2011 5.0 Mustang Dyno
04-14-2010, 02:25 PM
#161
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to laugh when people say "with bolt-ons and a tune" when referring to the Mustang. The car already runs on the ragged edge, you can't get more aggressive with the tune. It's their new adaptive spark control technology:
The adaptive spark control system keeps the engine running right on the knock sensor all the time, continuously adjusting the spark advance to avoid detonation regardless of the fuel used.
And I honestly don't believe ARH is getting similar gains from long tubes that the LS1's got. The Mustang engine is too efficient to pick up a whole lot more power. The BMEP is too high. More efficient than the Ferrari Enzo. If they get another 50-60hp out of this car without raising peak power rpm,then they will have surpassed F1, Cup, and Pro-stock technology. Call me crazy but I don't see it happening with "bolt-ons and a tune" haha.
The adaptive spark control system keeps the engine running right on the knock sensor all the time, continuously adjusting the spark advance to avoid detonation regardless of the fuel used.
And I honestly don't believe ARH is getting similar gains from long tubes that the LS1's got. The Mustang engine is too efficient to pick up a whole lot more power. The BMEP is too high. More efficient than the Ferrari Enzo. If they get another 50-60hp out of this car without raising peak power rpm,then they will have surpassed F1, Cup, and Pro-stock technology. Call me crazy but I don't see it happening with "bolt-ons and a tune" haha.
BTW a lot of sanctioned racing leagues have restrictions and rules to limit power....
Last edited by MauriSSio; 04-14-2010 at 02:41 PM.
04-14-2010, 04:02 PM
#163
LMAO there are people out there making well over 500hp with old school carbbed 302's, what makes you think that the DOHC 32 valve 5.0 is maxed out from the factory??? and its tune as well??? that is a rediculous statement. Also, GMHTTP got a whopping 12hp from long tubes on their LS1. The stock manifolds on the LS engines flow pretty good. similar to short tube headers. The 5.0 has some similar to mid lengths
BTW a lot of sanctioned racing leagues have restrictions and rules to limit power....
BTW a lot of sanctioned racing leagues have restrictions and rules to limit power....
Your example of 500hp from a 302 is irrelevant without knowing where peak HP occurred. Well, actually, I know where it occurred. At 7500 rpm or higher. Why? Because that's the only place an NA 302 CAN! Let me explain:
The dohc 5.0 is being released with a 194 bmep at peak torque. At peak power (415 which occurs at 6500 rpm) you need 335 ft/lbs of torque at 6500 rpm. That equates to a bmep of 167 at peak power, pretty stout! To make 450 rwhp (up from the 395 that mag got, just 55hp more, or 517 brake horsepower) you need 418 ft/lbs at 6500, which creates a bmep of just under 209. With a similar torque curve, that is going to put the peak torque bmep over 230!
In other words.. it ain't happening, and your a know nothing internet racer. As far as the tune is concerned, Ford said it themselves. They are already constantly running these engines on the brink of detonation as it is, and their compression is already way up there for a street engine.
There won't be much to find in "bolt-ons and a tune." That's physics. If you still don't believe me, I've been meaning to talk to you about this gravity thing too.
If you want to make 500hp like the old school carb guys the only way to do it is to raise your peak power up 1000 rpm or so and shift the mustang at 8000-8500 rpms. Now you just bought 4 cams and paid someone to go through the heads. At this point, it would have been easier and cheaper to say **** it and gone FI.
That's why you will not see "bolt on and tune" 2011 Mustangs gaining a ton of power. It's really just not there to be had. If you want to go into the engine and build a purpose built high rpm N/A screamer, then that option is there.. but you will get less power for more cost than just bolting up a vortech, and without losing bottom end for the street.
So if you want to reply to this MauriSSio, PLEASE have something to back up your claims besides "well this car did this once," especially when I can blast it right out of the water.
04-15-2010, 12:25 AM
#164
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You obviously don't understand brake mean effective pressure.. and I really don't feel like explaining it again.. but I will.
