2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter CodeRedR51
  • 6,247 comments
  • 494,688 views

And Ford fires the first shot with the new Shelby... Of course, we have to wait until the lap time becomes official.

Also, what is it that makes people hate the 2015 Mustang's design so much? I don't find it particulary ugly, I hate the King Cobra more than the new Fastback. It still has Mustang DNA, while being modern at the same time.
 
And Ford fires the first shot with the new Shelby... Of course, we have to wait until the lap time becomes official.

Also, what is it that makes people hate the 2015 Mustang's design so much? I don't find it particulary ugly, I hate the King Cobra more than the new Fastback. It still has Mustang DNA, while being modern at the same time.
There are some people that think it lost it's American touch. I dunno.
 
Mustang's I like

1965 Fastback
1967 Shelby
1970 Boss
1971 Mach 1
1993 Cobra
1999 Cobra R
2005 GT
2008 Shelby
2013 Boss
2013 Shelby

Mustang's I don't like
1972 King Cobra
2015 Fastback
There is no such thing as a 1972 King Cobra.
 
Mod Motor Mustangs is saying to avoid HPKings, Evo and Autoblog and that they've lost all credibility.
 
Whether it's confirmed or not, it seems more than believable given the specs. sheet the car has. I love the Z/28 & what it can do for a Camaro, but at the end of the day, it still doesn't have the most ideal platform underneath it.
 
I'm a bit late to the show on this one, but the prospect of a flat-plane Mustang intrigued me somewhat with the revealing of the GT350R. Then I hear the engine itself sounds somewhat un-flat-planey: doubly intrigued.

Now, this is not really new:





These are both flat-plane V8s with the "classic" log manifolds, feeding equal secondaries and X-pipes. The resulting sound is effectively a combination of four 90 degree V-twins that remain distinct due to the specific combination of equal and unequal lengths in the exhaust. Lose the equal secondaries or the X-pipe, and you get this.


But the 'Stang doesn't quite sound like that "classic" approach. For me, it's sort of a mix between the modern Corvette sound and the "hot-vee" twin turbo V8 M5 / M6 (which in turn sound like a duplexed boxer 4, to me).
Based on that, we can almost directly infer the manifold configuration. We know it's using "long" (for production standards) tubular manifolds, so it should be easy to get the differences required in the individual runner lengths.

Log manifolds aren't really conducive to high ouput in NA guise, but their acoustic effect can still be approximated with e.g. a "swept back", aftermarket-style tubular manifold with 4 separate runner lengths.

Alternatively, it should be eminently possible to isolate the front cylinders from the rear with only 2 slightly different runner lengths. That latter approach, in conjunction with equal secondaries and a "perfect" X-pipe, effectively gives the sound of a cross-plane V8 with perfectly equal length primaries and secondaries coupled with an H-pipe (or unequal secondaries and Y- / X-pipe). This would sound something like an R8 V8, on the exhaust side only.


Those Mustang GT350s still sound like the configuration is something more complicated / muddled, however, possibly like the old Cobra Daytona (i.e. this and this), re-factored as a 4-into-1 and the pairings preserved instead via runner length. It might, then, (although it's unlikely) be the result of trial and error...

Alternatively, any subtle separation of the banks (i.e. non-equal secondaries and / or non perfect X-pipe, or H-pipe instead) would quickly destroy the effect, and unearth the "flat-plane-ness", as with the Esprit above. The same would be true with primary runners that were too equal in length, regardless of everything else.

As a final possibility, and thinking again about "trial and error", they've maybe paired the "wrong" cylinders in the Daytona Coupe style separation of runner lengths. It's quite easy to get some lumpy but not quite V8-y sounds that way.

A combination of "wrong pairings" and the bank separation would probably best explain the sound I hear.


Maybe they can fettle it before release, but changing the manifolds affects engine performance and NVH, so...
Perhaps this was deliberate, in that it is the quietest combination, requiring less silencing volume (and hence mass).

