Ford Shelby Mustang GT350 to get 5.2-Liter Flat-Plane Crank V-8

[ILW84U]

More rumors but 600 HP N/A sounds pretty good.

http://wot.motortrend.com/1409_ford_shelby_mustang_gt350_to_get_5_2_liter_flat_plane_crank_v_8.html

 

[Bingo]

Dear lord...

 

[GallopingFord]

Interesting... I'm curious to know why they would take this route especially since with a flat plane crank there is a significantly lower amount of torque - more circuit racing friendly? Obviously this is along the lines of an Exotic car engine now. Lol.

 

[dennisafrompa]

Flat planes do sound awesome though. Guess they want higher revs for top end. A first in a US car I believe.

 

[Dubstep Shep]

Interesting... I'm curious to know why they would take this route especially since with a flat plane crank there is a significantly lower amount of torque - more circuit racing friendly? Obviously this is along the lines of an Exotic car engine now. Lol.

To my knowledge it isn't that flat planes make less torque, it's that the torque isn't as well delivered/smooth.

Or at least that's what I heard from Yamaha when they switched from a flat plane to a cross plane on the R1 motorcycles.

 

[Shaffe]

To my knowledge it isn't that flat planes make less torque, it's that the torque isn't as well delivered/smooth.

Or at least that's what I heard from Yamaha when they switched from a flat plane to a cross plane on the R1 motorcycles.

I thought I read somewhere that they lack torque b/c most of the time engineers want them to rev higher, they can still deliver good torque at the cost of higher rpms...but I could be way wrong

 

[o2sys]

It would be awesome if it were true... Only time will tell.... In the mean time I can't wait for my iPhone 6!!!! About to throw my Android to the wall...

 

[GallopingFord]

To my knowledge it isn't that flat planes make less torque, it's that the torque isn't as well delivered/smooth.

Or at least that's what I heard from Yamaha when they switched from a flat plane to a cross plane on the R1 motorcycles.

Is that due to the fact there is more vibration coming from an engine of this type due to no counter weights? I know they are all interconnected, I just haven't researched more into it.

 

[Dubstep Shep]

Is that due to the fact there is more vibration coming from an engine of this type due to no counter weights? I know they are all interconnected, I just haven't researched more into it.

From my understanding, which is limited to inline 4s, not v8s, the flat plane and cross plane make identical power and torque, but the firing intervals on the cross plane are more evenly spaced, thus giving it a smoother torque curve. That's why they used in on their GP bike, and why they put it on the R1. I had though cross planes were vastly superior because of this.

Now on a V8 I would imagine it's slightly different. If I had to take a guess, I would say that the flat plane uses the rest of the rotating assembly to balance itself some rather than counterweights, hence why it revs higher, but because of that it's hard to balance. I really don't know here, this is just speculation.

Maybe Ford gave it a crazy firing order.

 

[Dubstep Shep]

This sort of explains it...

http://youtu.be/oEXUrO5wYcE

 

[Rasmus]

From my understanding, which is limited to inline 4s, not v8s, the flat plane and cross plane make identical power and torque, but the firing intervals on the cross plane are more evenly spaced, thus giving it a smoother torque curve. That's why they used in on their GP bike, and why they put it on the R1. I had though cross planes were vastly superior because of this.

Not quite. While they do produce similar amounts of torque, it's actually the other way around.

Yamaha went with the cross-plane crank because they wanted a big-bang firing order, which, ironically, gave them a less smooth engine. It also gave them more control in corners. It was all about corner exit speeds.

This may sound counter-intuitive, but allow me to elaborate. In a non-big-bang engine, when the rear tire starts to slip, the even, continuous firing events will push the tire past the point of grip. In a big-bang engine, yes, the power will be more unstable, but the time period in between firing events will allow the tire to find traction, thus making the bike easier to control on the limits.

