The Ford Story: The Mustang 5.0 is Back!

Home | Auto Show Coverage | The Mustang 5.0 is Back!

The Mustang 5.0 is Back!

December 27, 2009

That’s right – the legendary Mustang 5.0 is back! But this engine isn’t a throwback. This is a new version of the venerable V8. Packed with technology, this 32-valve, 5.0-liter V8 in the 2011 Mustang 5.0 churns out 412 horses* and lays down 390 lb.–ft. of torque. And while numbers like these always look good in print, their true character can only be experienced from behind the wheel when the traffic light turns green.

Part of the power story comes from the 5.0 V8’s use of Cam Torque-actuated twin independent variable–cam timing (TiVCT). This technology allows variable control of intake and exhaust valve closing, independently, to optimize combustion and performance throughout the engine speed range.

The 5.0 also has a compression ratio of 11:1 and cylinder heads designed to optimize airflow. Other technologies include high-energy coil–on plug ignition and cooling jets that keep the pistons cool – every part in the engine is designed to work in harmony.

The driving dynamics of 2011 Mustang 5.0 are further enhanced with a six-speed transmission and reconfigured strut and shock tuning. Electronic power-assisted steering (EPAS) puts control and responsiveness directly in the driver’s hands. And the standard limited–slip differential gives you the traction you need it, whether you’re testing the off-the-line launch of the new 5.0 or driving in inclement weather.

But wait, there’s more! Not only does the Mustang 5.0 look good and perform great, it also manages a projected 25 mpg hwy.**

The original 5.0-powered Mustang built a reputation for performance. The 2011 Mustang 5.0 is ready to raise the bar. Click here for the 2011 Ford Mustang GT technical specifications, including more detail on the new 5.0-liter V8.

We make it easy for you to share this story with your friends; simply click on the “share this” method of your choice just below or at the top right corner of this page. You can also click here to sign up for updates from Ford Motor Company, and click here to add an RSS feed to your regular homepage.

Share this story:

149 Comments

NOXER
December 28, 2009 at 4:42 pm

Cant wait to see this thing in action, and to see what kind of power potential this engine has with the great aftermarket the Mustang has. (I also wouldnt mind having a couple of the redesigned 5.0 badging for an old Fox I have, let me know:) Reply

Dan
February 17, 2010 at 12:53 pm

The most important question for us enthusiasts is "how much will the car weigh? " big horsepower and torqe numbers are all well and good but if the car is going to be obese ( like the gt500 ) then all that power goes to naught. It's all about power to weight ratios, it doesnt take a lot of power to make a car go very fast if that ratio is right. Reply

Matt F
February 18, 2010 at 6:47 pm

Well according to the tech spec sheet at the bottom of the article it is about 100 to 150 lbs more but that coming from the new transmission and extra fluids not the motor which weighs 400lbs (exactly the same as the 4.6). Reply

MustangMike
February 19, 2010 at 3:14 pm

This is REALLY bad news guys.The main advantages the Mustang has always had was;
1. Light weight - gone now at 3600lbs
2. Aftermarket power adders - 11.0:1 compression rules out superchargers and turbos
This is really catastrophic. Reply

Jeff
February 20, 2010 at 8:38 pm

11:1 compression most certainly does not rule out power adders. With a Snow performace water/methanol injection system lowly 93 octane pump gas becomes like 118 octane race fuel and in FlexFuel configuration and running on E85 (105 octane) loads of boost or nitrous is not a problem. And lastly a huge shot of NOS is no problem at all running a separate fuel cell in the trunk filled with race fuel to be run to the nitrous system when giving it a shot the NOS. Reply

WillZacharias
February 25, 2010 at 3:45 pm

Agreed. People need to realize what a miracle it is for this motor to be out now. This new 5.0 shares absolutely NO components with the 4.6, it's a brand new motor. I'm psyched to see the performance potential of this motor. With inake/exhaust/tune you could put nearly 350 to the wheel in an 05-10 Mustang, compared to the 260 it puts to the wheels stock. Just imagine being able to buy a new 5.0, spend a grand and putting 450 to the wheels (about 515 net horsepower).

I AM PSYCHED! Reply

Spencer
March 18, 2010 at 12:22 pm

Not really because if you put a supercharger on a 4.6 then you get a 5.0 the reason you cant put a supercharger on a new 5.0 is because you will have a 5.4 Triton THAT is a truck motor and quite fankly with a 5.0 you dont need a supercharger.

ITS A MUSTANG!!!!! Reply

Kishlansky
March 20, 2010 at 2:39 pm

what? spencer what you wrote makes absolutely NO sense at all! seriously your comment makes my head hurt!
This is the biggest news for a Mustang since the first 5.0 intro. These cars will perform amazing and sell like hot cakes. Those who are concerned about the weight, dont worry. My 93 GT weighed 3650 with me in it and ran 13.8 STOCK, these things are low/mid 12's stock. Reply

go4dit
March 22, 2010 at 1:52 pm

it is still lighter than the piggy compitition Reply

Matman
April 8, 2010 at 10:10 pm

Actually ford already has a 660 HP Twin Turbo 5.0 that is supposed to debut in the 2012 GT500 and a 750 HP Twin Turbo Bobcat Prototype 5.0 that is supposed to be available in the Ford lineup by 2015. Reply

krazykuda
April 14, 2010 at 1:59 pm

If you are going to add super/turbo chargers then reach farther in your wallet and buy the proper pistons with the right compression for your modification. It's not rocket science... Reply

Karl
April 14, 2010 at 2:08 pm

Or you could get the Shelby GT500 that already is supercharged. Reply

Dan
February 20, 2010 at 12:47 pm

You have to think, nearly every part on this car is aluminum and plastic. The weight isn't going to be anymore than the 4.8L which is heavy because the block is still cast. It will fly down the road and stop just as quick! Reply

Dan2
March 31, 2010 at 2:38 pm

Will stop just as quick*ly* Grammar correction. Reply

Dan
December 28, 2009 at 6:14 pm

I want it... NOW. Reply

tom
March 20, 2010 at 12:25 pm

me 2 Reply

Matthew Stafford
December 28, 2009 at 6:21 pm

So what size is the block? Is it still a 289c.i.? Reply

Wade
December 28, 2009 at 9:48 pm

The Comaro/Mustang slug fest is back from the late 60's and I love it! All it takes is a little competition to wake Ford up and show us what they are capable of. I just cant wait to shut-up all the new Comaro owners that tend to forget that their pride and joy car died for several years because it couldn't keep up with the Mustang...funny how history always repeats itself. Reply

