[MWSletten]

A larger displacement V8 would provide more low end torque and a better day-to-day driving experience

I don't agree. Yes, having power more available at low RPM makes the car more fun for most day-to-day driving situations, but adding more weight up front would further degrade the GT's already relatively poor handling compared to the EcoBoost. The 2.3L EcoBoost engine offers the improved low-end torque of a larger-displacement V8 without the weight.

In short, the combination of a high-torque engine and lighter front end makes the EcoBoost Mustang one of the most tossable--and therefore fun to drive--cars on the road today. I don't believe a large-displacement V8 engine would be an improvement.

 

[14819]

He was talking about stock production cars. Anything can be modified to beat anything. As far as that goes at our level it's always the guy with the most money wins.

Here is a video of a S1000RR v.s. a McLaren F1. This is the kind of annilation he was referring to...

Sorry I never saw this thread again had activity, yep. any sport bike generally (saying 750/1000) 600s and below I don’t generally say will wooop ass, they are fast but it takes longer to get into their power and due to less torque.

it all comes down to this, hp to weight ratio, and balls.It’s scary dropping the clutch from astop, I don’t honestly do it.

I roll thengas it, ive seen to aggressive clutch drop and bikes straight flipping. Experience helps, but even if Mclaren takes off, and I have a second delay because I don’t clutch drop from stopped I would still catch and pass.

in Texas, there was a ton of sport cars. Me and friend was on bike and saw rowdy ass cars lining up on highway at like 50mph to floor it, I got beside them, and I flicked a wheelie and blew past themwhile front tire was suspended like 4 feet in air. (If you aren’t at balance, you will chase your wheelie) and that’s what I did on purpose. Was fun, they all waived and honked at me as Iput wheel down in glory.

but I don’t actually play w cars on bikes. Isn’t a level playing field

(on iPhone and hard to type) my 3.5 inch screen Or whatever on iPhone 5 lol


edit one more thing, bikes from factory, they are limited on power due tolaws and emissions. A simple reflash, woolich removes all the restrictions, and if you are doing that, cut the cat off install mid pipe and get a fuel remap while at it.

oh man, night and day difference, like a solid 30% more power across the board. It’s sad how bad they are limited due to emissions.

ECU Flashing

He flashes more than Suzuki.
I’ve been flashing my bikes for 10 years with Danos performance, amazing work.
Here’s a pic of what can be done with 1 flash, or better, it’s all the issues factory leaves locked due to government

he doesn’t know how long he has til California shuts him down, we talked about it. Same w car flashing, he said he already has to get waivers etc now due to epa and cali is going to eventually tell him
He’s an illegal shop he feels. He said he’s planning for the day for a new job when he’s shut down. He used to be a nasa engineer before he got into bike perf stuff 20 plus years ago

 

[2LTRPNY]

I don't agree. Yes, having power more available at low RPM makes the car more fun for most day-to-day driving situations, but adding more weight up front would further degrade the GT's already relatively poor handling compared to the EcoBoost. The 2.3L EcoBoost engine offers the improved low-end torque of a larger-displacement V8 without the weight.

In short, the combination of a high-torque engine and lighter front end makes the EcoBoost Mustang one of the most tossable--and therefore fun to drive--cars on the road today. I don't believe a large-displacement V8 engine would be an improvement.

According to a quick Google search, a fully outfitted LS3 (6.2L) or LS7 (7.0L) weighs the same or less than a 5.0 Coyote motor...

Please don't kid yourself, a 2.3T's low end torque is not at all comparable to a large cube V8. I have an EBPP (3.55 gears) with FP tune and supercharged C5 Corvette with 4.10 gears and a lowly 5.7L LS1. Even before the gears and blower, the low end, light throttle, torque difference was night and day. Does your Ecoboost have enough low end torque to justify a forced 1st to 4th gear shift from the factory? I like my Ecoboost for what it is, but it is what it is...

 

[jdsfly]

According to a quick Google search, a fully outfitted LS3 (6.2L) or LS7 (7.0L) weighs the same or less than a 5.0 Coyote motor...

Please don't kid yourself, a 2.3T's low end torque is not at all comparable to a large cube V8. I have an EBPP (3.55 gears) with FP tune and supercharged C5 Corvette with 4.10 gears and a lowly 5.7L LS1. Even before the gears and blower, the low end, light throttle, torque difference was night and day. Does your Ecoboost have enough low end torque to justify a forced 1st to 4th gear shift from the factory? I like my Ecoboost for what it is, but it is what it is...

Yeah, everybody knows that.

 

[2LTRPNY]

Yeah, everybody knows that.

Obviously the one guy that I'm responding to doesn't...

 

[MD18EcoStang]

Obviously the one guy that I'm responding to doesn't...

