2009 Boss Mustang

[68fastback]

Accord to what I have ready, the Shelby GT (or GT350) will essentially be the same car as GT-H, available in some different color combos and with either a automatic or 5 spd. Interesting development for sure and not totally unexpected.

 

Haven't heard the information on the engine branding but it certainly makes sense for Ford's "Bold Moves" marketing initiative. Great find!!

 

 

 

Re GT... makes sense, fills a niche and still won't impact auction sales of GT-Hs. Wonder if it will be a Ford or Shelby serial num, tho either way, based on what we know, Ford dealers will be the seller, I think.

[68fastback]

Re GT... makes sense, fills a niche and still won't impact auction sales of GT-Hs. Wonder if it will be a Ford or Shelby serial num, tho either way, based on what we know, Ford dealers will be the seller, I think.

 

 

Also, just found this over at Mustangnews.com:

 

"...the Hurricane engine program is going to sprout two new engines said to be 5.8 and 6.2 liters. Word is that the program is on full boat not only for the trucks, but for the Mustang too! The engines are for sure to be offered in the redesigned 2010 Mustang, but are even possible to land as soon as late 2008 in the current Mustang! No word yet on the horsepower ratings or technical specifications. Autoweek Magazine has reported that Ford may actually use the “Boss” name to brand the line of Mustang V-8 engines. While we have previously reported that cylinder deactivation systems would likely be part of the picture, it is unknown what the entrance of the Hurricane engine family will bring."

 

Given that it's almost certain now that the new mustang will get the slick Dana IRS used in the Aussie GT-P Falcon, this could be one nice ride developing here! ...whatever they call it

[MustangFanatic]

Also, just found this over at Mustangnews.com:

 

"...the Hurricane engine program is going to sprout two new engines said to be 5.8 and 6.2 liters. Word is that the program is on full boat not only for the trucks, but for the Mustang too! The engines are for sure to be offered in the redesigned 2010 Mustang, but are even possible to land as soon as late 2008 in the current Mustang! No word yet on the horsepower ratings or technical specifications. Autoweek Magazine has reported that Ford may actually use the “Boss” name to brand the line of Mustang V-8 engines. While we have previously reported that cylinder deactivation systems would likely be part of the picture, it is unknown what the entrance of the Hurricane engine family will bring."

 

Given that it's almost certain now that the new mustang will get the slick Dana IRS used in the Aussie GT-P Falcon, this could be one nice ride developing here! ...whatever they call it

 

Sound promising, Ford ACTUALLY might get back in the game with the Hurricane and produce a high HP naturally aspirated engine. We can only hope that a Boss 351 is in our future. As I've stated before, the Boss 302 is certainly my first and primary choice for a Boss but a 351 would be close second if Ford could produce 400 naturally aspirated HP, keep the curb weight below 3,400, offer an IRS with stellar handling and braking. It is certainly a great time to be a Mustang fan!!

[1970boss302]

With Ford moving on new Mustang models I can't wait till 2008 and a New Boss Model.

[EbonyGT500]

That's why I liked the '01 Cobra all alloy modular so much too <sigh> even if only 320HP. Never felt any NA motor pull so linearly like that before -- that sold me on the DOHC modulars.

 

Btw, also, found this little tidbit over at Autoweek:

 

The Ford Mustang will be restyled for the 2010 model year, one year later than previously planned.

 

The Mustang is likely to get a bigger engine developed under the Hurricane program. The main Hurricane engine is expected to have a 6.2-liter displacement, but a 5.8-liter is also possible. Ford could revive the Boss name to brand the engines.

 

Ford has pledged to keep the Mustang nameplate fresh by doing special versions each model year.

 

We can only hope that's on the '10 base to battle the Hemi and a 5.0 Boss will be an NA mod.

 

I also read thru all the Autoweek stuff on the truck rollouts. Chick full of 6.4 Diesel (my bet is on dual turbo! ;-) but not a word about 6.2 Hurricane or any reference to a big block NA truck motor... I thought that curious since the Mustang references above were in the same writeups.

 

.

 

The 6.4L Twin Turbo is already a done deal for Super Duty. should be out early next year as a '08 Model.

 

The 6.4L already shows up in some publications

[1970boss302]

java script:emoticon('', 'smid_5')

 

 

 

Will the New 2008 BOSS Mustang look like the Saleen PJ Boss ????

 

The Slaeen PJ BOSS 302 has 370 HP and looks like a winner

 

Ford maybe having Saleen done the work ???