Charles
January 12, 2010 at 11:36 pm

Quite the contrary. Mustang owners for years were (and continue to be) KO'd by LS1 powered Camaros and Trans Ams. What hurt the GM cars was cost of ownership. A Mustang back in the late 90's could be bought with the 4.6 liter motor for around 23K. You couldn't even think about buying a Trans Am or Camaro Z28 for that amount of money. That's what the V6 camaro was going for back then. Not to mention high insurance premiums for both the GM cars. The Mustang survived because it was cheap and easy to insure in comparison to the F-body cars. The new Mustang has loads of potential for the aftermarket and I'm anxious to see what it's capable of in bone stock trim. It's going to be interesting. Keep in mind GM can ring out an extra 40 ponies or so out of the LS3 motor by sneezing on it. You can't count Dodge out either. The good ole days are back! Reply

5.0guy
February 6, 2010 at 3:06 am

You're wrong... flat out wrong. The 2V mustang was more expensive than a similar f-body with 6 speed and Ls1. As for being Ko'd your a bit off too, but you probably have no clue about the NMRA and the racers there that have been shutting down chebbys since the 90's. 93' a 5.0 went 11's & beat out a field of BBC cars...LOL
The cars were ugly and Gm admittedly did a poor job of promoting/selling the cars. The V-6 mustang out sold ALL F-BODIES combined in 96-97. A z28 hatch had a MSRP of about 22,000 in 1998! They had similar costs and people still chose the car the more expensive car that was more appealing inside and out. Looks are subjective but those 90's f-bodies were door stop looking wedges that had horrible interiors. Consumer reports, Forbes,business week all have archived articles around the topic, GM's product manager at the time was focused on trucks...that's where the bidget went. The car was based on old tech. new gov't crash standards were coming into play...hence the 05' mustang chassis, since the fox based mustang would not pass current rear crash standards nor would the old f-body. Gm's Canadian plant was over-staffed and could make around 200k cars a year and they were only selling about half that. It made sense to close it down and this also hastened the death of the f-body.
FACT IS...CAMARO EXISTED BECAUSE OF MUSTANG...DIED AND THEN CAME BACK BECAUSE OF IT TOO. SADLY IT IS A COPY OF THE RETRO THEME EVERYONE IS DOING...UGH! Reply

Joe
February 17, 2010 at 2:05 am

I couldn't agree more. The good ole days are not back GM has needed 4 bail outs and Ford 0. Let's look at the stock too. GM is off the stock market bottoming out at .52 The Government owns GM. Ford last quote was around $11.00 Ford continues to work towards a new tomorrow. The Hybrids and higher gas mileage are what I am interested in. The 2011 V6 will bring 31mpg Highway. You can't go over 55 in some states anyway. Let's keep it real. Reply

Scott Croly
April 27, 2010 at 1:47 am

Seating position, anybody? While I have some respect for the Trans Am, particularly the late '70s version, as a very high speed stable road holder relative to those times, and still do for Camaro pony cars, Ford Mustang 5.O has truly set the standard from 1979 as both the best roadster, and street car, bar none. After market speed modifications, especially engine, are easily applied via most speed shops, either added by owner, or expert. The older Ford Fox platforms, at 100" wheel base, and newer chassis, were and are essentially stronger than GM competitor, as less distance between front and rear cradle, especially with frame connectors, yields less flex, and more efficient power application to wheels and better handling, regardless of slightly less track width, hence limited high speed stability loss, also compensable via slight latitude axis extension. The 5.O engine, based on the 302 block, with a 4.0 X 3.0 oversquare bore and stroke ratio, spins better, with less side thrust on cylinder walls than Chevy longer stroke small block, though with slight loss in low end torque. American V8s, Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, especially for reliability, durability, money, and modification potential, are the best high speed, 1/4, and 0 to ... engines in the world, bar none. Finally, with respect to Ford Mustang 5.O vs Chevrolet Camaro, it's better sitting up than dragging on the road. Reply

pedalmash47
March 2, 2010 at 8:43 am

Hold up their dude. With the right driver sitting the 2010 GT (w/ headers)the current 6 speed camaro can get wooped.

All day at the track a few weeks ago (when it was dry and 45 degrees).

Granted when ford was puttin out there no-load 5.0 'sand 4.6 's in the 80's and 90's yes they got slammed....not no mo.

Camaros are fat overpriced GM products. I keep wondering where the 422 HP is on mine........I have been bracket racing for 11 years while the Camaro SS is a pretty thing it BARELY outscores the current GT in one category and thats when the no-skill drivers at R&T and C&D are driving. 315 vs 422. On paper it should be a stomp but it aint

OBTW expect the Camaro to die once more. Sales have dropped precipotously since December

The 2011 5.0 will pound a Grand Sport most Ricky Tick. My source at FRC tells me that the 5.0 is pulling mid to low 4's in 0-60 with the 30-70- acceleration slaps the Corvette grand sport in the face. Reply

Eric
March 8, 2010 at 1:36 am

I love the looks of the new Camaro, and I've always been a GM man, but it's not what they say it is. I have an 06 Mustang GT 5 spd, bone stock, and I repeatedly beat a new Camaro SS auto in the 1/8 mile. Reply

Bryan
April 20, 2010 at 8:14 am

I spank Corvettes, the new SS camaro's, and not 1 Challenger R/T will step up. My 07 mustang is all Motor and puts 400hp to the wheels and I enjoy the looks on the GM owners faces as all they see is my Tail lights. They are fat and over weight. As far as the 2011 GT coming out, My only gripe is the rear end..the car is beautiful,. The rear is bubbly and fat looking and it really needs to be changed to suite the rest of the car.

Besides if you follow the Comparisons that MotorTrend and Car and Driver as well as a few other TV shows have done. The Mustang is the better choice. Seriously a stock GT with 3:73 gear does 0-60 in 4.9 Secs. The is quicker than the Dodge and right on the SS Tail. With less Muscle. If you up the power and it does not cost much either with or without a supercharger you can start spanking SS's daily and pull up next to Vettes and laugh as well....I still get an average of 19 MPG in mixed driving and 25 hwy, granted that is staying out of the throttle and while in the throttle yes my fuel economy suffers greatly, but so has the Camaro, Vette and a few Roush 427R's. GM and Dodge will never be what they used to be while under the care of our Government, and if you think that the Camaro will last, your wrong...It is not an eco friendly car and suffers the dreaded axe once again, while the Mustang keeps Galloping away from the competition. Reply

vmarshall@switched.com
February 23, 2010 at 2:17 pm

lets go ford Reply

Steve Fry
December 29, 2009 at 2:00 am

Matthew:

A five litre engine equates to 305 cubic inches ( 5.0 x 61 = 305, because a litre equals 61 cubic inches). An engine of 289 cu. ins. equates to 4.74 liters (289 divided by 61 = 4.74 litres (approx.)). I suspect that someone out there knows if the 305 is either a "bored-out" or a "stroked" 289. When Carroll Shelby began producing the Cobra in 1959 or 1960 he did so with the 289 engine.