Now, back to that age-old alchemist's question: how to get a V6 (new GT...) to sound like a V8? :p
 
I wonder if the flat plane sound can be reversed to a typical crossplane sound with 180* headers similarly to how it can make a crossplane V8 sound like a flatplane since they even out the pulses.
 
I wonder if the flat plane sound can be reversed to a typical crossplane sound with 180* headers similarly to how it can make a crossplane V8 sound like a flatplane since they even out the pulses.
Using normal "180 degree headers" on a flat-plane engine would get you something sounding like a quartet of parallel twins.


To truly "reverse" the effect on the sound, you group the front cylinders together, and group the rear cylinders together separately.

This can be seen from the archetypal flat-plane firing order:

1-8-3-6-4-5-2-7

The front cylinders (Ford / DIN numbering) are 1, 2, 5 and 6. Notice the intervals between those four (and the remaining four) are equivalent to the cross plane intervals: "potato-potato". ;)

The way to do this without technically wrapping tubes around the block is to acoustically separate the front cylinders from the rears: i.e. make their runners slightly longer. Do that, and use 4-1 or 4-2-1 collectors as normal (assuming you can package the lengths), then you merge the two secondaries e.g. in an X-pipe. :D



Incidentally, I've had a breakthrough on the V6 sounding like V8 front, assuming true duals (absolutely no merge, not even a wide H-pipe). You need each successive cylinder in a given bank to have a runner about a foot longer than the previous, though... :ouch:
 
Using normal "180 degree headers" on a flat-plane engine would get you something sounding like a quartet of parallel twins.


To truly "reverse" the effect on the sound, you group the front cylinders together, and group the rear cylinders together separately.

This can be seen from the archetypal flat-plane firing order:

1-8-3-6-4-5-2-7

The front cylinders (Ford / DIN numbering) are 1, 2, 5 and 6. Notice the intervals between those four (and the remaining four) are equivalent to the cross plane intervals: "potato-potato". ;)

The way to do this without technically wrapping tubes around the block is to acoustically separate the front cylinders from the rears: i.e. make their runners slightly longer. Do that, and use 4-1 or 4-2-1 collectors as normal (assuming you can package the lengths), then you merge the two secondaries e.g. in an X-pipe. :D



Incidentally, I've had a breakthrough on the V6 sounding like V8 front, assuming true duals (absolutely no merge, not even a wide H-pipe). You need each successive cylinder in a given bank to have a runner about a foot longer than the previous, though... :ouch:

I've got an easier task for you, make a V6 sound like a H-6 or an I-6 and you're in business. Imagine a VQ35 350Z that sounded like a 911 GT3 RS or BMW M1. (Long tube headers actually get pretty close, from what I've seen)

I am interested to see what aftermarket headers will sound like on the GT350.
 
Mod Motor Mustangs is saying to avoid HPKings, Evo and Autoblog and that they've lost all credibility.

For reporting on a rumor?

Interesting to note that Ford has said before that they do have a Nurb lap time, but that they're debating whether or not to release it.
 
For reporting on a rumor?

Interesting to note that Ford has said before that they do have a Nurb lap time, but that they're debating whether or not to release it.
Well after the last article they did prior to thins one everyone seems to be rather angry with them.
 
Mustang Shelby GT350S ?

http://www.fordracingparts.com/m/Part.asp?p=11687

2016 Road Race Mustang Placeholder (1).jpg


 
Yeah. Sounds like the FR500. Though, now that Ford Racing is defunct, might it be the FP500? Ford Racing Performance Parts will likely now be just Ford Performance Parts. FPP. I guess.
 
Well after the last article they did prior to thins one everyone seems to be rather angry with them.

Which one?

Also:


Mustang's I like

1965 Fastback
1967 Shelby
1970 Boss
1971 Mach 1
1993 Cobra
1999 Cobra R
2005 GT
2008 Shelby
2013 Boss
2013 Shelby

Mustang's I don't like
1972 King Cobra
2015 Fastback

I just had to comment. I like the 2015. I don't know if I like it as much as a 65 or 67, but I like it more than the 2005, the 1993 and maybe even the 2010. Maybe.