Your example of 500hp from a 302 is irrelevant without knowing where peak HP occurred. Well, actually, I know where it occurred. At 7500 rpm or higher. Why? Because that's the only place an NA 302 CAN! Let me explain:
The dohc 5.0 is being released with a 194 bmep at peak torque. At peak power (415 which occurs at 6500 rpm) you need 335 ft/lbs of torque at 6500 rpm. That equates to a bmep of 167 at peak power, pretty stout! To make 450 rwhp (up from the 395 that mag got, just 55hp more, or 517 brake horsepower) you need 418 ft/lbs at 6500, which creates a bmep of just under 209. With a similar torque curve, that is going to put the peak torque bmep over 230!
In other words.. it ain't happening, and your a know nothing internet racer. As far as the tune is concerned, Ford said it themselves. They are already constantly running these engines on the brink of detonation as it is, and their compression is already way up there for a street engine.
There won't be much to find in "bolt-ons and a tune." That's physics. If you still don't believe me, I've been meaning to talk to you about this gravity thing too.
If you want to make 500hp like the old school carb guys the only way to do it is to raise your peak power up 1000 rpm or so and shift the mustang at 8000-8500 rpms. Now you just bought 4 cams and paid someone to go through the heads. At this point, it would have been easier and cheaper to say **** it and gone FI.
That's why you will not see "bolt on and tune" 2011 Mustangs gaining a ton of power. It's really just not there to be had. If you want to go into the engine and build a purpose built high rpm N/A screamer, then that option is there.. but you will get less power for more cost than just bolting up a vortech, and without losing bottom end for the street.
So if you want to reply to this MauriSSio, PLEASE have something to back up your claims besides "well this car did this once," especially when I can blast it right out of the water.
Your example of 500hp from a 302 is irrelevant without knowing where peak HP occurred. Well, actually, I know where it occurred. At 7500 rpm or higher. Why? Because that's the only place an NA 302 CAN! Let me explain:
The dohc 5.0 is being released with a 194 bmep at peak torque. At peak power (415 which occurs at 6500 rpm) you need 335 ft/lbs of torque at 6500 rpm. That equates to a bmep of 167 at peak power, pretty stout! To make 450 rwhp (up from the 395 that mag got, just 55hp more, or 517 brake horsepower) you need 418 ft/lbs at 6500, which creates a bmep of just under 209. With a similar torque curve, that is going to put the peak torque bmep over 230!
In other words.. it ain't happening, and your a know nothing internet racer. As far as the tune is concerned, Ford said it themselves. They are already constantly running these engines on the brink of detonation as it is, and their compression is already way up there for a street engine.
There won't be much to find in "bolt-ons and a tune." That's physics. If you still don't believe me, I've been meaning to talk to you about this gravity thing too.
If you want to make 500hp like the old school carb guys the only way to do it is to raise your peak power up 1000 rpm or so and shift the mustang at 8000-8500 rpms. Now you just bought 4 cams and paid someone to go through the heads. At this point, it would have been easier and cheaper to say **** it and gone FI.
That's why you will not see "bolt on and tune" 2011 Mustangs gaining a ton of power. It's really just not there to be had. If you want to go into the engine and build a purpose built high rpm N/A screamer, then that option is there.. but you will get less power for more cost than just bolting up a vortech, and without losing bottom end for the street.
So if you want to reply to this MauriSSio, PLEASE have something to back up your claims besides "well this car did this once," especially when I can blast it right out of the water.
04-15-2010, 01:34 AM
#166
whoa calm down there killer youre getting yourself WAY too excited there, like a lil chihuahua ready to yap at whatevers there. When did i specifically say that the 5.0 will gain A TON OF POWER?? BTW those dyno numbers are crap and you know it. The car is not making 395rwhp (theyre the same ones who dynoed the GT500 at a bit over 500rwhp stock when they make closer to 470), it probably did on THAT specific dyno but this engine is SAE Certified to make 412hp and its trap speed indicates that it is indeed making that much at the crank ( =370ish RWHP). Im sure a few bolt ons will raise the power a decent amount (its superior heads indicate theres still some more power to be had) and we will see Mustang GT's commonly hit 11's with minor bolt ons and good tires probably at 114-115mph hopefully, which is plenty fast. Dont get all hot and bothered by it though!!!!
