ford engineering sucks?
10-13-2009, 10:51 PM
#13
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 2,211
or for the $$$. I had a 4Runner that i was trying to get just a basic 87 performance tune done on.
I wasn't aware that you have to send off the PCM to get a chip burned to reflash the tuning...then have it shipped back. over $500 at the time just for a slightly better ECM strategy and to account for my CAI and exhaust.
imports are a PITA. if you think Mustang goodies cost some $$$, try import. I learned my lesson on that thing, and stick with American made now
I wasn't aware that you have to send off the PCM to get a chip burned to reflash the tuning...then have it shipped back. over $500 at the time just for a slightly better ECM strategy and to account for my CAI and exhaust.
imports are a PITA. if you think Mustang goodies cost some $$$, try import. I learned my lesson on that thing, and stick with American made now
10-13-2009, 10:52 PM
#14
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Deep in the <3 of Tx
Posts: 3,925
I don't know about the Honda, but the 370Z is also running high compression. I think I remember reading about 11:1. So there you go. That plus high RPMs doesn't hurt. 
Although I'd bet the Honda is also running high compression. It seems all/most of the small engines from the imports (excluding hybrids) are running high compression to get power people expect these days and to "beat" the American cars which have always ruled in the power department.
But as said, in the American muscle car world, the V6 is the economy version and the V8 is the performance version. The new V6 in 2011 should be much better however.
Although I'd bet the Honda is also running high compression. It seems all/most of the small engines from the imports (excluding hybrids) are running high compression to get power people expect these days and to "beat" the American cars which have always ruled in the power department.
But as said, in the American muscle car world, the V6 is the economy version and the V8 is the performance version. The new V6 in 2011 should be much better however.
10-13-2009, 10:58 PM
#15
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Henry County, Georgia
Posts: 1,636
I dunno man, i kinda liked buying 300 hp 320 tq for 14k as opposed to spending 35k for a 370 that runs as fast. Mustangs are cheap compared to most performance cars but they pack a hell of a punch. I could buy a 09 stang and boost it for the same price as a 370 and kill it easily im sure.
10-13-2009, 11:33 PM
#16
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 416
Some lessons are harder learned than others. Have fun with your import.
10-13-2009, 11:45 PM
#17
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 568
V-tak just kicked in yo!...neeneeneeneenee
EDIT: ****, just realized this wasnt OT...muh bad.....yo
EDIT: ****, just realized this wasnt OT...muh bad.....yo
10-13-2009, 11:48 PM
#18
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Jax, FL
Posts: 1,554
why is it that with a 4.0L V6 ford can only manage a measley 210hp? honda's with 2.0L are making that much. A 3.7L 370z makes 30 more horses than our 4.6L. I think in about a year I'm gonna be moving away from the mustang. Most likely gonna buy a used M3. I know the long awaited 5.0 might come out in 2011 but, it's too late for me. I love my car, but when I think of how crappy the Liter to HP ratio is, it bums me out. i even have an s197, new edges have it even worse......
10-14-2009, 12:03 AM
#20
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CALI
Posts: 667
I understand where the OP is coming from. I am in the same mentality as well. Why can our 4.6L GT engine produce only 300hp when the VQ 3.6 can produce 300?
Obviously one association is COST. Thats the biggest concern.
Then comes driveability. They have a much higher comp ratio and require premium fuel.
Most people arent gonna wanna pay a 30cent premium/gallon for fuel.
But I do agree why Ford cant produce an engine that can be more efficient in terms of HP/CC ratio.
I'd like to see a ford engine break the 100hp/liter ratio. Without being boosted. (or boosted for that matter)
Obviously one association is COST. Thats the biggest concern.
Then comes driveability. They have a much higher comp ratio and require premium fuel.
Most people arent gonna wanna pay a 30cent premium/gallon for fuel.
But I do agree why Ford cant produce an engine that can be more efficient in terms of HP/CC ratio.
I'd like to see a ford engine break the 100hp/liter ratio. Without being boosted. (or boosted for that matter)