Strizzo wrote: turbo cobalt IS DI. Same engine as the turbo do sky/solstice And once you put one turbo into an already do engine, how much more does one more turbo really cost to add?
Twice as much? Double the hardware, double the cost. A $100 turbo isn't going to go down in price in mass production. So that's $200, as is the premium for air, exhaust, coolant, and oil plumbing.
Still, a N/A V8 is cheaper than a tiwn turbo DI v6. Parts are parts. And expensive parts are expensive parts.
E-
I was saying that the cost jump from one turbo to two isn't as significant as going from na to turbo. Yes a $100 turbo still costs $100, but my point was that it's a diiference of $100 on top of $1000 that it cost to go from na to (single) turbo.
Strizzo wrote: I was saying that the cost jump from one turbo to two isn't as significant as going from na to turbo. Yes a $100 turbo still costs $100, but my point was that it's a diiference of $100 on top of $1000 that it cost to go from na to (single) turbo.
No, it costs the cost of the parts. Low compression pistons cost the same as high, the rest of the components cost the same- all you pay for is the delta- turbo manifold- moderate increase, turbos- whole cost, plumbing, whole cost, and the extra cat costs. Oh, there's is ONE item you don't have to pay for twice- the intercooler. But that's nothing compared to the rest of it.
Rarely does the engineering costs get factored into the cost to build and sell the product- that gets taken out of overhead.
So for the $200 premium a 4 cyl turbo is REALLY, that would make a 6 cyl probably $350. What YOU see as the premium ISN'T the actual cost.
E-
On a v- motor you already have the extra cat
Strizzo wrote: On a v- motor you already have the extra cat
The turbos add cost to catalysts. So you pay for the increase twice- once per bank.
RossD wrote: Leave the GT V8 Mustang but make different spec level of it like GTS and then put the 3.5TT in it. Hell, they sold turbo 4 cylinders in the '80s in mustangs as Turbo GT cars. People love turbos; although 'those people' might not be the mustang people of old.
The problem with that is your taking a niche market vehicle that already has 2 engines and adding a 3rd. The cost of development on that just doesn't make any sense. How many extra sales would you really get with a twin turbo V6 rather than poaching from potential V8's??? Very few I'd say.
well if ford is as serious as they say they are about replacing na v8s with turbo do v6s than one might expect the v6 to be the only gt motor. I'm sure the purists could still get their 8 in a shelby or special edition or something if it was that important
Strizzo wrote: well if ford is as serious as they say they are about replacing na v8s with turbo do v6s than one might expect the v6 to be the only gt motor. I'm sure the purists could still get their 8 in a shelby or special edition or something if it was that important
It's a relative want.
For a truck where people are ok with a more fuel efficient V6, then it's ok. For a car/crossover that never had a V8 (but was thought of), and needed some performance w/o sacrificing fuel economy, it's also ok.
For a car that has historically had a v8, at the center of the muscle car movement, and is an icon that's 45 years old, it's not ok. Especially when part of that equation is performance for $$. There's enough of a V8 market for just GT's that THEN you can add do-dads for the very many special editions- look at the Mustang right now- that's exactly what's going on.
JB brings up a decent idea, but it can't be so close in looks to be take seriously. More of the old original Capri vs. Mustang to pull it off in terms of looks. That Cougar kind of look just screams V8.
Eric
Intersting that I too had some Iweb issues on that last post...
What about revamping the Capri name as a Miata/Solstice/Sky fighter?
You'll need to log in to post.
