4cy Turbo's in Muscle Cars

Scum_Frog · Jun 23, 2015

With Ford, the 2015 Mustang is available with the 2.3L EcoBoost and Chev getting ready to release the 2016 Camaro with it's 2.0T, the power output is pretty impressive at 300HP give or take depending on the specific vehicle. According to Ford that is more than the Mustang GT put out in 2005.

Trend of the day or here to stay? I'm still undecided....we are talking American muscle here. But maybe the times are a changin'

CT8 · Jun 23, 2015

EPA CAFE standards are going WOT to use a hot rodder term.

Bottom_Feeder · Jun 23, 2015

I'm all for the push to modern technology on newer cars. I'm sure the aftermarket will make those turbos into screamers.

It just seems odd that while these new motors make a lot of power, they are also pushing 4000 lb cars.

rjundi · Jun 23, 2015

Those are the entry level motors for people who like the look of Mustang/Camaro but could care less about having muscle car power levels. They are happy it is above average in power.

They are not muscle cars with the i4 and v6 that is why they still sell the v8's.

IndyIan · Jun 23, 2015

There have been a few fwd 4cyl "muscle" cars already. Dodge has been at it for a while since the Omni and K-car.
The old SRT-4 seems to match the new mustang in the quarter mile even.

DoubleWasp · Jun 23, 2015

This would actually be the second turbo 4 cylinder Mustang to be made by Ford. Nothing new here.

OneEyeJack · Jun 23, 2015

Can we expect in the near future to see another Mustang II with maybe front wheel drive, a CVT and that 4-cylinder turbo motor.

HerrStig · Jun 23, 2015

The only good sounding 4 cyl turbo in my mind was the old SAAB 900T. It might not meet the latest noise standard. Only a REAL phony would by a pony car and NOT get a V8 engine. I know a fellow who bought a V6 Mustang and was made sport of because he didn't have dual exhausts. The car was more than fast enough for his puttering around. He eventually bought a V8 version.

morepwr · Jun 23, 2015

As much as new cars weigh I wouldn't call them a muscle car. The new engines make good power for what they are and still get some decent mileage if you can keep your foot out of it. As long as I still have the choice to get a V8 I don't care what other engines they put in the car.

Win · Jun 23, 2015

Seems like there was a turbo Mustang in the first turbo fad era, back when I had my turbo T Bird.

SVO Mustang, or something like that.

Same 2.3 engine, more or less, as in the Turbo T Bird and Merkur XR-4, best as I recall.

Olas · Jun 23, 2015

Attack it from both sides, cut 1500ish pounds out of the car and it'll be a LOT faster than it was - then a 4cyl starts to make sense. E85 and boost can make over 1000 wheel horsepower from 2.0 litres of displacement, so why double the weight of the engine when it will have adverse affects on handling, braking and fuel consumption?
Area under curve is more important than displacement or cylinder configuration.

HerrStig · Jun 23, 2015

Originally Posted By: Win
Seems like there was a turbo Mustang in the first turbo fad era, back when I had my turbo T Bird.

SVO Mustang, or something like that.

Same 2.3 engine, more or less, as in the Turbo T Bird and Merkur XR-4, best as I recall.
I drove one. It was a well balanced car with less weight on the front, but the engine seemed crude. Drums on the back as I recall.

Quattro Pete · Jun 23, 2015

Originally Posted By: Scum_Frog
With Ford, the 2015 Mustang is available with the 2.3L EcoBoost and Chev getting ready to release the 2016 Camaro with it's 2.0T, the power output is pretty impressive at 300HP give or take depending on the specific vehicle.

I guess it really depends on one's definition of a muscle car. I think one of the requirements was for it to have a powerful engine. While 300 hp is certainly no weakling, there are many family sedans delivering similar power levels these days, so that 300 hp isn't necessarily a standout figure anymore.

Are 4-cyl turbo engines here to stay? Probably, at least until some new concept comes around that can best it in terms of output and fuel economy.

As far as engine sound, if you're in the driver's seat, everything can be fixed with a properly tuned audio system.

addyguy · Jun 23, 2015

This is absolutely nothing new in the 'musclecar' automotive world.

Ford brought out a turbo 2.3 Mustang in 1979, Chrysler brought out their numerous 2.2 and 2.5 turbo cars through the 1980's, GM had the turbo J-cars in the 1980's...turboing has always been a way to make good power with small displacement.

HerrStig · Jun 23, 2015

Originally Posted By: Olas
Attack it from both sides, cut 1500ish pounds out of the car and it'll be a LOT faster than it was - then a 4cyl starts to make sense. E85 and boost can make over 1000 wheel horsepower from 2.0 litres of displacement, so why double the weight of the engine when it will have adverse affects on handling, braking and fuel consumption?
Area under curve is more important than displacement or cylinder configuration.
Folks who enjoy these cars are not looking for devices which look great on paper, they like the sound, torque, and lack of fuss of a good size engine. As Smoky once said, "the only substitute for cubic inches is CUBIC MONEY" A 1000 horsepower 4 banger isn't going to be a 500 dollar option.

HerrStig · Jun 23, 2015

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Scum_Frog
With Ford, the 2015 Mustang is available with the 2.3L EcoBoost and Chev getting ready to release the 2016 Camaro with it's 2.0T, the power output is pretty impressive at 300HP give or take depending on the specific vehicle.

I guess it really depends on one's definition of a muscle car. I think one of the requirements was for it to have a powerful engine. While 300 hp is certainly no weakling, there are many family sedans delivering similar power levels these days, so that 300 hp isn't necessarily a standout figure anymore.

Are 4-cyl turbo engines here to stay? Probably, at least until some new concept comes around that can best it in terms of output and fuel economy.

As far as engine sound, if you're in the driver's seat, everything can be fixed with a properly tuned audio system.

Yup, it can sound like a mail truck to everyone but the driver who is hearing a piped in recording of a nice 911 motor. Honesty in motoring.

slacktide_bitog · Jun 23, 2015

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Can we expect in the near future to see another Mustang II with maybe front wheel drive, a CVT and that 4-cylinder turbo motor.

Well, the Probe almost became the Mustang III, but the backlash they got was so severe that there's no way Ford will make it FWD or drop the V8 option.

Bose exhaust

Scum_Frog · Jun 23, 2015

It will be interesting to see the sales numbers of V4turbo vs the V8's.

Resale value, if it isn't the V8 you take a huge hit, no matter what options you have.

Nothing says mustang like 5.0 and I just don't see that changing.

Win · Jun 23, 2015

I don't recall the first era turbo fad stuff being pushed as, or marketed as, muscle cars. If they did, no one took them seriously.

It was pretty well established, best as I recall, that the muscle car era was pretty much done, by '72 or '73, maybe '74, when the street hemis and 455 SD went away. I think you could still get a mild 455 SD in '74. I know it was gone by '75.

Are they being pushed as muscle cars, now?

HerrStig · Jun 23, 2015

If you want a 4 cylinder "sporty" car it's going to be hard not to reinvent the Miata. GM tried that a while back with a two seater which was sold as the Saturn Sky and a in Pontiac version.

4cy Turbo's in Muscle Cars

Similar threads