[PFA]

Ok...I missed this PJ BOSS Saleen...any links to pictures?

[68fastback]

Ok...I missed this PJ BOSS Saleen...any links to pictures?

 

 

I didn't take any pix at NYIAS in April, but here's link to some info Saleen PJ 302 It was drawing more attention than the S7 supecar, and was shown out front in the Javits center lobby not in the Ford area. Very nicely done -- a new Boss 302 for all practical purposes.

[PFA]

I didn't take any pix at NYIAS in April, but here's link to some info Saleen PJ 302 It was drawing more attention than the S7 supecar, and was shown out front in the Javits center lobby not in the Ford area. Very nicely done -- a new Boss 302 for all practical purposes.

 

Thank you!!

While driving down Woodward Friday night, I drove past Saleens setup. He had a couple of the S7s out there and I could have swore this car was out there too. I wasn't able to stop though...I figured it was one of Fords race cars.

[68fastback]

Thank you!!

While driving down Woodward Friday night, I drove past Saleens setup. He had a couple of the S7s out there and I could have swore this car was out there too. I wasn't able to stop though...I figured it was one of Fords race cars.

 

 

I've never been to the Woodward cruise -- that had to be a kick

 

.

[MustangFanatic]

I've never been to the Woodward cruise -- that had to be a kick

 

.

 

 

 

Me neither but I'd love to in my new Boss!!

[PFA]

Yeah, I went Friday, night before the "official" cruise, but it had to be better Sat. The weather was bad in the morning and part of the afternoon. It's always a good time!!

[39Mustang]

I posted this on the sticky on the 23rd...

 

I read that there were plans for a 5.4 NA BOSS for 08-09. The Romeo plant has been awarded the BOSS engine also.

 

This comes from people from those plants.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure where you got your info., but I can tell you the engine will be a 5.0 Cammer slighly detuned from the FR500C race cars. Actual HP is still being sorted out bewteen the 'car' guy and the 'bean counter', but mark it down that will be the motor.

[68fastback]

Not sure where you got your info., but I can tell you the engine will be a 5.0 Cammer slighly detuned from the FR500C race cars. Actual HP is still being sorted out bewteen the 'car' guy and the 'bean counter', but mark it down that will be the motor.

 

 

39, any idea what intake and heads are being considered. I would think the FordGT heads would work well but the '01 Cobra intake would need to be port-matched. If not the FordGT heads, I would think we'll only see 350HP or so, which doesn't make much sense to me. Any insight?

 

.

[JETSOLVER]

Not sure where you got your info., but I can tell you the engine will be a 5.0 Cammer slighly detuned from the FR500C race cars. Actual HP is still being sorted out bewteen the 'car' guy and the 'bean counter', but mark it down that will be the motor.

 

Then they are going with the spray bore technology? I would think that the other way would just lead to some serious oveheating issues with a production engine. And the cost...they would all have to be built on the niche line in Romeo,yes? As well its going to need a completley new intake to use the airbox on the drivers side. Hmmmm......

[885OHLX]

Hey everyone!

Long-time Mustang lover, first time poster here! This 2009 Boss is GREAT news! After so many years where Ford couldn't care less for the Mustang (The almost Probe years!), it's great to see the Legend getting its due! I just wish I could read the original article at the beginning of this thread to see all the info! Thanks!

 

Matt

[MustangFanatic]

Hey everyone!

Long-time Mustang lover, first time poster here! This 2009 Boss is GREAT news! After so many years where Ford couldn't care less for the Mustang (The almost Probe years!), it's great to see the Legend getting its due! I just wish I could read the original article at the beginning of this thread to see all the info! Thanks!

 

Matt

 

 

Welcome Matt!!! Enjoy, this is certainly the place to stay up to date on all relevant Boss news.

[68fastback]

Then they are going with the spray bore technology? I would think that the other way would just lead to some serious oveheating issues with a production engine. And the cost...they would all have to be built on the niche line in Romeo,yes? As well its going to need a completley new intake to use the airbox on the drivers side. Hmmmm......

 

 

 

Could be mild-stroked 4.6 too, or do you mean the 5.0 'cammer' MEANS spray-bore becasue of it's lineage?

 

Where do you see the overheating concern stemming from?

 

 

.

[JETSOLVER]

 

Where do you see the overheating concern stemming from?

