2013 Ferd Rustang Mullit Shoulda-Got-A-V-8 Edition

alfadriver wrote: Then a follow up question- why do you need another separator? I'm pretty sure that the engine is consuming less than a quart/10k miles....

Does it have one already? It's not consuming oil at a high rate but when I looked at the stock breather hose it definitely had some oil in it. Oil through the intake was a problem with my old Mazdaspeed3. I know it's more of a concern with forced induction engines. Maybe I'm just being paranoid.

xflowgolf wrote: not trying to troll... but honest question. While the V6 is a great car at the price point and most all of your planned mods are a welcome addition to almost any car, if you are planning "Brembo GT front brake conversion, and forced induction. Procharger...or a turbocharger" why not start with a 5.0 GT? It seems like by the time you upgrade driveshaft, buy a blower kit, and add the Brembo GT stuff, you're likely not any cost ahead.

Forced induction, as well as everything else in that paragraph, is a pie-in-the-sky mod. Like, it probably won't happen until the car is well out of warranty or I get some massive windfall. OEM Brembo front brake take-offs from Brembo package GTs are fairly common on Mustang forums.

RexSeven wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Then a follow up question- why do you need another separator? I'm pretty sure that the engine is consuming less than a quart/10k miles....

Does it have one already? It's not consuming oil at a high rate but when I looked at the stock breather hose it definitely had some oil in it. Oil through the intake was a problem with my old Mazdaspeed3. I know it's more of a concern with forced induction engines. Maybe I'm just being paranoid.

Yes, it has one- all new engines have one built into it. Lots of reasons for it, but the emissions durability is high on the reasons that I'm familiar with.

Don't think of yourself as being paranoid- think of it as planning ahead. The stock system does get reworked a little for a boost set up. Which I thought you were going to do.

I got to see this car in person when GRM had the Factory Five get-together. Compared to a friend's 2011 base GT, this car looks so much better with the subtle upgrades that Ford did for the 2013 model year. I like how far back the V6 is, and those seats are awesome. If this car had been out back when I bought my 3 in this same configuration, I'd be driving a Mustang.

Gears. Gears now. Change out the rear gears now. 3.73 should be perfect.

Bah!

Last week some lady love-tapped my Mustang's bumper while stopped at a red light. She was too busy gabbing on her cell phone and reaching into her glove box to notice she took her foot off the brake, and the car crept forward into mine.

We couldn't get out at that intersection, but she knew she hit me, and she knew that I knew she hit me. However, she drove off anyways when I tried to pull over further up and take down her info. Good thing I got her plates. The bumper damage is minimal but because it will cost over $500 to repair and she took off, it's in our insurance companies' hands now (I deliberated a lot before doing this, too. If the repairs would have been $200 or less I would have let it slide).

The 31 spline axles seem unnecessary. My car sends 459 lb-ft of torque to the wheels through an 8.8 with 28-spline axles, and I have no problems whatsoever.

Will wrote: The 31 spline axles seem unnecessary. My car sends 459 lb-ft of torque to the wheels through an 8.8 with 28-spline axles, and I have no problems whatsoever.

That's another pie in the sky mod (I'm going to change my first post, I left that part kind of vague). 31-spline axles are needed to use the OS Giken LSD, because that only comes in a 9-inch (31-spline) version.

The V-6PP comes with a Torsen LSD from the factory, but if in a few years I decide to make mine track-day oriented I would like a clutch-type LSD with the OSG's tuneability. It's high on my wish list for my turbo FC and I've heard nothing but good things about them.

I'd say be on the lookout for a wrecked F150 w/the ecoboost 6.. That would be a real sweet motor swap if you could swing it.

The oil separators are pointless on street-driven cars. They're useful on cars that are driven very hard for long periods of WOT, such as drag racing, autocrossing, and road racing.

That being said, my 5.0 does not have oil separators and consumes less than half a quart over the course of 6,000+ miles. And I drive that thing pretty dang hard.

