"BOSS 227"....?

tjm73

of Omicron Persei 8
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Posts
12,092
Reaction score
1,638
Location
Rush, NY
I was looking at the 3.7 Mustang engine article in another thread. I noted that the article says the engine has a forged crank. I also saw in the 2011 Mustang tech spec PDF that's online that Ford says the 3.7 has forged connecting rods. So I got thinking about how impressive the BOSS 302 is and thought if the BOSS can make 444 hp from 5.0L what could the 3.7L make if the same efforts were applied to it?

The BOSS 5.0L (4951cc) is rated at 444 hp, but Chassis dynos have shown 416 hp at the wheels. If the driveline has a 15% power loss, that's around 489 hp at the crank.

So if the BOSS is rated at 444 hp and could actually be under rated with 485-ish actual crank hp, the 3.7L (3721cc) could legitimately be tuned to provide 333 hp and may even be able to knock out 367 crank hp. Which would put it on par with the BOSS 302 when looking at hp/displacement.

The real question is would Ford have a market for such a tuned V6 Mustang? I think they might. I read some place, and I wish I could find it again, that a 2011 V6 was tested quicker around a well known technical road course than a 2011 Mustang GT. If Ford developed and sold a "BOSS 227" Mustang for road courses of the world, I think they would sell briskly. And such an effort could establish the V6 Mustang as a legitimate sports car. It could be the modern interpretation of the late 80's/early 90's Mustang 5.0L LX.

There will always be a significant segment of the Mustang buying population that only consider the V8 cars worthy. But things change and I think the technology and draw of the high revving smaller displacement V6 would be very enticing to a growing group of young automobile enthusiasts that may be the future of the hobby.
 

mac10chap

The bouncy tits guy...
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Posts
4,520
Reaction score
48
Location
houston, tx
How in the world could an '11 V6 be quicker than an '11 GT on a road course when the GT has a lot more power and a better suspension? Not saying you are wrong...just wondering.
 

VTXFrank

Obama SUCKS!
Joined
Sep 29, 2010
Posts
8,217
Reaction score
69
Location
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
I'd be willing to bet that no 3.7L stock Mustang could beat my car around any road course. But then, I do have a couple of suspension mods. lol

Still, I do think there would be a market for that type of V6 'Stang. I just don't know if it would be enough of one to lure people away from a base GT 5.0L. I think the large majority of U.S. consumers would opt for the GT and then modify it a little bit. It doesn't take much to get a GT up to BOSS 302 capabilities. And for less money.
 

1andonlywhitie

The Australian...
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Posts
2,499
Reaction score
9
Location
McKinney
The thing that would turn me off, regardless of power output, is admitting to people that it's STILL a V6 Mustang. Lol.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
So if the BOSS is rated at 444 hp and could actually be under rated with 485-ish actual crank hp, the 3.7L (3721cc) could legitimately be tuned to provide 333 hp and may even be able to knock out 367 crank hp. Which would put it on par with the BOSS 302 when looking at hp/displacement.
Essentially what you're trying to build is a Ford version of Nissan's 370Z motor.

http://www.nissanusa.com/zcoupe/specifications.html?next=vlptrim.specs

That lap time comparison sounds more like a 2011 3.7 V6 vs a 2010 4.6 V8, unless it was such a slow course that you could never get even close to WOT with the '11 GT.

I really like the idea of a high-revving 6, but there's a catch in there somewhere as far as matching the GT's overall performance . . . being that a 3.7 liter engine is going to make roughly 275 ft-lbs of torque while a 5-liter engine is looking toward 375. There is no way with mass-market components and assembly that you're going to make 275 ft-lbs at 6100 rpm and peak power up toward 10,000 in order to make up (not quite all of) the torque deficit with gearing that is enough deeper to cover for it.

Eventually, all-around acceleration performance comes down to a displacement to weight ratio, given that you actually do push the engines under comparison to similar states of tune. I'll repeat "all-around", because engines that have poor torque off idle and up into the lower midrange have not sold all that well. There is a segment that can appreciate (or at least live with) this, but it's a small segment overall.