Personally, I believe that the new 5.0 Mustang is very under powered. A five litre engine can easily produce around 525-550hp and still be very driveable in every day conditions. A friend of mine owned a 1963 Ferrari that had a 4 litre (244cu.ins.) engine generating around 450hp. and he used the car for every day driving without difficulty. I'm puzzled as to why Chevrolet puts into a Corvette a 7 litre engine not producing at least 725-750hp (or more). I almost forgot to mention that the 1963 Ferrari had standard carburation. No fuel injection or turbo-charger.

Just my one or two cents worth.

Steve Fry Reply

Peter Trudell
December 29, 2009 at 2:21 pm

A 5.0L V10 is quite capable of 500 hp, as seen in the new BMW M6. The reason the Corvette is 7.0L with "only" 505 hp is because of its rotational inertia. An engine with similar displacement and a higher number of cylinders will have more parts, but they will all weigh much less individually. This reduced weight will allow the parts of the rotating assembly to revolve at much higher speeds. While the Corvette Z06 engine has been proven to produce 505 hp and spin up to 7000 rpm, a good 4.0L V12 could spin to 11000 rpm to achieve the same 500 hp. A V12 will always beat a V8 of similar power or displacement in a race because of these attributes. Reply

Kevin
January 10, 2010 at 12:25 pm

Formula-1 race engines are currently only 3.0L V8's... yet they turn up to 19k.RPM's.
We need some of THAT tech. to trickle down to the street market.

*Of course it's very true that F1 engines are VERY expensive, & last only a couple races. Reply

Ken
February 5, 2010 at 8:32 pm

Son, F1 engines are all2.4 liter V8s, 3.0 went away and for 2010 there's no refueling allowed, only tires. Reply

Jason
January 15, 2010 at 5:00 pm

Lets get to the harsh reality that is "EXHAUST EMISSIONS". Anybody can create a high horsepower engine. Period. But it isn't just about horsepower. It is first and foremost about tailpipe emissions and conforming to the newest CAFE standards. If an automaker can keep an engine clean and produce power, then they have succeeded. Reply

Dan
February 17, 2010 at 1:03 pm

Depends. Ford Le Mans wins with the 427 powered GT40's in the 60's vs the Ferrari V12's disproved the higher cylinder high rpm engine superiority way back then. All things being equal, a v8 makes more power at lower rpms than a v12 which equates to much better reliability due to simplicity..less moving parts, less oil shear and wear, less heat. more power down low makes for a quicker car as well. You dont see many v12 drag cars out there. Reply

Paul Propps
December 30, 2009 at 8:19 pm

No it is a 302 Ford doesn't make a 305 that is a gm engine Reply

Bruce
January 3, 2010 at 12:53 am

Ahh yes, 305 is a GM engine and 302 is a Ford. But did you know that in 1967-69 GM had a 302 for the Camaro. Reply

david
January 4, 2010 at 10:18 pm

I beleive it was only available in the 1969 Z-28 Camaro Reply

Darrin
January 12, 2010 at 2:33 pm

GM built the 302 in 67-69 Z28; 327 block with a 283 crank = 302 ci. Reply

jason
February 8, 2010 at 12:56 am

The Chevy 302 was only offered in the 1969 Z-28. They built it to compete with the Ford 302. Reply

rick r
February 10, 2010 at 3:45 am

Nope... try '67-69. All Z28s had 302s, joke-rated at 290 hp... Reply

mouser
February 21, 2010 at 11:29 am

rick r, You are correct about the 302 Chevy 67-69. The 67 was actually a 327 block with a 283 truck crank and also the 67 block was only 2-bolt mains. In 68 Chevy built a dedicated 4-bolt main block for the 302 specifically, which I believe could also be had in 1970 until the stock was depleted. I don't know if you guys were there, but that Chevy 302 was a very formidable foe. I will never forget sitting in a Howard Johnson's Car Hop, in 1968, and heard this roar behind me, that turned out to be a 302 Z-28, I'll never forget that rev ver as long as I live, just beautiful exhaust music.
Have a good day folks,
Mouser Reply

Paganpink
May 14, 2010 at 2:51 pm

Boy oh boy i remember almost the same thing with the first Z-28 i ever heard. Of course much of it was the mechanical lifters which generated all sorts of mechanical noise kinda like exotic v-12's always do. And they had radical cams with those long duration loping sounds. All and all one of the baddest sounding stock engines ever put into an American car. Those DZ motors also blew up a lot, but they were seriously powerful especially compared to the laugable 290 hp rating!

James
January 11, 2010 at 2:19 pm

Peak horsepower is just one thing that manufacturers are optimizing for to fit the different markets they serve, in addition to torque production, cost, etc.

The new 5.0 Mustang makes slightly more torque than the uber-dollar 2010 M6, runs on 87 octane, hopefully will be in the low 30s, and should have enormous aftermarket support. For it's market it should be a fantastic car.

As a hobbyist, for any given horsepower I'd tend to go with the car with the lower horsepower per liter (ie bigger engine).

Once you get used to the 400hp, cranking a mass produced 5.0 up to 500 or 600 hp will typically be a lot cheaper and easier than starting with a small engine that was an engineering epic at 400hp and trying to increase its output by 20% or more.

Not to mention the fact that the day the new 5.0 comes out there will probably be 3 or 4 competing supercharger kits for it :)

Overall the new Mustang looks great, so congratulations to Ford, and thanks to Chevy for forcing it to happen with the 400hp Camaro. Reply

Matt Files
February 18, 2010 at 6:37 pm

Actually in order to get the 412 bhp and 390 ft lbs of torque you have to run 91/93 octane. it can run on 87 yes, but with a loss of horsepower Reply

Mike H
January 20, 2010 at 11:23 pm

I can't help but laugh at all of you HP/L calculator fans out there. 82+ HP/L from a V8 in a car that will run $30K is world class. Show me something better in the price range of the 2011 Mustang, that is not some high strung, no-torque, slow-mobile. The new 5.0 is right up there with a V8 in a new M3 - at half the cost to purchase, and a fraction of the cost in long term parts and maintenance. Do you nay-sayers even look at the torque spec? I suggest for your homework that you look at dyno graphs and study the "area under the curve" that this engine will produce vs your 120 HP/L fantasy land engine.