Yeah, but he disagrees with you, because he likes what he likes. No big deal, really! I mean, I wanted a 2.3 because I just wanted one. I really didn't want a 5.0 at all, so the EB is a better driving experience for me, because I'd just be frustrated with all that V8 power! I love to drive fast and push it, but I don't like doing so on public roads, so I only really get on it infrequently. With a 5.0, I'd either lose my license, or go to bed crying every night over my inability use all that power I bought. 😂

 

[2LTRPNY]

Yeah, but he disagrees with you, because he likes what he likes. No big deal, really! I mean, I wanted a 2.3 because I just wanted one. I really didn't want a 5.0 at all, so the EB is a better driving experience for me, because I'd just be frustrated with all that V8 power! I love to drive fast and push it, but I don't like doing so on public roads, so I only really get on it infrequently. With a 5.0, I'd either lose my license, or go to bed crying every night over my inability use all that power I bought. 😂

Did you guys even read the posts? lol

The disagreement is based on the claim that more cubes automatically equals more weight, which I showed is not true.

"The 2.3L EcoBoost engine offers the improved low-end torque of a larger-displacement V8 without the weight." is also simply not true. The Ecoboost motor is impressive in it's own right, but it's factually not going to give you close to what a larger V8 (larger than a 5.0) would in terms of daily, usable, light throttle, low end torque. It's pretty close to that of a 5.0 motor, which is what some of us were saying is lackluster. Hence my solution to add more cubes...but then you'd add more weight...but then no you wouldn't...but then...here we are again.

I specifically chose the 2.3T as well due to price and fuel economy. I could buy 2 GT's for what I paid for my Ecoboost and the Ecoboost is different and fun in it's own way. A stock GT isn't a fast car and as the OP and others have pointed out, it's a little underwhelming unless you're ringing it out. This is the "daily drivability" we're talking about not being much different.


Why would you go to bed crying?

 

[jdsfly]

Did you guys even read the posts? lol

The disagreement is based on the claim that more cubes automatically equals more weight, which I showed is not true.

"The 2.3L EcoBoost engine offers the improved low-end torque of a larger-displacement V8 without the weight." is also simply not true. The Ecoboost motor is impressive in it's own right, but it's factually not going to give you close to what a larger V8 (larger than a 5.0) would in terms of daily, usable, light throttle, low end torque. It's pretty close to that of a 5.0 motor, which is what some of us were saying is lackluster. Hence my solution to add more cubes...but then you'd add more weight...but then no you wouldn't...but then...here we are again.

I specifically chose the 2.3T as well due to price and fuel economy. I could buy 2 GT's for what I paid for my Ecoboost and the Ecoboost is different and fun in it's own way. A stock GT isn't a fast car and as the OP and others have pointed out, it's a little underwhelming unless you're ringing it out. This is the "daily drivability" we're talking about not being much different.


Why would you go to bed crying?

He'd go to bed crying, because he's upset about your post. Everybody knows that, lol.

 

[2LTRPNY]

LOL I don't even know what's going on anymore

 

[jdsfly]

LOL I don't even know what's going on anymore

Yeah, you'd think it was April 1st! At least you've got a sense of humor.

 

[2LTRPNY]

God can you imagine not having a sense of humor in this world?? What an absolutely miserable existence that would be

 

[MD18EcoStang]

Did you guys even read the posts? lol

The disagreement is based on the claim that more cubes automatically equals more weight, which I showed is not true.

"The 2.3L EcoBoost engine offers the improved low-end torque of a larger-displacement V8 without the weight." is also simply not true. The Ecoboost motor is impressive in it's own right, but it's factually not going to give you close to what a larger V8 (larger than a 5.0) would in terms of daily, usable, light throttle, low end torque. It's pretty close to that of a 5.0 motor, which is what some of us were saying is lackluster. Hence my solution to add more cubes...but then you'd add more weight...but then no you wouldn't...but then...here we are again.

I specifically chose the 2.3T as well due to price and fuel economy. I could buy 2 GT's for what I paid for my Ecoboost and the Ecoboost is different and fun in it's own way. A stock GT isn't a fast car and as the OP and others have pointed out, it's a little underwhelming unless you're ringing it out. This is the "daily drivability" we're talking about not being much different.


Why would you go to bed crying?

I hope you know I wasn't really arguing against your point, or anyone's for that matter. When he replied to you, he only quoted one sentence, so that's all I was referring to. Anyhow, what I've learned from this thread is GTs are (not really) fast and motorcycles are (really) fast! Or, something like that...

 

[MD18EcoStang]

He'd go to bed crying, because he's upset about your post. Everybody knows that, lol.