The 2005 which was fantastically retro and thus sold like flapjacks. That car had numerous design flaws, but I think the best way to illustrate them is in side view:

2005-Ford-Mustang-GT-p-Side-Graffiti-1024x768.jpg

Of particular note, the front and rear chops are severe, giving the rear end a rather flat and tall expanse of bumper at the back. The front end is riotously square. Not a bad thing... I like the grille and lights in isolation, but the relationship of the the headlight to the front wheelarch has always bothered me... and I'm sure the guys at Ford spent hours massaging the clay at that exact spot to minimize the interference... but it's still there.

The sides are flat. Too little curve to give good definition and shadow.

The swage line leading to the vestigial side vent is a nice touch, but the big flat rear fender looks fat and dumpy. I chose an outdoor shot because artful studio lighting that highlights the fender flares covers up how dull it looks with sharp shadows... but on the road, there's no denying there's something missing there.

lead4-2013-ford-mustang-v6-review.jpg


The 2010 facelift was bettter. Fixed the relation of the front clusters to the wheel arch. Blended the wheelarches into the fenders to give the fenders themselves more definition. Pulled the vestigial side vent back into a swash to give more structure to the rear fender, put in hips(!!!), and canted the tail-lights to give more shape to the (still too tall) rear.

They also started using black paint on the rockers to disguise the car's bulk. Obviously not on this car, but on most models, this was the case.

2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost-side-view.jpg


Here, you still have a lot of rear bumper, and yes, in side view, it's not particularly inspiring (more like a Tiburon), but from the rear, it's much nicer, with the surfaces on multiple planes, this time.

The rear haunch is more noticeably muscular, standing out from the side of the car better.

The swage lines effectively break the side up into three distinct sections, giving a distinct center cutaway portion that makes the car look much sleeker. Nice touch: Upper shoulder line continues after rear arch, further exaggerating the muscular proportion of the hips.

The front light clusters and the front wheelarch blend better. They've given it a sharper nose without losing the upright square element (thus, no, it really doesn't look anything like an Aston) necessary for a "Muscle Car". It's very reminiscent of the 1969 Boss... whose high-mounted sidescoop and integrated rear window are echoed in the styling of the rear fender.


137860_Side_Profile_Web.jpg



I can understand if people don't like the 2015... taste is subjective... but inferior to the 2005? Hell no. It's superior to the 05 in most every way. Maybe against the 2010 facelift, it's debatable, but this model represents the clean break needed to take the Mustang's design (and yes, many Mustang-specific design cues are still intact!) into the 21st Century.

-

EDITED: Forgot to finish the last line before I left the house for work. :ouch:
 
Last edited:
I've got an easier task for you, make a V6 sound like a H-6 or an I-6 and you're in business. Imagine a VQ35 350Z that sounded like a 911 GT3 RS or BMW M1. (Long tube headers actually get pretty close, from what I've seen)

I am interested to see what aftermarket headers will sound like on the GT350.
The exhaust is trivial; the intake is the harder part because the packaging is more rigid, and people like "plug-and-play" mods.

For a V6 to sound like a boxer six on the exhaust side, just avoid the warbly Nissan sound and almost anything you can easily package will do.

For the intake, you need to pair in diagonals (consult the firing order for even separation) across the V to mimic the boxer pairings (sounds like a trio of parallel twins, incidentally). I.e. you need to fabricate something like this.

Straight sixes usually come in that configuration already if NA, e.g. this one.

The more evocative straight-six with log-type intake manifold (M3 CSL, M1 ProCar etc.) is a little tricky to do on a V6. Thankfully, the merged-inline style intake sounds good enough. The Cyclone isn't bad, either; intake mods might be preferable to exhaust mods if you don't like the idea of my "Medusa crossplane headers". :P


Aftermarket exhaust parts for the new GT350 are going to be a whole new ball game, I bet!
 
Back