Ford could make the 2011 5.0 engine produce 500 HP, but it would come at the expense of drivability, longevity and cost. Change the cam profiles, extend the redline to 8000 RPM, etc and it would give you a nicer peak number on paper. But it would be a dog below 4000 RPM, require more expensive internals to handle the added revs, etc.

For me, I want a car that can carry 4 people in a pinch, can be auto-crossed and/or open-tracked a few times a year, driven to the office daily, run high 12s in the 1/4 mile, provide a big aftermarket to modify it as I see fit, handle the performance driving without breaking, and give me a $30K entry price. The new 2011 drivetrain gives you this package.

Great job, Ford! Reply

George P.
March 5, 2010 at 10:45 am

What a refreshing truth! it is so good to hear from a common sensical point of view. As a long time Ford and Mustang fan I could not agree more! Good job Ford and Mike H as well! Reply

Scott Croly
April 27, 2010 at 1:58 am

A-1 analysis; right on the money. Thanks. Reply

Charles Koenig
January 31, 2010 at 2:34 am

Actually, Mr. Shelbys' very first little Cobra was a British AC with a 260 c.i. Ford small-block crammed into it. The 260 was the precursor of, and gave birth to, the 289- then the 302 and 351 Windsor engines- all the same family. The Boss 302 and Boss 351 were different animals altogether with Cleveland canted-valve heads like the big-block Chevys. Matter of fact, the Boss 351 Cleveland intake valves are larger than a big-block Chevy! The "Lima" big-block Fords (429 & 460) also had canted-valve heads while the Boss 429 (the "Blue Crescent" Shotgun) was a HEMI with true hemisherical compustion chambers. This new 5.0 is really gonna shake up the Bowtie Boys and Mopar maniacs. Just think of it- a 32-valve quad overhead cam motor , all-aluminum (!) that'll rev like a Ferrari. It's a good day to have Ford blue in yer veins. Like me. Reply

rick r
February 10, 2010 at 3:41 am

Carroll Shelby's first Cobras were powered by F=ord's new 260 engine, 1962 was the first year of the Cobra, made possible by the introduction of the first 260-289 engines in the Falcon/Fairlane. Reply

bukleu
February 18, 2010 at 2:27 pm

i am feeling u dog Reply

86madstang
February 18, 2010 at 5:22 pm

steve fry:

hey man i hate to dissappoint or throw u under the bus but to be on a Ford website u dont kno much about the stang. the 5.0 liter mustang motor equates to 302 c.i. the chubby 5.0 liter equates to 305 c.i.
just puttin in my 2 cents also Reply

joe m/
March 19, 2010 at 9:38 am

Mr. Shelby built the first cobras with the 260 c.i. v8, i believe. these were the test cars, and a couple of them are still around. worth millions.

as for a v8 vs. v12 - the stroke/bore combination, properly balanced, is what determines max rpm. a small bore/short stroke engine will always turn faster than it's larger bretheren. it just won't have torque at lower speeds like a long stroke will.
one last item.....top fuel engines regularly turn to 8000 or so on a good run. big block v8s can get up there, too Reply

Stangrocka
December 29, 2009 at 2:15 am

I would think 302. Reply

doug fare
December 29, 2009 at 7:47 pm

come on guys get smart what has happened to all of these new alternative fuel idea has everybody forgotten already? Reply

Keith
December 29, 2009 at 8:33 am

289? it's not the sixties any more! 4.6 litre, my friend (1 litre being 60.025 c.i.) Reply

justin
January 12, 2010 at 11:33 am

Matthew, back in 1963 horsepower was gross horsepower, or the amout of power the engine itself makes. Today, horsepower is net, which means that it is the power that gets to the wheels. This was changed, I believe around 1980. There is substantial lose of horsepower going through the transmission, driveshaft, and through the wheels to actually get to the ground. That is why if you look at a lot of 60's muscle cars they have an enormous amout of stated horsepower, but todays cars with less power actually out perform them. Reply

Jeff
January 24, 2010 at 10:45 am

Actually gross hp numbers were arrived by dyno of the motor without any accessories....just the engine on a dyno. Net hp is the result of the motor as it will be installed in the vehicle driving all accesories water pump alternator power steering and a/c compressor and whatever else is hung on there. That is why people put underdrive pullies on their cars and bypass the water pump with an electric one. It makes more hp. Reply

Dan
February 17, 2010 at 12:40 pm

Exactly. And Wheel Horsepower will be about 15% less than Net horsepower with a manual transmission and about 18% less with an automatic. Same goes for torque. If automakers actually gave the horsepower numbers at the wheels there would be a lot of surprised and unhappy customers out there. As an example, a stock and advertised "430hp" 6 litre C6 corvette with a 6 speed will get about 370whp on a dyno. Same with the mustangs or any other car. Wheel Horsepower is all that matters, the gross and net numbers are just advertising and bragging rights. Reply

Earnest Freeman
February 4, 2010 at 5:48 pm

this is a DOHC motor, not the pushrod 5.0 of old. This one is based on the 4.6l C'mon man! and the reason the small displacement engines are making so much power these days is because of variable vale timing that can't be produced in a pushrod motor...that is why a 6.2 liter GM engine puts out 4-5 hundred HP and a BMW 4liter v8 puts out 400 vairiable valve timing and other tech tricks Reply

SpudZooka
May 6, 2010 at 1:25 am

The Dodge Challenger RT is a 5.7L pushrod engine with Variable Valve Timing. It is do-able in a pushrod engine. Reply

roboto
February 20, 2010 at 11:46 pm

the war is on! Reply

Larkey
December 28, 2009 at 7:57 pm

Cant wait for this mean pony to come rolling out! 5.0 + 6 speed+390rwtq= Purely Epic Monster Reply

NOXER
December 28, 2009 at 8:10 pm

5.0 L, 305.1 ci, 4951cc from what I gather.. Reply

mk
March 7, 2010 at 9:52 pm

4951 cc = 4.951 liters not 5
5 liters = 5000 cc Reply

pat
December 28, 2009 at 8:19 pm

its probably a 302 Reply

Chuck
December 28, 2009 at 8:33 pm

Rollin' in my five point O with the rag top down so my hair can blow...