As for the worthless twat running into the back of your car, I would have followed her.

RexSeven wrote: Bah! Last week some lady love-tapped my Mustang's bumper while stopped at a red light. She was too busy gabbing on her cell phone and reaching into her glove box to notice she took her foot off the brake, and the car crept forward into mine. We couldn't get out at that intersection, but she knew she hit me, and she knew that I knew she hit me. However, she drove off anyways when I tried to pull over further up and take down her info. Good thing I got her plates. The bumper damage is minimal but because it will cost over $500 to repair and she took off, it's in our insurance companies' hands now (I deliberated a lot before doing this, too. If the repairs would have been $200 or less I would have let it slide).

Glad you got her plates. People suck.

On the night of the 1st date with my now-wife, some jackhole with jackhole-ette in the passenger seat decided to tap me at a stop light. I got out of the car to exchange info, and they took off. Back in the car I went. You see, he was driving a crappy rusty Accord, and I was in my 2002 WRX. I called the cops and told them what happened, and surprisingly they told me to stay with the guy until they could set up a patrol. I had no problem keeping up.

When the idiot saw two cops with their lights on coming at us, he pulled into a supermarket parking lot. The cops pulled up too. They immediately went over to their car and made the driver get out. They knew my car because I had been on the horn with the dispatcher. Luckily, my bumper was not damaged visibly. Unlucky for him, they began writing him up for leaving the scene of an accident, and then searched his car after smelling the weed emanating from the interior. I didn't stick around to see how that turned out for them.

+1 for adding an oil separator.

I would hope there was one built in somewhere, but a little extra insurance is worth it.

From what I've seen and heard, engines with direct injection can develop alot of deposits on the intake valves. This is due to the fact that they don't have a fuel injector spraying them off all the time. (This of course assumes you are using good fuel and have a properly maintained motor). With a DI engine, oil from the PCV and carbon from the EGR just cooks on the valves.

Why the factory doesn't use these I don't know. Cost cutting I guess. If it could be fitted with a drain so it went back to the crankcase, even better.

Gearheadotaku wrote: +1 for adding an oil separator. I would hope there was one built in somewhere, but a little extra insurance is worth it. From what I've seen and heard, engines with direct injection can develop alot of deposits on the intake valves. This is due to the fact that they don't have a fuel injector spraying them off all the time. (This of course assumes you are using good fuel and have a properly maintained motor). With a DI engine, oil from the PCV and carbon from the EGR just cooks on the valves. Why the factory doesn't use these I don't know. Cost cutting I guess. If it could be fitted with a drain so it went back to the crankcase, even better.

Couple of things about that-

This engine isn't DI. The only N/A DI engine in the Ford family right now is in a Focus, the rest have turbos.

And the cars that do have intake deposit problems seem to generate from BWM, so it's not so much unique to DI, since BMW has had intake system deposit problems for decades.

(yes, there are oil separators. I'm sure this engine burns oil somewhere around 15k/qt- which is basically nothing)

oops, thought it was a DI motor, thanks for the correction.

I have seen another German car co. that has valve deposit issues as well on their DI motors.

Never was concerned about the consumption of the oil itself, just want to keep it out of the intake tract.

Most of the cocerns I've read about were BMW and Mini's- a few audis, but not nearly the volume. So I don't know if I would believe it or not.

As Sky_Render mentioned in his thread, I have a Fays2 Watt's Link on the way from him. So right now I have that on the way, the Koni struts at home, and I need to order the caster/camber plates and springs. No word yet from insurance on my bumper, though.

If anyone here is interested in a new and unused Whiteline adjustable Panhard bar and brace for the 05-13 S197 Mustang, please PM me.

In reply to RexSeven:

Honest question, unless you posted it and I just missed it...

What do the Whitline Adjustable Panhard bar/brace and the Fays2 Watts link bring to the table that the stock panhard bar does not do? In theory, this will have an impact on the rear suspension of my GTV which also is a live axle.