 

Just before Hyland published his book I had a lengthy phone conversation with him re. building my bottom end. I was thinking that since I was toying with rods and pistons anyway, I might as well get everything out of my TEKSID block I could. He told me that they had had some issues with liners both wet and dry and that in his estimation the bore spacing was just to small to get it larger and still retain dependability due to the lack of water jacketing in the MOD V8. Thus the stroke(5.4) thing. At that time he had a good pipeline into Ford. I think we are all agreed that we would much prefer to get revs over a long stroke limited rev engine, no? As I think about it, he also said something about the "b" cylinder head not being jacketed for that kind of flush capacity as well, but I wasn't going to port the heads and kind of ignored that part. I did buy his second stage reground NA cams(The single largest money mistake I have ever made with a car) but pulled them and went back to stock as the overlap killed my mileage. And as we now know, Ford had to go through several 4 valve heads to correct the cooling issues.(top of my head says 5 designs?)

[68fastback]

Just before Hyland published his book I had a lengthy phone conversation with him re. building my bottom end. I was thinking that since I was toying with rods and pistons anyway, I might as well get everything out of my TEKSID block I could. He told me that they had had some issues with liners both wet and dry and that in his estimation the bore spacing was just to small to get it larger and still retain dependability due to the lack of water jacketing in the MOD V8. Thus the stroke(5.4) thing. At that time he had a good pipeline into Ford. I think we are all agreed that we would much prefer to get revs over a long stroke limited rev engine, no? As I think about it, he also said something about the "b" cylinder head not being jacketed for that kind of flush capacity as well, but I wasn't going to port the heads and kind of ignored that part. I did buy his second stage reground NA cams(The single largest money mistake I have ever made with a car) but pulled them and went back to stock as the overlap killed my mileage. And as we now know, Ford had to go through several 4 valve heads to correct the cooling issues.(top of my head says 5 designs?)

 

 

Thanks, Rob...

 

So they must have addressed that in the GT500 block w/Ford GT heads? If so, what we would want is the 5.4 GT500 block in 356-T6, 5.0 stroker, w/ F-GT heads? Or possibly its just not a problem w/o liners and with the enhanced water passages in the F-GT heads, dunno, but w/500HP is had to be addressed.

 

I wonder if they also avoid that prob in the spray-bore since they pick up 4(?)mm (x2) w/o the liners for larger cooling passages? Maybe the 5.4 in steel gets around that the same way -- all 3.55" bore, I believe.

 

I think I've read somewhere the 427 siamesed cyl big-block also had to address similar cooling enhancements once bore got up over 4.15" or so (w/ 4mm liners), though, in steel, they can typically go to about 4.5" before cooling jacket gets too close/thin, if I'm reading your concern correctly.

 

All the subtle engineering considerations we usually don't see ;-)

 

.

[MustangFanatic]

Just before Hyland published his book I had a lengthy phone conversation with him re. building my bottom end. I was thinking that since I was toying with rods and pistons anyway, I might as well get everything out of my TEKSID block I could. He told me that they had had some issues with liners both wet and dry and that in his estimation the bore spacing was just to small to get it larger and still retain dependability due to the lack of water jacketing in the MOD V8. Thus the stroke(5.4) thing. At that time he had a good pipeline into Ford. I think we are all agreed that we would much prefer to get revs over a long stroke limited rev engine, no? As I think about it, he also said something about the "b" cylinder head not being jacketed for that kind of flush capacity as well, but I wasn't going to port the heads and kind of ignored that part. I did buy his second stage reground NA cams(The single largest money mistake I have ever made with a car) but pulled them and went back to stock as the overlap killed my mileage. And as we now know, Ford had to go through several 4 valve heads to correct the cooling issues.(top of my head says 5 designs?)

 

 

I suppose the jury is still out on the GT/GT500 heads having resolved the cooling issues. I know the Terminator Cobra's still had cooling issues with their revised cylinder heads necessitating a TSB for the infamous "tick".

 

Dan, I agree, we can only hope that Ford will give us a 5.4L GT500 block cast in 356-T6 with a 5.0L stroker crank and 4V GT heads. At this point, that would be the best we could possibly hope for before 2010.

[JETSOLVER]

Thanks, Rob...

 

So they must have addressed that in the GT500 block w/Ford GT heads? If so, what we would want is the 5.4 GT500 block in 356-T6, 5.0 stroker, w/ F-GT heads? Or possibly its just not a problem w/o liners and with the enhanced water passages in the F-GT heads

 

 

 

I suppose the jury is still out on the GT/GT500 heads having resolved the cooling issues.