This has to be the Stang I heard driving around Hines drive the other night while out for a run. It had an exhaust note that would make me take the radio out of the car so I could listen to that mellifluos note burbling along. Reply

Adam
December 28, 2009 at 10:05 pm

Should I trade in my 04 Mach1????? Reply

cody
January 7, 2010 at 10:30 pm

for sure trade in that 04 the rear end gears are so much better in the 5.0 six speed tranny better exhaust note maybe i hope if didnt just buy a brand new truck i would get a 5.0 when it comes out. Reply

GARY
December 29, 2009 at 1:14 am

FORD ....ROCKS. THIS PONY WILL RULE THE ROAD AS USUAL, FORD ALWAYS HAS A BETTER IDEA . Reply

todd
December 29, 2009 at 7:18 am

mustang are awesome, my favorite ford hands down Reply

Visteon Pensioner
December 29, 2009 at 9:09 am

You know the apt expression 'going to hell in a handcart'? well this is a 5 ltr version of the handcart - drive like the world is not yours to waste. Reply

skip03cobra
January 13, 2010 at 10:51 am

Wow, did you not see how this motor is going to get best in class MPG's. Mustangs will never have an electric motor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Reply

Time to Think
January 28, 2010 at 2:47 pm

Every car will have an electric motor eventually - besides, a properly -executed 100% electric car will always outperform an ICE off the line. 100% torque from 10 rpm up to 5k to 7k rpm depending upon the design. The Tesla Roadster out-drags Porsches and the Audi R8 and many others (0-60 in 3.7s). The 7-seat Model S sedan goes 0-60 in 5.6 - no 4-door ICE vehicle in that price range can do that.

Between the performance and the neglible total cost of ownership and high reliability (single-speed gearbox, no oil changes, no gas, better brake longevity due to regenerative braking, etc.), the only advantage to ICE designs is that enthusiasts like the growl of the engine. Electrics are virtually silent aside from a futuristic hum. Reply

Dan
February 17, 2010 at 12:45 pm

Until we can produce electricity without burning fossil fuels to do it, electric vehicles will never get off the ground. It is more efficient and energy conserving to have a high mpg fossil fuel car than it is to have to create the electircity via the same fuel source to power an electric vehicle. However, once the infrastructure is in place to generate electricity via solar/wind/water etc, then electirc powered vehicles will rule. Reply

Paul
February 19, 2010 at 5:09 pm

The Tesla is a lithium ion battery powered car. FACT.: Over 50% of the worlds known lithium is found in a country ruled by a socialist quasi dictator (Bolivia) who already charges a 60% "kickback" for lithium exports. i.e. this guy makes OPEC look like free marketeers. (Ever wondered why your cell phone or lap top batteries were so expensive?)
The Tesla has grossly exaggerated it's performance claims. NO test of a Telsa has
come close to the claimed 200 hours of use before a charge is needed. Real world tests show 120 hours, max.
Fact: On average 50% of electrical energy is lost during transmission from production facility (nuclear, coal, whatever) to the receptacle for the plug to charge an electrical car. Unless you are off the grid and generating your own electricity battery powered cars like the Tesla are a pipe dream.
Design a better battery, design and build superconductor electrical transmission lines and the pipe dream of electrical powered cars might make sense. Until that time the lobbyists and environmental evangelists have bamboozled you. Reply

Time to Think
February 26, 2010 at 6:50 pm

I share some of the same concerns regarding material supplies. Lithium supply and rare-earth metal supplies (for the motors) are a concern. So is silicon and the nasty processes by which solar panels (and all electronics) are currently produced.

There is no free lunch - it's merely selecting the lesser of the evils. Trading types of pollution, and the relative amounts, determines where additional efficiencies can be realized and pollution be controlled.

The fact remains that internal combustion will soon be that barbaric thing us 20 and 21st century people considered normal. We probably won't see it in our lifetime, but if we wish to survive as a species, we will have to stop burning everything in sight. Reply

Norman Lynch
December 29, 2009 at 10:27 am

No, the new Five Oh is not a 289 or 302 (both windsor based push rod engines). The Five Ohs from 79-95 were actually 302 Windsors and yes an accurate rounding of the 4947 cc engines would have put them at 4.9 not 5.0).

The new engine is base on the current 4.6 3V SOHC engine currently in the GT. I'm assuming it has been either bored or stroked (or both) and the new engine is a 5.0 4V DOHC that is DI not EFI, but I'm sure FORD or some magazine like 5.0 Mustangs and Super Fords will have an extensive review of the engine soon. Reply

Peter Trudell
December 31, 2009 at 9:16 am

This engine is not DI. Despite its 7000 RPM red-line and lack of DI it is still an 87 octane engine. It uses the same block as a 4.6L Modular 4-valve V8(aluminum), only bored and stroked(92.2mm and 92.7mm respectively). The cylinder heads are redesigned to improve intake-port geometry. Reply

Philip Arrington
January 13, 2010 at 3:52 pm

The 2011 mustang 5.0 is based off of the engine created for the 1999 concept car the FR500. This was a 415 hp engine based off of a redesigned 32v 4.6 cobra engine. Ford has been producing this engine for sale through ford racing performance parts for almost 10 years. Reply

Todd
January 15, 2010 at 10:03 am

The new 5.0L engine is NOT based of the "Cammer" of the FR500. It's also not in the "Modular" family of engines(4.6/5.4). It s a totally NEW design. This engine is also NOT the 5.0 Cammer that FordRracing sells. Reply

WillZacharias
February 25, 2010 at 3:55 pm

Have to correct you. The new 5.0 is a completely new design, no components carried over from the 4.6. The heads on the 5.0 flow way better than even the Ford GT 5.4 heads. And it doesn't have "direct injection" but the placement of the fuel injectors directly injects fuel into the combustion chamber, a technique that gives you direct injection without the added equipment and cost. Reply

cole
December 29, 2009 at 4:42 pm

You can find more detail on the 2011 Mustang Mustang GT and the new 5.0-liter V8 by clicking here.

Cole Quinnell
Editorial Director
theFordStory.com Reply

Jeff
December 29, 2009 at 11:27 pm

So, I'm of the adage that current 4.6L Mustang GT owners should get a free upgrade. How bout it Ford? ;) Reply

Royce
December 30, 2009 at 3:31 am

Becouse you did not take the money from the goverment I will buying from Ford next time. Reply

bob von rinteln
December 30, 2009 at 9:20 pm

Looks like they steped up to fix the running gear on the Mustang to bad the tail end still looks chopped off...... GOOFY Reply

John
December 31, 2009 at 12:02 am

Because Ford has always been best, on the road and off the road, I will be buying Ford next time, just like I have been doing since 1966. Maybe a Mercury or Lincoln too.