04-16-2010, 05:15 AM
#167
MauriSSio,
Thats true, every car does has it short comings. I admit i don't like Ford cars or trucks.
But if you look how nice looking the GMC Terrain for example and the Chevy Equinox as far as little suv's and compare then to the Ford Escape, there's no comparison. I'm a fan of most American cars. For a while now when driving i compare GM's vehicles to Ford and Dodge. Even Chrysler products look an feel alot higher quality then most Ford cars. Last night i drove in a 2007 Mercury Mariner and i was shocked how choppy its ride was. I was in the back seat and i feel the motor or the tranny vibrating through the truck. It's things like that that causes people to buy foreign cars. The only thing that saves Fords' asses is they have very very loyal customers. Ford claims they sell so many cars, well they don't tell you that a good chunk of their sales are fleet sales. States, townships and DOT's buy batches of vehicles. Not that they sell a better car, its just that they're willing to sell their product for less. Now that's good business, so i give Ford a lot of credit for that.
But most of friends or family that bought a Ford product sold it after 2 years. There's no shortage of low mileage 1 or 2 year old cars on used car lots. I always found it funny that Fords claims they win all those awards for " Initial Quality "...lol. Well i'm more interested in how a car holds up after a few years. lol.
But it is true that no car is perfect for sure.
Thats true, every car does has it short comings. I admit i don't like Ford cars or trucks.
But if you look how nice looking the GMC Terrain for example and the Chevy Equinox as far as little suv's and compare then to the Ford Escape, there's no comparison. I'm a fan of most American cars. For a while now when driving i compare GM's vehicles to Ford and Dodge. Even Chrysler products look an feel alot higher quality then most Ford cars. Last night i drove in a 2007 Mercury Mariner and i was shocked how choppy its ride was. I was in the back seat and i feel the motor or the tranny vibrating through the truck. It's things like that that causes people to buy foreign cars. The only thing that saves Fords' asses is they have very very loyal customers. Ford claims they sell so many cars, well they don't tell you that a good chunk of their sales are fleet sales. States, townships and DOT's buy batches of vehicles. Not that they sell a better car, its just that they're willing to sell their product for less. Now that's good business, so i give Ford a lot of credit for that.
But most of friends or family that bought a Ford product sold it after 2 years. There's no shortage of low mileage 1 or 2 year old cars on used car lots. I always found it funny that Fords claims they win all those awards for " Initial Quality "...lol. Well i'm more interested in how a car holds up after a few years. lol.
But it is true that no car is perfect for sure.
Last edited by BlackNiteWS6; 04-16-2010 at 05:43 AM.
04-16-2010, 04:59 PM
#170
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MauriSSio,
Thats true, every car does has it short comings. I admit i don't like Ford cars or trucks.
But if you look how nice looking the GMC Terrain for example and the Chevy Equinox as far as little suv's and compare then to the Ford Escape, there's no comparison. I'm a fan of most American cars. For a while now when driving i compare GM's vehicles to Ford and Dodge. Even Chrysler products look an feel alot higher quality then most Ford cars. Last night i drove in a 2007 Mercury Mariner and i was shocked how choppy its ride was. I was in the back seat and i feel the motor or the tranny vibrating through the truck. It's things like that that causes people to buy foreign cars. The only thing that saves Fords' asses is they have very very loyal customers. Ford claims they sell so many cars, well they don't tell you that a good chunk of their sales are fleet sales. States, townships and DOT's buy batches of vehicles. Not that they sell a better car, its just that they're willing to sell their product for less. Now that's good business, so i give Ford a lot of credit for that.
But most of friends or family that bought a Ford product sold it after 2 years. There's no shortage of low mileage 1 or 2 year old cars on used car lots. I always found it funny that Fords claims they win all those awards for " Initial Quality "...lol. Well i'm more interested in how a car holds up after a few years. lol.
But it is true that no car is perfect for sure.