 

Now you know why my heart skipped a beat when we saw that pre/pro car that puked coolant in that pic floating around here a few months ago. And why I quit giving Ford such a hard time with the hood issue. I still maintain its easier to keep an Al. engine cool, but as always I am willing to be swayed. It ought to be easier to cast a larger coolant passsage in iron so

[68fastback]

Now you know why my heart skipped a beat when we saw that pre/pro car that puked coolant in that pic floating around here a few months ago. And why I quit giving Ford such a hard time with the hood issue. I still maintain its easier to keep an Al. engine cool, but as always I am willing to be swayed. It ought to be easier to cast a larger coolant passsage in iron so

 

 

I agree re easier to cool alloy motor.

 

 

I was thinking space might be the motivation behind the "5.0 Cammer" spray-bore and the additional bore they consume for 5.0 over 4.6 still leaves additional potential cooling space since the liners take a full .3" (2x 4mm) out of usable bore spacing. I think I read the spray-bore is 1.5mm (3mm lost), so that leaves a full 5mm to play with.

 

Then I did the math and I now see they actually lose about .6mm (insignif.) on net usable bore spacing with spray-bore (5.0 over 4.6). My assumption is that the 1.5mm spray-steel is not structural, but it may well be to a very real extent. If so, could give a little more cooling room closer to the centerline, but we're talking very little.

 

In the Shelby 427 big blocks (siamesed, which typically aggrevates cooling design) they state:

 

Centrifugally cast ductile iron cylinder sleeves are fitted in the block, with an interference step fit that creates precise, non-shift sleeve positioning. Cylinder walls are siamesed and revised cooling passages make street or race track cooling problems a thing of the past.

 

I would also think that with alloy, the superior heat conduction would pernit more flexibility in cooling passage location, as long as the capacity is improved. But without a 'sliced-MRI' view of the 5.4, 4.6 and 5.0spray next to one another, I think we'll have no way to know what the alternatives actually look like inside.

 

 

Maybe Ford will use the FRT 5.0 cammer's 3-piece cast-magnesium variable-geometry intake.

 

I suppose the jury is still out on the GT/GT500 heads having resolved the cooling issues. I know the Terminator Cobra's still had cooling issues with their revised cylinder heads necessitating a TSB for the infamous "tick".

 

Dan, I agree, we can only hope that Ford will give us a 5.4L GT500 block cast in 356-T6 with a 5.0L stroker crank and 4V GT heads. At this point, that would be the best we could possibly hope for before 2010.

 

 

I didn't know about the Termie's tick... thanks, Fanatic. Is that part of the cyl 7-8 heat-soak problem I've heard about?

 

.

[MustangFanatic]

I agree re easier to cool alloy motor.

I was thinking space might be the motivation behind the "5.0 Cammer" spray-bore and the additional bore they consume for 5.0 over 4.6 still leaves additional potential cooling space since the liners take a full .3" (2x 4mm) out of usable bore spacing. I think I read the spray-bore is 1.5mm (3mm lost), so that leaves a full 5mm to play with.

 

Then I did the math and I now see they actually lose about .6mm (insignif.) on net usable bore spacing with spray-bore (5.0 over 4.6). My assumption is that the 1.5mm spray-steel is not structural, but it may well be to a very real extent. If so, could give a little more cooling room closer to the centerline, but we're talking very little.

 

In the Shelby 427 big blocks (siamesed, which typically aggrevates cooling design) they state:

 

Centrifugally cast ductile iron cylinder sleeves are fitted in the block, with an interference step fit that creates precise, non-shift sleeve positioning. Cylinder walls are siamesed and revised cooling passages make street or race track cooling problems a thing of the past.

 

I would also think that with alloy, the superior heat conduction would pernit more flexibility in cooling passage location, as long as the capacity is improved. But without a 'sliced-MRI' view of the 5.4, 4.6 and 5.0spray next to one another, I think we'll have no way to know what the alternatives actually look like inside.

Maybe Ford will use the FRT 5.0 cammer's 3-piece cast-magnesium variable-geometry intake.

I didn't know about the Termie's tick... thanks, Fanatic. Is that part of the cyl 7-8 heat-soak problem I've heard about?

 

.

 

Excellent post as always Dan. Based on the above posts, it would be a logical assumption that the liners do play more of an integral role in the structual integrity of the block than first thought.

 

The Cammer intake is awesome in terms of both performance and appearance!!! :happy feet:

 

Yes, I believe the "tick" relates to the heat soak issues in cylinders 7 and 8.

[68fastback]

Excellent post as always Dan. Based on the above posts, it would be a logical assumption that the liners do play more of an integral role in the structual integrity of the block than first thought.