Moving on, the flat-plane crank in a V8 gives you a cylinder firing exactly every 90 degrees of crank rotation, giving you a very smooth power delivery from firing event to rear wheels -- which is part of the reason why they can be revved so high. Another part of that reason is that unlike the cross-plane crank, the flat-plane doesn't need big, heavy counterweights. The downside, that is so often talked about, is related to the secondary harmonics. This is not specifically due to the lack of counterweights.

Here are some links for further reading:
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Motorsports_Mayhem/topic/8198547/1/
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...-sounds-completely-different-american-v8.html

 

[o2sys]

Could it also be that the GT350 might be a 4-cyl turbo? A nice exhaust could make those turbo 4's sound sweet as hell

 

[WJBertrand]

Not quite. While they do produce similar amounts of torque, it's actually the other way around.

Yamaha went with the cross-plane crank because they wanted a big-bang firing order, which, ironically, gave them a less smooth engine. It also gave them more control in corners. It was all about corner exit speeds.

This may sound counter-intuitive, but allow me to elaborate. In a non-big-bang engine, when the rear tire starts to slip, the even, continuous firing events will push the tire past the point of grip. In a big-bang engine, yes, the power will be more unstable, but the time period in between firing events will allow the tire to find traction, thus making the bike easier to control on the limits.

Moving on, the flat-plane crank in a V8 gives you a cylinder firing exactly every 90 degrees of crank rotation, giving you a very smooth power delivery from firing event to rear wheels -- which is part of the reason why they can be revved so high. Another part of that reason is that unlike the cross-plane crank, the flat-plane doesn't need big, heavy counterweights. The downside, that is so often talked about, is related to the secondary harmonics. This is not specifically due to the lack of counterweights.

Here are some links for further reading:
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Motorsports_Mayhem/topic/8198547/1/
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...-sounds-completely-different-american-v8.html

^^^This! And I would add that the lack of big heavy counterweights should allow better throttle response and quicker revving.

 

[Boaisy]

All I can think of is when I drove the F430 Scuderia around the track here. Yeah, it virbated quite a bit (and a little noisy once you give it gas), but the response from the engine just throws you into the seat. Ford going to flat plane v8 is making me want one really bad.

 

[claudermilk]

Could it also be that the GT350 might be a 4-cyl turbo? A nice exhaust could make those turbo 4's sound sweet as hell

Yes. Some of the Focus ST or Fusion 2.0 sound a lot like the Nissan VQ35 V6--which is a good thing IMHO. I'm waiting on Borla to decide if they are doing a Fusion 2.0 exhaust (they are toying with the idea).

Now off to read up on those links...

 

[Sharad]

Am I wrong to be skeptical? Seems like every article I read, including this one, implied that the GT350 *could* get the flat plane crank.

 

[jayman33]

Not quite. While they do produce similar amounts of torque, it's actually the other way around.

Yamaha went with the cross-plane crank because they wanted a big-bang firing order, which, ironically, gave them a less smooth engine. It also gave them more control in corners. It was all about corner exit speeds.

This may sound counter-intuitive, but allow me to elaborate. In a non-big-bang engine, when the rear tire starts to slip, the even, continuous firing events will push the tire past the point of grip. In a big-bang engine, yes, the power will be more unstable, but the time period in between firing events will allow the tire to find traction, thus making the bike easier to control on the limits.

Moving on, the flat-plane crank in a V8 gives you a cylinder firing exactly every 90 degrees of crank rotation, giving you a very smooth power delivery from firing event to rear wheels -- which is part of the reason why they can be revved so high. Another part of that reason is that unlike the cross-plane crank, the flat-plane doesn't need big, heavy counterweights. The downside, that is so often talked about, is related to the secondary harmonics. This is not specifically due to the lack of counterweights.

Here are some links for further reading:
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Motorsports_Mayhem/topic/8198547/1/
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...-sounds-completely-different-american-v8.html

Great post Rasmus, you just sent me on a 2 hour venture. Learned a lot of great information, much appreciated.

 

[Unreal]

I just don't see 600hp na on a warrantied emissions legal 5.2L with todays tech. 520-540 if pushed, sure, but not 600.

 

[Department Of Boost]

I called it.