For the record, I currently have 289 cubic inches, 390 cubic inches, 429 cubic inches, 2300 cc, and whatever is in the modern Mustang GT and Rangers, they're in my garage too.

Ford is my kind of car. Reply

noo
December 31, 2009 at 4:23 am

Ford is the coolest Reply

Monty
December 31, 2009 at 1:35 pm

My 289, 4 speed 1965 Fastback is very peppy (stock)... I gotta beleive almost twice the ponies in the 2010 Mustang is VERY FAST.

I wonder how the two cars compare in weight? Reply

Fafafooey, Bababooey
December 31, 2009 at 4:47 pm

Did any of u click on the the link above with the specs????
Its a 302. JC! Reply

Fulcrumb
December 31, 2009 at 7:15 pm

Good move on this new V8. I hope this is the first of many more and not the last.
I believe that Ford Motor Company Automobiles should always include at least one V8 option. I also realize that 35.5 mpg by 2016 presents a challenge. But even a 2.0 liter V8 in a Ford trumps a 4 or V6 of any displacement or horsepower.
Ford has been joining 4-bangers at the crank since 1932. Keep up the good work! Reply

Ashton
January 2, 2010 at 4:51 pm

It's about time ford brought back the 302. This new engine in the Mustang should have new Camaro owners running scared. This new engine can produce 412hp, while the older model only produced 315hp. That is a lot more, and even if the new Camaro prodoces 440hp, the Mustang is still almost 300 pounds lighter then the new Camaro. So way to go Chevy, 15 more horespower out of a bigger engine that weights 300 pounds more. "Chevy sure know what they are doing". JK Reply

mjdwyersr
January 2, 2010 at 7:38 pm

all those need things, variable valve timing, multiple valves per cylinder, overhead cams etc. are great . however, being a fan of ford performance ever since my 69 mach one i still have one HUGE gripe. i dont know how the "younger generation" thinks but i know that i absolutely Hate giving up 1 cc/cu" to the likes of gm and chrysler. wanna really make us ford fans happy. combine all those other neat items mentioned with a 4 inch bore, 3.65 inch stroke for 6.0 liter engine. lets really get with the "program" guys. Reply

Rulebreaker
January 10, 2010 at 9:37 pm

Ford will also be releasing a new 6.2L V8 but I doubt you will find it in a Mustang. Reply

Time to Think
February 2, 2010 at 10:12 am

It's not the size that matters, it's the output. The days of massive, gratuitous displacements are gone, and for good reasons - it's a waste, and there's no room for waste in the 21st century. Reply

Dylan
January 8, 2010 at 1:34 pm

I drive a 1995 Mustang GT 5.0 right now (im 16). I cant wait till the new GT 5.0's come out . . . I will totally get one. Reply

peter scultety
January 8, 2010 at 6:33 pm

I will buy one of these when they change the stupid looking tail lights on the current model. Still have my 69 MACH 1 C.J. that I purchased new & my 05 GT with a whipple. FORD, please restyle the tail lights. CJ PETE Reply

Chris
January 10, 2010 at 10:38 am

I'm going to have to agree with you about the tail lights. You can make it work though by adding a spoiler and smoking them out. And plus, you're not going to care about how the car looks when you're hitting 60 in 4.9! Reply

Jeff H
January 12, 2010 at 11:43 am

in the words of Mick Jagger..."you can't always get what you want..." Reply

Jim
January 15, 2010 at 10:14 am

I have to agree on the tail design. Its the weakest part of an otherwise great Mustang design. There are a few rear spoilers available to help the appearance. Don't foresake a great car just because it's butt looks bad. Maybe Ford will fix it in a few years. Reply

Craig
January 10, 2010 at 2:49 pm

I also heard they are going to put that engine in the F150 Reply

Konrad
January 12, 2010 at 12:38 am

Ford is finally using technology that the Germans implemented over a decade ago. Way to go Ford. Reply

Gary
January 12, 2010 at 9:42 pm

Was planning on buying a 2010, untill i heard the 5.0 is coming back stronger than ever. Get ready, Chevy to put your money where your mouth is yeee! Reply

jordy
January 13, 2010 at 6:21 pm

The 5.0 is a 302 not any other number. It says so in the technical specs sheet. 302, 302, 302 Reply

Nathan
January 13, 2010 at 10:36 pm

Me want NOW!! Reply

Kevin B
January 14, 2010 at 2:25 pm

i just want to know when i can order one and i have heard that u can go to the factory and see it come off the line or something like that i love mustangs and to be abel to see my first new one come off the line with me and my son ould be a great thing so would love to her back thanks Reply

Tim
January 16, 2010 at 11:50 pm

Excellent! [wringing hands] Excellent! Reply

Robert Baca
January 17, 2010 at 7:17 pm

The 2011 5.0 ford engine sounds like the power house connected to the right automatic transmission with the right computer controls in front of my 4-11 bendix rearend. O I should mention inside my 1927 model t . Yes keeping it all FORD. E-MAIL me some prices please Reply

Pfc.Aaron
January 17, 2010 at 8:57 pm

whell if u ask me i would BUY one BUT im going to add a vortech s/c first and then a cherry bomb vortex exhaust system and cats with x pipe then jbl headers with a comp cam and a aftermarket k&n filter pack i think i could get at least 600 bhp to the wheels but thats what i would do but i drive a 91 gmc truck with 300 bhp but its a 4.3l v6 and im ready for a FORD and im tired of gm topping out over the the oldest car company in the US!!!!! Reply