 

The Cammer intake is awesome in terms of both performance and appearance!!! :happy feet:

 

Yes, I believe the "tick" relates to the heat soak issues in cylinders 7 and 8.

 

 

Thanks, Fanatic...

 

You know, you, me and Jetsolver, and a few beers, and I think an evening would disappear in about 15 minutes! <lol> It's a delight interacting with you!

 

.

[68fastback]

Thanks, Fanatic...

 

You know, you, me and Jetsolver, and a few beers, and I think an evening would disappear in about 15 minutes! <lol> It's a delight interacting with you!

 

.

 

 

I found this little tidbit on the 5.0 Cammer... notice the date: this was for SEMA 4 years ago! And just as sweet a motor for a Boss 302 today ;-)

 

LAS VEGAS, Nov. 5, 2002 - Ford Racing Technology will revolutionize the crate-engine concept when its new 5.0-liter Cammer crate engine becomes available in 2003. Instead of modifying a standard production engine to suit non-stock applications, Ford Racing specifically designed the Cammer to be one of the most technologically advanced crate engines any manufacturer has ever offered.

 

This high-performance retrofit is an all-aluminum, overhead-cam, 4-valve engine that is a perfect repowering upgrade for vintage Mustangs, street rods, and classic truck projects.

 

According to Ford Racing Technology engine engineer Andy Schwartz, “The 5.0-liter Cammer delivers a healthy 425-430 horsepower at 6700 rpm. The torque curve peaks with 370 foot-pounds at 4000 rpm.”

 

The 5.0-liter Cammer crate engine is based on the SVT Mustang Cobra’s 4.6-liter 4-valve V-8. However, the crate version has several unique qualities and components, including:

 

Larger cylinders (94mm vs. 90.2mm) for 5.0 liters of piston displacement

Flanged cylinder liners

Reinforced crankcase web areas

Forged pistons

11.0:1 compression ratio

Ported heads

Higher-lift cams (12mm vs. 10mm)

Beehive-shaped valve springs to accommodate the higher lift

Modified roller-finger followers

Multi-layer steel-insert head gaskets

Higher-flow fuel injectors

3-piece cast-magnesium variable geometry intake manifold

Higher-flow, dual-cone-spray fuel injectors

The 5.0-liter Cammer crate engine will be shipped with a stock Mustang Cobra oil pan and exhaust manifolds. Installation will be eased substantially by a choice of six different 4.6-liter 4-valve modular wiring harnesses being created specifically for the 5.0-liter Cammer crate engine.

 

“We intend to grow the interest in overhead-cam technology,” said Dan Davis, director, Ford Racing Technology. “This is the future for tuners, project-vehicle builders and aftermarket car and truck enthusiasts. There’s no reason why a crate engine can’t start and perform as well in an aftermarket setting as the engines in production automobiles and trucks do. The 5.0-liter Cammer crate engine will provide top performance, a slick underhood appearance and excellent driveability without the hassles attached to carburetors and distributors.”

 

.

[MustangFanatic]

Thanks, Fanatic...

 

You know, you, me and Jetsolver, and a few beers, and I think an evening would disappear in about 15 minutes! <lol> It's a delight interacting with you!

 

.

 

 

 

You got it!!! If Ford would only listen to the three of us, we could solve all their problems!!

 

Steve

[JETSOLVER]

I would like to go throw darts with Coletti. I think that would be one for a lifetime. But I would definatly invite you guys. And maybe Mark Fields. If he promised to buy... :tequila:

[68fastback]

I would like to go throw darts with Coletti. I think that would be one for a lifetime. But I would definatly invite you guys. And maybe Mark Fields. If he promised to buy... :tequila:

 

 

Deal! and Michigan is probably half-way

 

.

[MustangFanatic]

Deal! and Michigan is probably half-way

 

.

 

 

I'm in!!! :beerchug:

 

Talk about "Bold Moves", I can see the headline now "Ford exec Fields has beers with group of enthusiasts and develops new Mustang models on a cocktail napkin while Coletti throws darts!" Hmm, I wonder if Brad Pitt would be available to play me in the commercial

 

It is really is too bad Ford wouldn't consider such an idea, consider the kind of perspective a small group of well informed enthusiasts could bring to the process. Essentially what Ford would have is a group of consultants without the high price or the BS. I'd sign a non-disclosure and non-compete agreements just to have the opportunity to have input into such an undertaking....Ok, I just woke up from my dream