The adjustable panhard bar allows you to re-center the rear axle after lowering.

I won't pretend to know HOW the Watt's Link works other than it's supposed to do a better job of locating the rear axle during suspension movement and eliminating the side-to-side motion of the axle during compression.

That is a very small amount that it moves though.

RexSeven, your Watts link should be there tomorrow. You got the tracking number I sent you, right?

In reply to z31maniac:

The panhard bar is supposed to locate the rear axle laterally relative to the chassis. It does this by using a lever arm that connects to the passenger side of the chassis and the driver side of the axle. In steady state, this prevents the axle from moving laterally. (The trailing arms prevent the axle from moving longitudinally.)

However, that is steady-state. When the suspension is compressed/uncompressed during cornering, acceleration, or cresting the top of a hill at high speeds, the panhard barcauses the rear axle to move in an arc, which causes the axle to move laterally relative to the chassis. This causes some measure of "rear wheel steering" during transitions and makes the rear end feel "squirrelly."

Now, a Watts link essentially replaces that single panhard bar with two smaller panhard bars connected to a "propeller." This causes the axle to move up and down with no lateral movement relative to the chassis.

The disadvantages of a Watts link include additional weight, less space on the rear end, and additional complexity.

Ah, didn't think about the lowering part. Using the adjustable panhard would be very imporant for that.

As for the arc panhard vs. the watts- that I know about- what I'm more interested in is if this Watts is that much better that it's obvious that the axle moves laterally and that the watts is worth the time/money/weight.

Some of the rear steer is the action of the 3 trailing links moving in relation to each other- just leaning the car over will change what direction the axle points as it rotates around the middle lenght- 4 bar mecanism physics- can't do anything about that. (the trailing arms define an arc, too- so they change longitudial location as the car leans)

it would be interesting to see how much lateral movement there is with full axke movement, and then look at it more on a real boundary basis. How much lateral movement is the Watts fixing?

From the "A picture's worth a thousand words" department, scroll down to the bottom of this page:

http://www.miracerros.com/mustang/t_suspension.htm

In reply to dj06482:

Like i said, how much does it actually move. Inches, centimeters, or millimeters?

alfadriver wrote: In reply to dj06482: Like i said, how much does it actually move. Inches, centimeters, or millimeters?

Less than an inch, but enough to upset the rear end.

For an example, think about how much of a difference 1/8" of toe-in vs toe-out makes.

In reply to Sky_Render:

But you'll still get the rear steer from the 3 trailing link geometry. That actually changes the angle of the axle relative to the chassis for "toe"- the panhard effect just moves the axle side to side.

Not to say that the Watts you bought in the other thread isn't cool as heck- it looks really nice. And with the diff housing being so beefy... Very handy swap.

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: But you'll still get the rear steer from the 3 trailing link geometry. That actually changes the angle of the axle relative to the chassis for "toe"- the panhard effect just moves the axle side to side. Not to say that the Watts you bought in the other thread isn't cool as heck- it looks really nice. And with the diff housing being so beefy... Very handy swap.

I'm not sure I'm following you on how the 3-link geometry causes rear steering. As long as the trailing arms are set up with the proper angles and there is no binding, there should be no rear steering.

Sky_Render wrote:

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: But you'll still get the rear steer from the 3 trailing link geometry. That actually changes the angle of the axle relative to the chassis for "toe"- the panhard effect just moves the axle side to side. Not to say that the Watts you bought in the other thread isn't cool as heck- it looks really nice. And with the diff housing being so beefy... Very handy swap.

I'm not sure I'm following you on how the 3-link geometry causes rear steering. As long as the trailing arms are set up with the proper angles and there is no binding, there should be no rear steering.

A link suspension will cause rear steer - 3 link included. In the same way that the panhard follows an arc, so do the LCA's. When you go into a turn, the car leans over, and the outside arm pushes the axle back as that side compresses, effectively making the car dynamically crab-walk.