Tony
January 18, 2010 at 3:14 pm

So Cole, When can we order one? Had ordered a 2010 but dealer called back and said no more 2010 orders. Said I would be first when order bank comes out. But when?????? Reply

cole
January 23, 2010 at 8:04 am

Tony, The Mustang GT with the 5.0-liter engine is a 2011 model. Ordering will open for it soon -- watch theFordStory.com and fordvehicles.com for more info. Thanks! Cole Quinnell Editorial Director theFordStory.com Reply

cole
January 24, 2010 at 8:55 pm

You can now order a 2011 Mustang. See your local Ford dealer. Cole Quinnell Editorial Director theFordStory.com Reply

mouser
February 21, 2010 at 7:26 am

Cole, yes you can order a new 5.0 now!!!! I ordered mine on January 29,2010!!!! It is performance white, tape stripe delete, GT premium with premium leather and cashmere accented seats, 3.73 rear gears ( with the 6 speed stick) you can't get the 3.73's with the automatic, (which would make it seem like a take the kids to soccer car)!!!!, polished aluminum 18 x 8 wheels because when they tested the '03 Cobra it handled better with the smaller diameter wheels. I had one of those also, boy did that thing scream! Also I ordered the HID light package w/ security system and the interior is charcoal black. The Chevy's will be seeing alot of GT taillights I hope as a GT owner, this should prove to be alot of fun for everybody!!!! Mouser. Reply

cole
February 21, 2010 at 9:45 am

Enjoy your new Mustang! And thanks for the confirmation that ordering is now open for the Mustang 5.0. Cole Quinnell Editorial Director theFordStory.com Reply

Bill McKee
January 19, 2010 at 9:07 pm

The 2011 5.0 sounds great. I owned a BOSS 302 in 1970 and have been waiting for another 5.0 to come out since the new body. Is this a consideration??? Reply

Eric
January 20, 2010 at 8:15 pm

I am just confused with how in the 'tech specs' the automatic's are said to get better mpg's?.
Is that a typo, or have the machines finally taken over?. Other thing is, engine is the heart, but
the interior is the soul, I hope they have improved it over the 2010 because when I sit in my '69
it feels like it has more soul then these ever will, I need more soul!!. Step up Ford I know you can do it. Reply

cole
January 21, 2010 at 8:41 am

Regarding the spec sheet -- that's no typo. Several new Ford product achieve better EPA-estimated mpg with the automatic transmission compared to manual. You will probably see this more in the future.

Cole Quinnell
Editorial Director
theFordStory.com Reply

mouser
February 21, 2010 at 10:49 am

The "Boss 302" is a reality!!!! The Ford Boys, are building 50 (50, is this indicative of "5.0?), at the meager price of $79,000, for the street and I am not sure what the track car is going to be, but I know it is going to be north of $130,000.00, and also I believe these are going to be short in numbers also. You better make tracks to the dealer if you want either of these. If you want info, just punch "2011 Boss 302 Mustang, and drool.
Good Luck Bill,
Mouser Reply

Shawn
January 25, 2010 at 1:15 pm

I just hope that it sticks around for the 50 Aniversery Edition coming up in 2014!!!! Reply

alex
January 27, 2010 at 4:44 am

i think ill take mine straight to Mr. Shelby for a conversion to GT350ism!!!!!!!!!!!! Reply

Ron
January 29, 2010 at 12:17 pm

I wonder what Mr. Shelby has in mind for the Gt Cobra 500's in 2011? The 2010 Shelby GT 500 is smoken hot and fast. Going from the reg GT of old with 300hp to the Shelby Cobra gaining 240 more hp is the stock GT 500 going to be pushing out 240 hp over the stock GT of 2011? That would be something to look forward too.. Reply

Jim Degenhart
January 31, 2010 at 10:38 am

Good job-O.K. I'm interested-WHEN will this car be available to the public? Reply

Mustangkidd88
February 7, 2010 at 1:12 am

I am not an expert on engine buliding or physics but dang!! those numbers look good. I was a little sad at first when the 2010 first came out only sporting the Bullit's intake system adding 15 extra hp while Dodge and Chevy had 6 litre monsters producing 400 hp plus. Still, I have to agree with some of you regarding to what has now become the "displacement issue." Both Chevy and Dodge has 6 litre engines in their flagship cars (Challenger SRT-8 & Camero SS) to take out the Mustang producing over 400 hp. The mustang makes around the same hp as both cars but more than a whole litre less. Like I said before, I am not an engineer or a tuner, but that is just in plain sight.

In addition, yes, German cars make the same hp with less litres- such as the BMW M3 or the Audi RS4 making 400hp+ with only a 4.0'sor 4.2 for the Audi. But consider this, Mercedes has the C63 AMG which is a 6.3 (C63 is where it gets the name. It is a C class Benz with a 6.3) but only makes 450hp. This is only a little bit more than our American cars. I don't know but guys, com'on, as long as it's American right? American V8 craping on Euro and JDM cars is always good. Don't agree, the SSC Aero TT is American and beats the Bugatti Veryron 16.4 with less litres and turbo chragers. Woo hoo! Reply

GK1Racing
February 9, 2010 at 10:33 am

I love what all of the American, and yes a few of the overseas co.'s are doing with the pony wars.
But I would like to send a special thank you to Chevy for finally getting the Camaro out there. The Camaro is a venerable pony in HP, handling & style. A V-6 with 300 ponies lurking sent a wake-up call to the Blue Oval team that GM was serious about doing the car up right.

As a big fan of Shelby(who I believe is the man reponsible for the pony wars) I can't wait to see what he does with all-aluminim DOHC 5.4L. I currently own a Shelby Mustang and a Bumble Bee
Camaro. In the end the car that I would put in my garage if I were only allowed one would be the Corvette. I believe it to be the quintessential muscle car. Just look at what the car mags run up against it in comparos. For a cool 100-Grand you get a modern handling, driving and engineered
masterpiece. In a sidebar: Isn't it a shame that soooo many owners just shine em up and drive them to the show. And sit their all day in the sun fraternizing with all of the other 'vette owners. I went to one of these shows once and left mildly disgusted...such a waste. Reply

Laurens
February 9, 2010 at 7:32 pm

Very nice looking car. I am so glad to see Ford didn't allow it's body design to deteriorate to mimic that depressing looking camaro. 412 horsepower and 25 mpg sounds good to me. Reply

2011 Soon Proud Owner
February 23, 2010 at 5:13 pm

Deteriorate? The only solution is for the Mustang GT to crash into the Camaro and hope that these fad retro designs cancel each other out and we are left with a more unique, updated, aero-dynamic and impressive front end for both! Look how goofy the Thunderbirds look now after a few years - you would think that with the substantial decline in sales and terrible resale value of the Thunderbirds that Ford would have realized the vintage retro look has had its days, and those days were 30 years ago!!! Reply

Taylor
February 10, 2010 at 1:28 pm

Everyone here knows the first Camaro was copied from Mustang right? Just throwing that up in the air, this should start some arguements. The truth hurts Camaro fans. Reply

Ed
February 12, 2010 at 12:41 pm

Bought a 2010 GT Premuim 5spd w/3.73 rear. LOVE THE CAR. Dealer has me on list for the 2011 5.0, which I am waiting for. HAd a '68 GTX, '70 Cuda and '71 Vette, but this 'Stang has me sold big time Reply