Thats true, every car does has it short comings. I admit i don't like Ford cars or trucks.
But if you look how nice looking the GMC Terrain for example and the Chevy Equinox as far as little suv's and compare then to the Ford Escape, there's no comparison. I'm a fan of most American cars. For a while now when driving i compare GM's vehicles to Ford and Dodge. Even Chrysler products look an feel alot higher quality then most Ford cars. Last night i drove in a 2007 Mercury Mariner and i was shocked how choppy its ride was. I was in the back seat and i feel the motor or the tranny vibrating through the truck. It's things like that that causes people to buy foreign cars. The only thing that saves Fords' asses is they have very very loyal customers. Ford claims they sell so many cars, well they don't tell you that a good chunk of their sales are fleet sales. States, townships and DOT's buy batches of vehicles. Not that they sell a better car, its just that they're willing to sell their product for less. Now that's good business, so i give Ford a lot of credit for that.
But most of friends or family that bought a Ford product sold it after 2 years. There's no shortage of low mileage 1 or 2 year old cars on used car lots. I always found it funny that Fords claims they win all those awards for " Initial Quality "...lol. Well i'm more interested in how a car holds up after a few years. lol.
But it is true that no car is perfect for sure.
04-16-2010, 06:12 PM
#171
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-17-2010, 10:27 AM
#172
Thats true...i don't hide how i feel about mustangs...lol, but i am looking forward to driving in a new 5.0 GT. Actually last summer Echelon Ford in Stratford, NJ had an awesome looking 2008 silver w/blue stripes Shelby KR
It cost a lot more than i thought it would, but it was one best looking cars on the road.
It cost a lot more than i thought it would, but it was one best looking cars on the road.
04-17-2010, 12:35 PM
#173
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-17-2010, 12:37 PM
#174
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-17-2010, 12:43 PM
#175
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You say that like it's no big deal...I'm curious if you do it with a straight face (hard to tell through the computer). The GTO's came out weighing 3725 and everyone flipped out saying they were fat pigs. Then the GT500's came out in the 3900 lbs range and they caught nothing but **** from the GM guys. Now that the Camaro weighs that much it's suddenly ok, though...
HAHA! I lol'd hard at this.
04-17-2010, 02:54 PM
#176
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the mach 1 kept up just fine. I think its funny that people use the forced induction excuse. People always looking for excuses, if it isnt weight, its the disparity in the size of the engines, or its forced induction or god knows what else. Dont be mad that Ford builds tough engines that can withstand forced induction and incredible power levels. Live with it.
04-17-2010, 03:25 PM
#177
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The GT500's stock internals are good for 1000rwhp. Both of these are well over 1000hp at the crank....so what's your point?
This thread is suppose to be about the new 5.0 engine anyway. This thread has been all over the damn place because of chevy fanboys being all butt hurt and getting their panties in wad.
04-17-2010, 03:42 PM
#178
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread proves that there are a lot of straight up fanboys on this forum, not auto enthusiasts.
04-17-2010, 03:49 PM
#179
I've seen an 04 Cobra with stock everything minus a twin turbos and fuel system make 874RWHP. (Stock block, cams, crank, pistons. Basically, everything internal was stock.)
The GT500's stock internals are good for 1000rwhp. Both of these are well over 1000hp at the crank....so what's your point?
This thread is suppose to be about the new 5.0 engine anyway. This thread has been all over the damn place because of chevy fanboys being all butt hurt and getting their panties in wad.
The GT500's stock internals are good for 1000rwhp. Both of these are well over 1000hp at the crank....so what's your point?
This thread is suppose to be about the new 5.0 engine anyway. This thread has been all over the damn place because of chevy fanboys being all butt hurt and getting their panties in wad.
04-17-2010, 03:52 PM
#180
the mach 1 kept up just fine. I think its funny that people use the forced induction excuse. People always looking for excuses, if it isnt weight, its the disparity in the size of the engines, or its forced induction or god knows what else. Dont be mad that Ford builds tough engines that can withstand forced induction and incredible power levels. Live with it.