BLU-BY-U

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2...Boss_Specs.pdf


7500 redline
forged internals
11.0 compression

ford is upping the anty naturally aspirated, i for one thought they'd always take the "easy" way out with a blower or turbo motor.... wrong

The Evil Genius

Need moar torque!

BLU-BY-U

it will have every bit as much tq as an ls6, and this motor is going to be bullet proof. you will see these boss car's modded spinning to near 8500rpms and making very large hp numbers. this motor is a tank, it's MUCH better than the base 5.0 thats in the '11 gt cars

http://media.ford.com/press_kits_det...ection_id=2858

darkstallion_69

baaaddd a$$$$$!

Vette_Minded

It's OK but it's no.......

https://www.fushigiball.com/?MID=743178

tjZ06

Ummm, really? Their spec sheet says est. 380 tq. '02+ LS6s were 400tq. How is that every bit as much? Also with a high-winding 5.0L vs. the 5.7L LS6 I doubt the torque peak will be as low, nor will the torque curve be as healthy below that peak. Also, I really doubt 8500rpms. It takes a LOT of valve spring to run that kind of RPM, which in turn is harder on other valve-train components. Also, it's unlikely the intake mani will be any good at that kind of rpm. Finally, will the factory computer (obviously with a reprogram) even support 8500pm? For reference for over 7500rpm in a LSX you have to go to a single plane "carb style" intake or a custom sheet metal intake to really make any power, and I'm pretty sure the stock computer (yes, with tune etc.) can only support something like 7500rpm.

-TJ

BLU-BY-U

remember the '02 C5Z (which i owned BTW) was rated on the old SAE system. All motors since 2006/2007 are under the more stringent SAE rating system. Don't get caught up with listed hp/tq crank numbers and try and compare to 9 years ago. You are comparing apples to oranges.

The "regular" 5.0 for 2011 is dynoing 360+ ft lbs to the wheel.....thats more than my ls6 did bonestock. It dynoed like 350 rwtq.

And regarding the redline capabilities....i say prepare to be shocked with what this thing is going to spin to. It's a rotating TANK of a motor and the aftermarket tuners I've talked to said it's going to be more than capable of spinning to 8500 "TUNE ONLY". We shall see.

NYC6

Ford knocked it out of the ballpark with the new Mustang.

racerns

Just a quick note on this. The changes to the SAE rating system was more for 3rd party oversight of the results than any of the actual true engine tests. It was to close the loop holes that had some manufactures fudging numbers. Many of the Japanese auto makers were found to be inflating their numbers quite a bit and their ratings went down a good bit but the GM ratings pretty much went up a few hp as it seem they were rounding down to the nearest 5s or 10s place. I would be pretty confident in the GM LS6 ratings as a comparison to today’s ratings.

BSheppard

+1 Just a great car!

NytmereZ

Dont bother , I test drove a couple 5.0's over the weekend gave and honest reveiw , and the auto with the 3.15 gearing didnt inpress me, the 6 speed with the 3.73 gearing was very impressive.
If its not a corvette, you are automaticaly a lier.
The new Boss 302 will demolish a base vette, but the LS7 wont be in any danger IMO, we will have to see.
I already know for FACT that on the steet(in mexico) the standard 5.0 , with the 6 speed and 3.73 gear is quicker than the base LS3 Vette(by about 2-3 cars) that little 302 is amazing, and I'm ordering one next week
I'm going with the light blue, 6 speed, 3.73 brembo package, it will be my sleeper car as none of my others are, I might even take off the 5.0 badges and stick GT ones on, last years GT was a slow heavy pig
The base 5.0 spins all the way up to 7 grand hard, it feelt like it had more, as I hit the rev limiter a few times.

TrueBlueConvert

Sweet I look forward to pics and a full review after you get it and gain more seat time and after you ad a few mods as im sure you will. I would like to get one, but fiscal responsebilities keep me from that. So I just ordered and dumped a bit of cash into my current DD to make me want to drive it and keep it again.

JerriVette

the boss 302 is awesome. I heard the dealers are having an allocation on boss 302 based on previous years sales and even then it will be limited quantity..

Dealer markups could be a concern for potiential buyers....

I heard 36 grand base msrp and 44 for the one without the rear seat..

Have fun with that awesome new ford...(and I'm not a ford fan)

(edit) stock to stock I'd like to know what you're basing the statement of the Boss 302 is "going to demolish a stock LS3 vette"

From what I understand this new Boss 302 will beat an M3 around the track...

Hows the corvette compare to the M3 on a track? Is the M3 equal to the vette on the track runs? or visa versa?

I dig the mustang boss 302 ...but demolish a vette LS3? I'm not buying into that one just yet...

Not from missouri but still impressed by the old saying....Its the show me state..

So show me..

Good luck with your new ride. Its really great.

tjZ06

Seriously, try Google sometime, there's a world of information out there!

Power ratings switched from Gross to Net in 1971, with some cars carrying both Gross and Net in '71. ALL of these ratings were and are regulated by SAE and SAE sets all of the testing procedures and standards.