The Boss's ~700 lbs/liter would look pretty good scaled down to 3.7 liters. Not that the thought has ever crossed my mind before, or that there's at least one way to get the little sixer into something awfully close to 500 lb/liter . . .


Norm
 
Last edited:

Sky Render

Stig's Retarded Cousin
S197 Team Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Posts
9,463
Reaction score
357
Location
NW of Baltimore, MD
The Roadrunner motor (BOSS 302) had a hell of a lot more development put into it on top of what was already done for the standard Coyote. There's no way Ford would put that kind of investment into the base model V6.
 

white05gt

Senior Member
S197 Team Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Posts
5,338
Reaction score
20
Location
Illinois
The thing that would turn me off, regardless of power output, is admitting to people that it's STILL a V6 Mustang. Lol.

That wouldn't bother me one bit, I don't care what motor is in it as long as it performs well.
 

BruceH

BBB Big Bore Boss 322
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Posts
13,801
Reaction score
14
Location
Pacific Northwest
Local shop (TMS) put a procharger on a 2011 3.7 v6. Made 421rwhp. Think about it for a minute, that's what a 07 GT500 put out stock.
 

BMR Tech

Traction Vendor
Official Vendor
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Posts
4,863
Reaction score
11
Location
Tampa, FL
The 3.7 is impressive.

But, as long as they are producing engines like the Modular V-8, and the new Coyote...I don't think I could consider it. Maybe for my wife....and I could sneak a small "shot" on to it to get some of that much needed TQ back.
 

mac10chap

The bouncy tits guy...
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Posts
4,520
Reaction score
48
Location
houston, tx
Local shop (TMS) put a procharger on a 2011 3.7 v6. Made 421rwhp. Think about it for a minute, that's what a 07 GT500 put out stock.

horsepower yes...but how well did the torque compare to that of the GT500?
 

tjm73

of Omicron Persei 8
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Posts
12,092
Reaction score
1,638
Location
Rush, NY
227 sounds pretty "boss"


haha

About as boss as "302" did in the heyday of big blocks, 1969.

390, 427, 428, 429. Why would anyone build and run a mere 302?
 

ford20

forum member
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Posts
7,346
Reaction score
24
Location
White Plains,NY
If the 3.7 did get the full Boss treatment engine upgrades race suspension high revving capabilities etc. I think that it would make a pretty cool car. How much weight would you save off the front of the car a couple hundred pounds with a FRPP tuned suspension like the 302 has would be pretty impressive given the power to weight ratio. I would think that with the less weight and a ample amount of power would create a great car, maybe not a car that would be able to beat a GT with suspension upgrades but still a decently balanced car.
 

TimMcc

______________
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Posts
633
Reaction score
0
Location
Indian Land, SC
Hey I got a 227 what do you have?

Not a conversation a majority of the mustang guys would want to have if theirs a boss 302 version available or even when the standard GT dominates it in horsepower or if they strap a blower on it.

I just couldn't even put myself in that position. I don't know...

Good luck with the 227 mister.
 

8306gt

forum member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Posts
658
Reaction score
1
Location
Conroe, Tx
About as boss as "302" did in the heyday of big blocks, 1969.

390, 427, 428, 429. Why would anyone build and run a mere 302?

Because Trans Am limited engine displacement to 5.0 liters, and thus both Ford and Chevy ran a 302 cubic inch engine.
 

FalconGTHO

The Reporter
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Posts
5,145
Reaction score
28
Location
Scorpion Gulch
About as boss as "302" did in the heyday of big blocks, 1969.

390, 427, 428, 429. Why would anyone build and run a mere 302?

So it could be homologated for Trans Am. Otherwise it got bitch slapped around on the street ESP since it had a dumb, overly large 780cfm carb.

***EDIT Whoops didnt see the above response.***
 

Latest posts

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Sponsor Links

Banner image
Back
Top