Why do the V6's ONLY have 210hp?
#41
RE: Why do the V6's ONLY have 210hp?
The reason is cost. Ford and GM are desperately trying to hold onto what market share they have. Their only way to compete is $$$. The imports KILL them on quality, standard features and engine technology. I have two late model Honda's in my driveway (and 2 Fords, so we're even), both run so efficiently they don't need cats AND have better power to weight ratios. Engine R&D is big $$$.
As gas price goes up, you can bet the domestic guy's sales will shrivel until a d*** import group buys them. Remember when VW bought rolls-Royce and Bentley? maybe Kia will buy GM. just my crystal-ball BS.
As gas price goes up, you can bet the domestic guy's sales will shrivel until a d*** import group buys them. Remember when VW bought rolls-Royce and Bentley? maybe Kia will buy GM. just my crystal-ball BS.
#44
Dodge has a 3.5 V6 that puts out 250HP / 250ft-lbs and gets better gas mileage
than the 4.0, so I don't see the 4.0 as an economy motor at all, for gas costs
or manufacturing costs. Also that 3.5 V6 is NOT a VVT engine either, the 3.6
V6 Pentastar is, at 300+ HP. Yet, the 'Stang 4.0 is 210, and the 3.5 Dodge
is 250. So, I wondered the same thing, why only 210 HP from a 4.0, when
that 3.5 in the Charger is 250, and gets better MPG. Tune that 3.5, and
get up to 270 HP and TQ.
Torque curve notwithstanding, it should be able to put out at least 260 HP.
I am still fine with it, but 210 is quite low for a 4.0, no matter how you slice it...
than the 4.0, so I don't see the 4.0 as an economy motor at all, for gas costs
or manufacturing costs. Also that 3.5 V6 is NOT a VVT engine either, the 3.6
V6 Pentastar is, at 300+ HP. Yet, the 'Stang 4.0 is 210, and the 3.5 Dodge
is 250. So, I wondered the same thing, why only 210 HP from a 4.0, when
that 3.5 in the Charger is 250, and gets better MPG. Tune that 3.5, and
get up to 270 HP and TQ.
Torque curve notwithstanding, it should be able to put out at least 260 HP.
I am still fine with it, but 210 is quite low for a 4.0, no matter how you slice it...
#45
In reference to the initial question, my first vehicle at 16 in 1976 was a 220 Gross HP 1970 302W Mustang with auto transmission. Looking back, it had all the power a 16 year old kid should have in my opinion. I never had an accident or even a ticket when I was a teenager.
#46
When I bought my Mustang I had the choice between the V6 or the V8. I had a 5.0 one time and thought since I really wouldn't be driving it all that much and not that far, the 4.0 would do me just fine. Now I do wonder why Ford put such an engine in it with so low of hp compared to other brands with 2.0, 3.6 getting a much higher hp. Once in a while I do miss the growl of the V8 but I do love my Mustang.
#47
Ford even announced they're done selling most cars, except the Mustang and Focus Active:
4/25/18:
Ford today announced it will phase out most cars it sells in North America. Ford sees 90 percent of its
North America portfolio in trucks, utilities and commercial vehicles. They said they "will transition to two
vehicles", one being the Mustang and an unannounced vehicle, the Focus Active, as the only traditional
cars it sells in the region.
4/25/18:
Ford today announced it will phase out most cars it sells in North America. Ford sees 90 percent of its
North America portfolio in trucks, utilities and commercial vehicles. They said they "will transition to two
vehicles", one being the Mustang and an unannounced vehicle, the Focus Active, as the only traditional
cars it sells in the region.
Lincoln's sedan's may also disappear though this was not explicitly stated in today's press release.
#48
Yes, I saw that press release today. I don't know what to think of it. However other car companies are or have done it; http://wtkr.com/2018/04/25/ford-drop...n-dealerships/
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
THS_Steed06
V6 S197 General Discussion
6
04-08-2014 12:46 AM
98elcheapo
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
5
09-07-2013 11:00 AM