Paganpink
May 14, 2010 at 2:58 pm

I agree Ed! I have had a number of cars as well, including a 67' GTO and a 69' SS427 Impala but this new Mustang really looks good- especially for the price! It has a much improved interior as well which really has me thinking about ordering one as well. Reply

jim
February 21, 2010 at 1:09 am

The new rear end look of the mustang SUCKS! I do not know what the ford engineer was smoking that day but I will not buy another mustang intill they change the backend around to what it was in 2005-2009. I love the looks of the new mustang but when it comes around to seeing the back end I will not buy it. It is UGLY. We have always been FORD lovers and will always be. I do have right now a 71 boss 351 and a pro street 66 mustang fastback and 2008 GT ford mustang Vert. Love the new tech. I wonder how long it will be before ford puts in the mustang a independant rear suspention. That has to be coming soon now with the new 5.0 coming out. Reply

mustanglover
February 21, 2010 at 7:18 pm

THAT ROCKS 5.0S R BACK YEA Reply

2011 Soon Proud Owner
February 23, 2010 at 2:33 pm

Fellow 5.0rs, the back end of the new Mustang GT is not the issue - it's the horrific and vintage front-end that is sad. If the old timers want an old car, go buy a 1968 Mustang and let Ford keep up with the better competitor designs! Have you seen the retro interior guages on the dashboard??? Are you serious? What a sad day for the Ford designers who allowed all this technology to be shadowed by their failure to be innovative! Reply

Gary
February 24, 2010 at 1:39 am

The goverment bailed out gm,where does the money come from? then it was on the news that the ceo got 9 million dollars last year.That's alot of cars he can buy! Reply

Karl
February 26, 2010 at 6:40 pm

Wow what a total waste of engineering just to get bact to where we were 40 years ago!
11:1 compression ratio & only 25 mpg. At present some colleagues & I are working towards an engine design with 20:1 compression & a cleaner & cheaper fuel source. Reply

Donald Veritas
May 14, 2010 at 2:53 pm

Good luck! Reply

CavScoutSniper
February 28, 2010 at 2:58 am

302 & 327 cherolet made great doorstops then and still do. NO self respecting AMERICAN PATRIOT should be caight DEAD in a GM or MOPAR product as they are owned by the Obama Socialist States Of Amerika. C'mon people, show some support for the ONLY Real INDEPENDANT CAR COMPANY LEFT HERE. FORD. Reply

j
March 4, 2010 at 7:15 pm

The Mustang started the war and the Mustang ended it along time ago. Reply

Will
March 5, 2010 at 12:45 pm

whats funny is my grandpa was getting 27 mpg with his '66 289 Mustang convertible when he wasn't going to White Sands Missile Range @ aprox 140mph. I'll keep the '91 5.0 vert myself. i like old school. Hes due to get another mustang in 5 years. i hope Ford doesnt screw up, they probably wont. Reply

muddie
March 6, 2010 at 8:01 pm

Hot Rod April 2010 gives you the low down on the new 5 litre Ford engine Reply

Tim
March 7, 2010 at 12:07 am

Forget the Camero! The New Ford Mustang 5.0 Rocks!! Reply

Apache Doug
March 10, 2010 at 2:24 pm

I am just glad that Ford decided to go back to the 5.0. I own a 4.6 GT, and was happy with it for a while but then eventually the 270 ponies it was shelling out just wasnt hitting the spot. Granted there are quite a few upgrades that you can do to the engine to compete any of the cars in that class, but that is like saying a fat girl can be hott, it just requires a lot of work. Once again, props to ford for pulling their heads out of there behinds and throwing a real engine in the mustang. Reply

Tammy
March 10, 2010 at 5:13 pm

When will I be able to buy one? Reply

WOODY
March 13, 2010 at 12:33 am

When will the 2011 Shelby be available? Reply

Mike Morrison
March 18, 2010 at 1:40 pm

Dear Ford,
Please improve the brakes on the 2011. This is still a weakness on the current Stangs. Reply

Michael
March 20, 2010 at 9:00 pm

sweet............ Reply

tim
March 22, 2010 at 9:58 am

Ford has really got a winner on their hands, not only does this new stang have power it handles as well matching track times with a BMW m3 ,the Camaro on the other hand handles not nearly as well with skid pad numbers about the same as 10 year old cars and the interior of the Camaro is not nearly as nice as the Mustang. Reply

ramon
March 27, 2010 at 11:45 am

well it is the same engine that is found in all jaguars with out the the direct injection at almost the same horse power ford still has some input at jag and austin martin do your home work ford still has a 20 percent ownership of both ford diesel engines duratorq over there too Reply

Cody Reel
March 28, 2010 at 6:27 pm

I have a 1990 lx 5.0 H.O. I love 5.0's Reply

Paul
April 1, 2010 at 4:55 pm

I just ordered a new 2011 GT Premium convertible last week: silver, black top, charcoal int. Will look good parked next to my restored 65 Mustang convertible. Reply

Dean
April 16, 2010 at 5:02 pm

Everything looks good BUT the aluminum..lighter? Yes, but Ive seen too many heads and blocks lose coolant..Perhaps the technology has changed enough to make them more reliable,but I'll stick with my cast-iron 302. Everything else makes it a WOW,though Reply

Holland
April 25, 2010 at 5:05 pm

I have my fingers crossed that the 5.0 might make it's way to the F-150. I'd gladly take an FX4 Supercab, with a 5.0 under the hood. Please make it happen, Ford! Reply

Rick
June 19, 2010 at 9:37 pm

Is it just me or is anyone concerned about ALUMINUM pistons connected to STEEL rods? Aluminum will wear-out prematurely when messed-up to steel. And what's the crank shaft? Call me old school, but I don't want internal aluminum parts connected to steel. Aluminum intakes are fine -- no moving connected parts with steel. Reply

Add Your Comment

Name: (required)

Email: (required)

Email address is used for verification only and will
not automatically be added to distribution lists.

Comment: (required)

Are you looking for Customer Service?

Your complete satisfaction is of primary importance to us. If you have questions or comments about your Ford vehicle, please vist the Ford Contact Us page.

Please enter the word into the field

Our Privacy Pledge: We will never share your personal information with non-affiliated third parties. For information on how we protect your privacy, please read our Privacy Policy.

Comments are moderated in accordance with the Ford Story Rules of Conduct.

I accept and agree to follow the Rules of Conduct.

Share this story: