the 302 a slight overbore just so it would be exactly 305 cu/in..? The 300 6cyl was also in production, it was actually 301.6 cu/in. They called it a 4.9, they were off by 2.5 cu/in the other way. Who cares...

Mike

yeah , and if it was a 4.9 the "Vanilla ICE" song would make no sense
Didn't the song go,
"Rollin' in my 4.9
Wit the ragtop up so my hair looks fine?"

Maybe that was a different song.
Old Sep 30, 2006 | 04:47 PM
  #10  
SSKiller's Avatar
SSKiller
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,677
From: Scottsdale, AZ
Default RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?

Vanilla Ice Ice baby.......

On a side not.....my old 2001 Honda RC51 was a "1000" but on the engine cases it said 998cc. That is funny why do they do that?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38 PM.