Ford 3.5L EcoBoost

>Ford 3.5L EcoBoost
>400 lbs
>over 700 HP


>Chevy LT4
>529 lbs
>650 HP

Turbo V6's are clearly better than V8's for track performance. Why would you want extra weight if you're trying to create a lightweight track vehicle?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hljPsNpo9y4
performance.ford.com/content/dam/fordracing/enthusiasts/Media Room/2017/01/2017_GT_Tech_Specs.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

i wonder which is more reliable, the highly strung v6 turbo
or the undertuned supercharged v8
roflmao

>undertuned
LMFAO

lol

Love these threads

THICC

Stop with the bait. And here is the (you)

And a naturally aspirated I4 is better than a twin-turbo I6.

youtube.com/watch?v=hljPsNpo9y4

Your point?

h

Does the Ecoboost weight factor in the weight of the turbos?

yep

will you ever find love? and what will you do when you do?

That Chevy lt4 weight includes the transmission. I guarantee that Ecoboost weight doesn't include everything. My 1mz, which is alloy and NA, is about 450lbs with a transmission.

Nice try.

Yes, I will. And when I find the man I love I will cuddle with him and play video games. I'm hoping his name is taxi but I'm not sure if true love is that easily found.
>lt4 weight includes transmission
nope
sperg more

...

nice selfie. sperg more. it 1:15 in the morning

I see you're doing what you can to keep your shitty thread alive even if it means replying to yourself. Have a good night faggot

im not replying to myself? nice obsession tho

I can't keep my hands off myself when I think about you. Shit, I don't know what love is, but if being obsessed means you'll go out with me then I'm fucking obsessed. Will you go out with me?

i doubt you live where i do.

.

can we get some mods on this board?

.

>high strung

straight fucking wrong, the 5.0 and 6.2 both make power at higher rpm's than the v6. completely fucking full of shit.

Why do you keep making this thread?

>Ending at 6000's
B-b-but thats where the fun begins

thx

stupid nigger makes a stupid thread kek

sperg more

>17245587
nice projection, keep giving me (you's) darkie

sperg more

. e

muh torque

>over 700hp
More like 647.
performance.ford.com/content/dam/fordracing/enthusiasts/Media Room/2017/01/2017_GT_Tech_Specs.pdf

>Worse than a Chebby LT4
No shit, that's GM engineering. However, a 675LT is lighter with it's V8.

the rxc turbo makes 700 hp.

>675 lt is lighter
it's also slower than the ford gt. sperg more

The RXC is not a Ford, and makes 650bhp - about 640 SAE hp.

The 675LT is slower than a Ford GT - in a test conducted by Ford engineers, for the Ford GT's marketing program, on a track in bumfuck nowhere Canada. There's a reason Ford hasn't given a single one to the media for unbiased testing - they're afraid it'll be slower once their engineering team isn't around to slow the Mc down.

Bye.

the rxc uses a ford v6. sperg more.

>the 675 lt is slower
yes. you just admitted mclaren can't compete.

>b-but
sperg more
>literally ragequits
lmao

>the rxc uses a ford v6. sperg more.


The Evora uses a toyota engine, your point?

His point is that they probably have tuned the engine in house to tweak more power out of it so its irrelevant in comparison to the factory offered version.