4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?
09-30-2006, 02:28 PM
#1
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location:
Posts: 484
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???
09-30-2006, 03:12 PM
#3
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 2,645
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....
09-30-2006, 03:41 PM
#4
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 51
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
Mike
09-30-2006, 04:30 PM
#7
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 3,768
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.
All companies do it. My 4wheeler is marketed as a 600 when it's actually 598cc. It's not a big deal, lol.
09-30-2006, 04:36 PM
#8
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 293
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
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
09-30-2006, 04:41 PM
#9
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 3,768
RE: 4942cc, why do they call it 5.0 then?
ORIGINAL: squad272
yeah , and if it was a 4.9 the "Vanilla ICE" song would make no sense
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
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
"Rollin' in my 4.9
Wit the ragtop up so my hair looks fine?"
Maybe that was a different song.
09-30-2006, 04:47 PM
#10
4th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,677
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?
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?