Any Truth to this?

[Seanith]

I was just reading one of my SCC mags, and in the issue that has "99 things you need to know" it said that mustand "5.0"s don't actually have 5.0L engines but 4.9L engines? Is that true? They said that they call them 5.0s because it sounds cooler lol ricers :rofl: :dunno:

[eb0i]

well my car is a 3.0L honda and when you look at the specs its really a 2.999999999.....L

so the mustang 5.0 could really just be a 4.9999999999....L

[Seanith]

Originally posted by eb0i
well my car is a 3.0L honda and when you look at the specs its really a 2.999999999.....L

so the mustang 5.0 could really just be a 4.9999999999....L

Well i know they round up, but to what extent for the mustang?

[Wildcat]

ford is notorius for overrating their engine's actual HP, so i suppose 4.9L could be probable :dunno:

[Akagi Redsuns]

1L is equal to 61.02374 cubic inches.

The "5.0" Ford Mustang has a 302 cubic inch engine which is 4.948893L .......close enough.

[GT-FOUR]

#100. Never trust SCC for reliable information on anything.

But yeah, the mustang has a 302...meh. My Dakota has a 318...often quoted as a 5.2L, but it is actually a 5.2110867L. My celica has a 1988cc engine but is known as a 2.0L...

[C4S]

Most cars are like that !

Most 2.5L car is actually 2.48 or 2.49L etc

and most 1.8L engines are 1.78, 1.79L etc
same as 3.0L engine .. etc ..

We are not talking a 2L COKE !

I don't underatand why you concern about it ?

So . a Mustang should say Mustang 4.9624357 L ?? :confused: :confused:

Anyway .. there is the main reason for some other cars :

For most other market in the world there r lots of regulation, example, from a 1.5L to 2.0L engine, the insurance is like cheaper then 2.0L to 2.5L , and then 2.5 - 3.0 L is more expensive, 3.0- 4.0L is even more, and 4.0L and up r very expensive.

that is why, car manufactures need to make a 1.99L, 2.49 L 2.99L engines etc .. and that is why, there r so many Turbo engines, and Honda has to make small size engines ..

It is much cheaper to make a 5.0L engine with 250 HP then a 2.0L engine with 250HP, however, for example in Japan, a 2.0L engine car cost way less then a 5.0L car to insurance ! so Honda mada a 1.997L engine, with 250HP !

And that is also why, Toyota makes a RX330 (3.3L )here, and RX300 (3L close enough)

:dunno: :dunno:

[rage2]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns
1L is equal to 61.02374 cubic inches.

The "5.0" Ford Mustang has a 302 cubic inch engine which is 4.948893L .......close enough.
Actually, the 302ci is rounded... the Mustang 5.0L's have a 102mm bore, 76mm stroke, which calculates to 4968cc, or 4.968L, which rounds up to 5.0L.

Engines are rounded up to the nearest tenth in displacement when talking in L. The mustang motor is rounded up properly, and SCC is on crack (yea, why the hell would you trust SCC? They're the worse for accuracy).

You want to talk misnaming, look at BMW and Mercedes :).

BMW 320i (2.2L)
BMW 330i (2.7L)
BMW 545i (4.4L)
MB C230 (1.8L)
MB C240 (2.6L)
MB S55 (5.4L)
MB S600 (5.5L)

[Seanith]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns
1L is equal to 61.02374 cubic inches.

The "5.0" Ford Mustang has a 302 cubic inch engine which is 4.948893L .......close enough.

yeah but thats obvious they rounded up when it should of been rounded down :thumbsdow

[Seanith]

Originally posted by GT-FOUR
#100. Never trust SCC for reliable information on anything.

But yeah, the mustang has a 302...meh. My Dakota has a 318...often quoted as a 5.2L, but it is actually a 5.2110867L. My celica has a 1988cc engine but is known as a 2.0L...


Your celicas displacement is equal to 1.988 L. Its reasonable to round up in that case. Not if it was like 1.944L

[rage2]

Originally posted by ~$eanith~
yeah but thats obvious they rounded up when it should of been rounded down :thumbsdow
see my post above you :).

[Seanith]

yeah got it ;)