So which would you rather have in a Mustang? The old 225 hp 5.0 or the new 412 hp 5.0? I have a 2000 GT and it is no quicker than a new, and heavier, 2011 V6 - and uses a lot more gas. I owned a 88 LX 5.0 and it was a fun car and easy to work on but I prefer newer cars.

Go drive an F-150 with the Ecoboost and decide if you would prefer the old 4.9 liter V8.

 

"Lets see either new Explorer reliably tow 7000 - 9000 pounds on a regular basis as well. Oh yea one more thing, look at that price point for the 2011 4X4 XLT which is as similar to mine as I can get - $33,000!!! My 1997 AWD XLT was $23,000!!! "

The new Explorer doesn't have the towing capacity of the older model but having owned a 1998 V8 Explorer I would never tow that kind of weight behind it. Given how few Ford was selling, and most sales were fleet, few others were using it for any purpose. As for the price point, newer cars have gotten expensive. I would face a similar situation if I replaced my 2000 GT Convertible Mustang. The newer models have a lot more content but it still costs money.

 

I think this is starting to turn into a agree to disagree. I totally disagree with the comment MCDavis made "When you remain tied to older technology and things that may have worked in the past, you will ultimately fail."

I am the one who has had a truck for 14 years thats been paid off for about 10 of those years, have gotten 200,000 reliable miles out of it, and did many things with it. When you start dumping all sorts of new technology and electronics into things, what do you think is going to happen. Something will eventually fail and be costly to replace. When you start dumping money into every new thing, what does that make you look like?

Ford is only going this route because of the oil and gas crisis that people are paying for at the pump. Look at the new (not so new anymore) MPG numbers that Obama wants all car makers to abide by. Of course Ford has to rethink and redesign everything! No more mechanical engines/powertrains anymore. Everything has to be electronically controlled. This is not necessarily a good thing folks...

And as for tcesni's comment about Mustangs, I'd take the old 5.0 anyday because its a classic. Classic means something to me, it may not to you. With a few thousand dollars and probably a total under $10,000, I'd blow the doors off a brand new $30,000 5.0 Mustang. And BTW, the 2000 GT that I own blows the doors off the new V6's. I also think the majority of V6 drivers have an automatic and don't really know how to race it. I don't have a convertible so mine doesn't weigh as much as yours. And BTW, more horsepower doesn't necessarily mean a faster car...hopefully you know that already.

In the end, not all models should be "eco-friendly". If you are so concerned with MPG and the impact on the environment, then don't buy anything you don't want. I shouldn't have to suffer because Ford stops production of a popular engine. Perfect example of too much government interference in business.

 

No doubt that everyone's entitled to their opinions, and I have no problem agreeing to disagree. I honestly believe there is no better exhaust note than a V8 Mustang! If it were necessary to do so, I would take a slight decrease in performance or increase in fuel economy just to get that exhaust note. I had a 2000 Mountaineer with the 5.0L V8 and currently have a 2004 4.6L V8. The 4.6L is more enjoyable to drive than the 5.0L was, and now that I have a performance tune, it blows the 5.0L away. Much of that ability is due to more modern electronics. For less than a performance exhaust system I was able to really wake the engine up without getting dirty. And in 5 minutes I can switch to an economy tune to improve fuel economy for a long trip, etc.

I tow a 3800lb camper with the 2004 Mountaineer and cannot imagine pulling anywhere near 7000-9000 pounds with it! I also have a 2011 Taurus SHO with the EcoBoost and, while the car is not rated to tow much of anything, the engine's 350 ft-lbs torque feel much more capable of towing than my V8 Mountaineer. Granted that's all based on "feel" and no real-world experience.

There's definitely room for large displacement and technology, and certainly interesting approaches at each. I do like the feel of acceleration from a dead stop that even the broad torque curve of the SHO won't give me like the 2004 Mountaineer does. The 2000 Mountaineer wasn't nearly as responsive as the 2004, but had a much more solid, encouraging, transmission.

-Rod

 

"I shouldn't have to suffer because Ford stops production of a popular engine"

Huh? Obviously we have different opinions on cars and SUV's (yet we own the same car, isn't that interesting) but that is such an interesting statement. Sorry that Ford didn't keep a money losing SUV in production just for you but maybe the Expedition will be a good alternative for you. Ford has to stay competitive and that meant new drivetrains. As a long-time, and occassionally suffering, Ford share holder I like their approach to leading the industry.

 

I think your misinformed. If you were successful in such a feat you will have created a 8mpg pig that won't pass a smog check and will then get smoked with a simple $400.00 tuner .So now are you going to do?

 

I get the feeling YOU've never pulled 7-9000lbs with an exploder either. I know I managed to get a trailer loaded to about that behind my '03 when I was getting paid by the military to move, and i put boulders and weights in the trailer for the weigh in. I would never want to pull that behind a light duty rig like the sploder for more than a couple of miles.

You're talking a $10,000 change in almost 15 years. Thats not much of a surprise. look at every other car between 97 and 2011.

1. I doubt theres anyone on a site called "ford-trucks.com" that is unfamiliar with fords most well known powerhouse, nor is anyone contesting the potency of the mill, but if ford were to continue using that inefficient pushrod engine today, I, a diehard Ford fan for life, might have second thoughts on why i love ford.

2. Have you ever experienced the feeling of a turbo powered vehicle. I mean, other than an crap-@$$ VW or Audi type of car. There's a reason you'll probably never see a Kenworth pulling a load down the Hwy that doesn't have a turbo. Turbos work, and they work extemely well.

I dont mean to rant, but your posts seem very, say, trollish to me.

 

This is an absolutely true statement. One I've even had conversations about with my friend that just got a 2012 boss. You know a near stock fox Mustang just won the autocross competition at sturgis this year? Beat a 2012 Boss to do it. However, I drove my buddies 2012 Boss, and it is more pleasant to drive than even my mildly souped up 5.0 by leaps and bounds. I wasn't even comfortable putting my kids in mine, and I got rid of it because I was tired of putting money into it, and going to the junkyard to get parts for it, which is what inevitably happens to older cars.

Sure, I plan to get another Fox body when I can afford to have a toy car around, but I will never use a "classic" for my DD again.

So, sure you can build a racecar for cheaper using a used and abused old mustang, but then you'll have exactly that. A used and abused racecar.

The Boss I drove handles like its on rails AND rides extremely good, something a fox or sn-95 platform will never match. I speak from experience, too. Not just speculation from what I've read or heard.

Dont get me wrong, I think its really cool that I can literally sit IN my engine bay of my '88 F-150 to change the plugs, but new technology is not a bad thing.

 

Moved to the 2011 & Newer Explorer forum.