Yes, right, I think, or not. Actually, I have no idea why I posted in this thread! I just felt like saying something. Anyway, back to bed, where I'm not currently crying, because I don't have a 5.0. 😂

 

[MWSletten]

Please don't kid yourself, a 2.3T's low end torque is not at all comparable to a large cube V8. I have an EBPP (3.55 gears) with FP tune and supercharged C5 Corvette with 4.10 gears and a lowly 5.7L LS1. Even before the gears and blower, the low end, light throttle, torque difference was night and day.

The discussion centered on the fact you must rev the Coyote engine to high RPM to get into the meat of its power band, and that a larger-displacement V8 would offer better low-end torque. My point was not that you can get the same power from a 4 cyl as you can from a V8, it was that the EcoBoost engine offers improved low-end torque without increasing displacement. The reason OP was underwhelmed by the Coyote engine is because they are used to having maximum power available at the lowest possible RPM. That makes for much more useable power in day-to-day driving. In stock form the 2.3L EcoBoost is producing within a few percentage points of its maximum torque at around 2200 RPM.

What kind of torque does the LS1 make at 2200 RPM? I can't find a dyno chart showing power numbers under 3000 RPM. What does that tell you?

According to a quick Google search, a fully outfitted LS3 (6.2L) or LS7 (7.0L) weighs the same or less than a 5.0 Coyote motor...

But not the same as a 2.3L EcoBoost.

 

[2LTRPNY]

I hope you know I wasn't really arguing against your point, or anyone's for that matter. When he replied to you, he only quoted one sentence, so that's all I was referring to. Anyhow, what I've learned from this thread is GTs are (not really) fast and motorcycles are (really) fast! Or, something like that...

Lol you're all good. Pretty dang good summary haha

The discussion centered on the fact you must rev the Coyote engine to high RPM to get into the meat of its power band, and that a larger-displacement V8 would offer better low-end torque. My point was not that you can get the same power from a 4 cyl as you can from a V8, it was that the EcoBoost engine offers improved low-end torque without increasing displacement. The reason OP was underwhelmed by the Coyote engine is because they are used to having maximum power available at the lowest possible RPM. That makes for much more useable power in day-to-day driving. In stock form the 2.3L EcoBoost is producing within a few percentage points of its maximum torque at around 2200 RPM.

What kind of torque does the LS1 make at 2200 RPM? I can't find a dyno chart showing power numbers under 3000 RPM. What does that tell you?



But not the same as a 2.3L EcoBoost.

I must be a Google search wizard because I immediately found several dyno graphs showing a stock LS1 makes ~300 ft/bs to the wheel around 2k rpm.

Thankfully you're correct on the basis of the disagreement, but your argument is not accurate based on one simple fact: we're not talking about WOT vs WOT, so your dyno graphs and max numbers aren't applicable.

Can you make similar power with a 4cyl while under boost? Sure. But my statement was about usable torque during normal, daily driving conditions (aka out of boost where it's just a plain old 2 liter 4 cylinder) ...not WOT pushing 20 psi at 2k rpm lol. If you're constantly flooring it at 2k rpm on an Ecoboost, you're going to have much bigger problems sooner than later.

You can disagree until the cows come home, it's just simply not true that a 2.3L 4 cylinder at 2k rpm, out of boost, casually driving away from a stop light, is going to produce anywhere near the torque or driving experience of a 6.0L+ V8 in the same situation. All you have to do is drive both and it'll immediately be apparent. No max effort graphs needed.

The only info I can find with a quick search on the weight of an ecoboost says it weighs over 400 lbs. Let's say there's a 50 lb weight difference between the two... I can almost guarantee that you wouldn't be able to tell a 50 lb difference if nobody told you before hand. With that being said, I find it a tad suspect that there seems to only be a ~50 lb difference. The general assumption/claim is that an ecoboost is 200 lbs lighter up front than a GT, but I've seen that questioned/argued a few times as well. Oh well.

Now that my comment about the 5.0 needing more displacement has turned into a comparison of the Ecoboost, this debate really has run it's course lol. If you want an ecoboost vs V8 argument, there's plenty of those to sift through already. This is an ecoboost forum... And I'm not the enemy, I also own an ecoboost....lol. The ecoboost is a fun little motor

 

[MWSletten]

I must be a Google search wizard...The only info I can find with a quick search on the weight of an ecoboost says it weighs over 400 lbs.

Ok wizard. 🧙‍♂️

 

[2LTRPNY]

I must be getting blind in my old age, because I don't see the weight of a 2.3 ecoboost listed anywhere on that wikipedia page. Good to know the dry weight of any other ecoboost though I guess lol. Closest info I can find on 6G is that it weighs 418 lbs fully dressed.

 

[MWSletten]

I must be getting blind in my old age, because I don't see the weight of a 2.3 ecoboost listed anywhere on that wikipedia page. Good to know the dry weight of any other ecoboost though I guess lol. Closest info I can find on 6G is that it weighs 418 lbs fully dressed.

That's because the 2.3L is essentially a stroked 2.0L.