Now, in 2005 SAE rolled out their "Certified Power" rating, which is still a Net power rating (Net simply means that the engine is tested with all accessories, intake and exhaust systems in place as it would be in a car, while the prior Gross rating did not include the accessories and full intake or exhaust systems and as such generally meant a higher rating).

Obviously there was no 2005 Z06, and the Corvettes had moved on to the C6 body. However, CTS-Vs still used the LS6 for the 2005 model year. LS6 CTS-Vs were rated at 400hp/395tq for the 2004 model year under the prior SAE rating system. LS6 CTS-Vs were rated at 400hp/395tq for the 2005 model year under the new Certified Power SAE system. NO CHANGE

In fact, I was unable to find ANY GM engine that had its power rating REDUCED by the new system. Further lots of GM engines had to increase their ratings (for example the supercharged Northstar jumped from 440hp to 469hp).

If your LS6 only did 350rwtq you had a dog or lemon, sorry to hear. You sure you didn't have a '01 with the smaller cam and pup-cats (and a 385hp/385tq rating)?

And yes, we'll have to wait and see what it will spin to. But why would Ford put valve springs capable of keeping it out of valve float at 8500rpm on a motor they set the redline at 7500rpm in? Springs to accommodate that extra 1000rpm would be significantly stiffer, likely more expensive (though perhaps not), and actually cause some extra parasitic loss. What's the upside in that for Ford? And we're assuming the internals are up to the task as well. RPM is the biggest stressing factor on things like rods and rod bolts (since it determines the linear speed the piston/rod assembly travels, since it will always have to decelerate and then re-accelerate in the same physical distance - defined by the crank - the speed at which it must do so dictates the Gs exerted on the assembly, and is generally the higher stressing factor on rods but certainly on rod bolts than actual power generation). Then let's not forget it's unlikely the intake manifold is capable of supporting that RPM in an efficient manner either. Look at LSX style manifolds for example, they really fall on their face after 7k. Sure, you can build an LSX that will spin beyond that, but you really need to go to a sheet metal or single plane intake to take advantage of it. Finally, will the Ford PCM even accommodate fuel and spark control to 8500rpm? I'm pretty sure even w/ HP Tuners and such you can't get a GM PCM to run a motor that high, I'd be surprised if Ford gave out of the box tuning capability to 8500rpm. Why would Ford want people being able to easily spin a motor they have to warranty 1k rpm beyond what they engineered it to do?

Now, as for the current 5.0 beating up on LS3 base 'vettes I don't buy it. It sounds like everybody is talking about street racing which a) is lame and stupid b) is 99.9% driver (all in the launch). LS3s are 436hp IIRC in a ~3200lbs car. Real-world dyno testing has proven the LS3 is good for every bit of that 436hp, if not more. The motors are true beasts.

Don't get me wrong, I think Ford is really getting it right with the 5.0 and upcoming Boss. I am very much not a "Ford guy" but they even have me thinking about it. And really, it's good for all of us Chevy guys that Ford is giving GM a good incentive to do something with the Camaro. I'd love to see the Z28 finally come out, and perhaps a lighter still LS3 powered "track" version. I wouldn't hold me breath for that though.

-TJ

BLU-BY-U

350 REAR WHEEL TOURQE SAE corrected on a 248 dynojet is about 400 "at the engine". how is that a dog for a low mileage car? thats exactly what other 2002 owners dynoed on a LEGIT 248 dynojet with an SAE CORRECTION FACTOR. If you have a 12% drivetrain loss thats 350/.88 = 398 tq. Sounds about what the crank rating was, eh?

and of course i owned a 2002, did they make electron blue in 2001? I'm also on the C5 Z06 fast list and C6 Z06 fast list so get your story correct before you start calling me a liar (some how or another I'm not good enough for you but QuickSilver and Ranger seem to believe me - lol). Maybe try a search on my handle, it's as easy to do as your stupid google comment that got you no where but bad info

NytmereZ

As you know Electron blue didnt come out until 2002, I remeber cause I was Pissed, I bought a Black 01, and loved that color, my memory also recals my 01 in the low 340 rwhp range, my et's were 12.3's'-12.5's in between 114-116 mph, stock everything.

BoostManiac

I'm pretty excited that they have revived the 5.0 Boss and remembered to include it's high revvability. That's something that's typically missing from the V-8 experience, and V-8s that can rev and make torque are very deadly. The look of the latest Stangs has really grown on me, a few choice updates and they can be very sharp. Without a doubt, the best Stangs ever made are being made now.

Although I couldn't help but notice, even NA----STILL 3600+ lbs?

BSheppard

This is a problem to me but most of all, the physical size of the Mustang is just on the large side. Make it smaller with the same drivetrain and keep the weight down around 3100-3200lbs. It would be: faster, handle better, get better gas milage, stop better and of corse be MUCH more fun to drive. See the old Fox body, it had 4 seats and was a much smaller car.

C5 Pewter Coupe

Considering that the 2011 Mustang GT barely lost to the M3 on a track, you can bet your top dollar that the much more "race ready" BOSS 302 will spank it silly on the track.. how it does vs a LS3 C6 is anyone's guess till they are raced on the same track on the same day..