What Everyone Gets Wrong About The V6 Mustang
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 кві 2024
- These V6 Mustangs are low-hanging fruit orchards if you can be satisfied with ~200-250 horsepower in a ~3100lb car . They're not muscle cars and never claimed to be.
So here's why I think they're a bit of an IQ test - are you building the right car? Do you have realistic expectations? What's the most effective way to get the most from these cars?
Most of the focus is on early SN95's, 1994-1998 but the same things apply to 1999-2004 New Edge 3.8 and 3.9 Mustangs. - Авто та транспорт
Great video man!
Great video, I’d like to see a comparison between the NPI 4.6 and the PI 4.6 from you.. Unfortunately you don’t have those 2 cars 😂😂 I know all the differences but I like the way you explained it all in detail..
Also have you looked into the Windstar intake upgrade??
Thanks! The Windstar intake was the easy go-to 20 years ago because it updates the single port 3.8's using junkyard parts and there just weren't a lot of new edge split port engines in junkyards yet.
I think today in 2024 a 4.2 truck swap is less work, same money and more power when starting with a SN95 single port, or just having the stock intake assembly ported when starting with a New Edge car. That lets you avoid a bunch of questionable "home depot" stuff, maybe having to get a different hood if you started with the heat extractor stock hood, etc.
I'd do a Windstar swap if I had a rescue car that was always going to look like a dog's lunch, it does work.
V6s in general are and always will be underrated, especially in cars under 3500lbs. Given a decent head casting, you can build any motor to make 1.4-lbft per cubic inch at 10:1 compression on 87 octane gas via proper head work and cam selection, and that motor can be made to rev to around 7000 (as long as the stroke is under 4") and make around 1.2x HP compared to the torque, and it'll do so dead reliable, basically forever, with basic aftermarket bearings and studs unless the rods, crank, and pistons are TRULY garbage, and even then, you'd only need aftermarket hypereutectic pistons and some super basic aftermarket forged rods (cuz I've never heard of aftermarket CAST rods).
And TBH a good rule of thumb so you have enough torque is the displacement-to-weight ratio of 1cc per 1 pound of vehicle all up+driver combined weight. So if you have a 3300-pound car and a 200-pound driver, a 3.5L will be the perfect balance for a sports car, especially something that's effortless to drive (power-wise) with controllable fun, particularly for new or skill-lazy spirited drivers. Given the above rules of thumb (derived from over 50 years of engine building experience by David Vizard and 30 years from Cattledog Garage) a 3.5L V6 can, at the bare minimum, give you around 360 crank HP all motor (at 6300rpm, redline around 1000 higher, I'd assume) to work with, when properly built. All you'd need to make that fun is a well-sorted, progressive ratio 5 or 6-speed transmission, decent suspension, and decent 3-season tires.
I can't argue with any of this, except to say all that work to make 300+ hp out of an Essex is a tough sell economically. Can it be done? Yep! Should it? Probably not for most people 😁
@@shoveI I fully agree, I wouldn't bother with an Essex. There are plenty of good swap options out there, both with and without existing kits. I'd be looking at a Honda J35, Toyota 2GR, or Chevy LV3 2014+ 4.3 V6 for V6 swaps. Or hell, even Ford's own later 3.7 DOHC V6, those things are beasts and can take 15+ pounds unopened, producing 500+ whp when doing so.
None of that is really "budget" unless someone is already a skilled engine builder (not an assembler, a true builder) and swapper, but still.
If I just wanted to turn an SN95 V6 into a peppy daily I'd do what you said regarding the engine, MAYBE order a custom street cam to David Vizard specs, manual swap it, and then stick whatever rear end gives me 60mph at 2000 in last gear, that way it's neither too long nor too short. (50mph, as some low displacement economy cars are geared for at 2000 in last is another step further you could go, but IMO is the practical limit, as that'll give you only 75 at 3000)
I observed that the Probe GT was a better v6 Mustang. As good as the Mustang GT in stock form. Half the 5.0 displacement, 1.3l less than the 3.8. 7k rpm, all aluminum, variable length intake with 3 length of intake using one set of runners, 24 valves, forged crank. Weight is about 430lbs. about the weight of a 4 cylinder from that era. There are 4 different Mazda intakes for that engine. Each designed for different rpm and they all look unique. 164hp on the low end stock, 200 hp for the JDM hotted up one. Switch to a newer ECU for MAF about 210-215. That will beat a 4.6 2v GT or 5.0 GT, NA. Mazdas technical papers on VRIS do a pretty good job explaining how it works helmholtz resonance, using the air like a spring.
The intakes look more like the earlier 3.8 intake ironically. Instead of one intake box, it's like the 2 sides of the newer 3.8 intake folded onto one another, offset for equal length. 2 boxes, 3 runners each. The trick part is 2 other tubes connect between the intake halves. The tubes (vacuum valved,) open up as you go through the rpms, allowing the 2 boxes to share more and more air. Effectively shortening the air path.
Those K engines are a good example of what you can get by spending more money on an engine. They're considerably taller so they couldn't reuse the same K-member as the GT Mustangs and still fit under the low hood and the pair of DOHC heads probably cost more to manufacture than a whole running Essex 3.8 . But Mazda does build a great engine when someone's willing to pay for it!
I think dual exhaust or bigger single with a nicer Y pipe is best amd thats it.
Car IQ test? Too smart for me!
Replace the engine with a Predator engine, super sleeper. lol.
Lmfao a harbor freight special will last half a pull