It seems the 2011 Mustang Gt's performance was "Inflated" vs 2010 Camaro
05-27-2010, 08:11 AM
#382
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And even that, what I changed it to was right as well. There will be tons of modded 4th and 5th gen Camaros smearing stock 11' GTs.
05-27-2010, 09:12 AM
#383
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airflow is highly dependent upon total valve area. The S85 intakes are 35.7mm and the exhausts are 30.5mm; total intake area is about 62 square inches and exhaust is about 48 square inches.
Coyote intakes are 37mm, exhausts are 31mm - for total area of about 53 and 37 square inches, respectively.
You wouldn't reflexively say that even though the LSx has fewer valves, they're bigger...would you?
Ref the rest - each individual piston is lighter, yes. Each crank throw is lighter, yes. It's not total mass, it's the per-cylinder mass - the con rod in cylinder 1 isn't stressed by the forces acting on cylinder 2, right?
Coyote intakes are 37mm, exhausts are 31mm - for total area of about 53 and 37 square inches, respectively.
You wouldn't reflexively say that even though the LSx has fewer valves, they're bigger...would you?
Ref the rest - each individual piston is lighter, yes. Each crank throw is lighter, yes. It's not total mass, it's the per-cylinder mass - the con rod in cylinder 1 isn't stressed by the forces acting on cylinder 2, right?
But you would probably agree there is some room to enlarge the valves and lighten the rods and pistons and increase in the rpm. In 69 they were pushing 5.0 engines to 9K surely some of that technology could be used today. Stronger lighter rods pistons and lighter valve assemblies. And as has been said Roush is already doing it so the point is already proven. I just don't think Ford is putting a fully maxed out 5.0 engine in the production Mustang. I think the is room for more N/A horsepower improvement. The rods and pistons aren't even forged I'm sure the engines are not extremely well balanced from the factory. Porting the heads stronger lighter rotating assembly larger lighter valves improved intakes improved exhaust flow and balancing the engine all come to mind.
Last edited by FOG52; 05-27-2010 at 09:27 AM.
05-27-2010, 09:33 AM
#384
Teching In
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FOG52
In 69 they were pushing 5.0 engines to 9K surely some of that technology could be used today. <snip> And as has been said Roush is already doing it.
Originally Posted by FOG52
I just don't think Ford is putting a fully maxed out 5.0 engine in the production Mustang.
Regarding the crank - you'd agree that, given sufficient airflow and fuel, the upper limit on an engine's speed is that at which it comes apart? That's pretty much directly a function of maximum piston speed, which is a direct function of stroke length. Two engines of equal displacement, all else equal the one with the shorter stroke can rev higher before it breaks. You offset the shorter stroke by either making the bore bigger, or adding more cylinders.
The downside of more cylinders is more friction (more bearing area between cylinder walls and pistons, usually more crank bearings, more con rod bearings, etc.). So at some displacement/RPM, you reach a tradeoff point. That's why F1 ran V10s instead of V8s or V12s; for the displacement limits and optimum RPM range, the 10 made the most sense.
05-27-2010, 10:42 AM
#385
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes...for pure racing engines. F1 used to get 1000HP out of 1.5 liter V6s, too. They don't have to live longer than one race, and they don't have to make any power below race speeds either. They were also all short-stroke designs, too. The Coyote is not.
No doubt, but at what point do you give up reliability and driveability?
Regarding the crank - you'd agree that, given sufficient airflow and fuel, the upper limit on an engine's speed is that at which it comes apart? That's pretty much directly a function of maximum piston speed, which is a direct function of stroke length. Two engines of equal displacement, all else equal the one with the shorter stroke can rev higher before it breaks. You offset the shorter stroke by either making the bore bigger, or adding more cylinders.
The downside of more cylinders is more friction (more bearing area between cylinder walls and pistons, usually more crank bearings, more con rod bearings, etc.). So at some displacement/RPM, you reach a tradeoff point. That's why F1 ran V10s instead of V8s or V12s; for the displacement limits and optimum RPM range, the 10 made the most sense.
No doubt, but at what point do you give up reliability and driveability?
Regarding the crank - you'd agree that, given sufficient airflow and fuel, the upper limit on an engine's speed is that at which it comes apart? That's pretty much directly a function of maximum piston speed, which is a direct function of stroke length. Two engines of equal displacement, all else equal the one with the shorter stroke can rev higher before it breaks. You offset the shorter stroke by either making the bore bigger, or adding more cylinders.
The downside of more cylinders is more friction (more bearing area between cylinder walls and pistons, usually more crank bearings, more con rod bearings, etc.). So at some displacement/RPM, you reach a tradeoff point. That's why F1 ran V10s instead of V8s or V12s; for the displacement limits and optimum RPM range, the 10 made the most sense.
Roush-Yates will also supply a naturally aspirated 600 HP 5.0L Cammer for use in the Matech-Ford GT1 that will compete in the upcoming FIA GT1 World Championship.
Last edited by FOG52; 05-27-2010 at 04:22 PM.
05-27-2010, 12:06 PM
#388
Launching!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Azusa, Ca.
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all you numbnut's that think that the new 5.0 is maxed out, Come back to this thread in a year and you'll see how ignorant you sounded. When has a manufacturer put out a engine that has been maxed out? Never.
05-27-2010, 12:38 PM
#389
I don't think anyone is saying it's maxed out with no way to make more power. But how many people are going to spend 4K on cams? There will be a lot more cammed SS' than GT's. I bet you come back to this thread in year and it's still a drivers race.
Last edited by Dark SS; 05-27-2010 at 01:38 PM.
05-27-2010, 12:45 PM
#390
Teching In
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Black1997T/A
For all you numbnut's that think that the new 5.0 is maxed out
I'm saying that most of the easier/more cost-effective routes have either already been taken at the factory (decent exhaust, VVT), or won't be possible (boring/stroking).
You surely can throw a blower on it. But making significantly more NA power is gonna be really expensive.
I'm not belittling it - quite the contrary, it's an incredibly impressive engine at its price point. I have to wonder about the market penetration, though - aside from the Mustang, what other applications will there be?
05-27-2010, 01:00 PM
#391
Launching!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Azusa, Ca.
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I highly doubt it, but I wouldn't mind be pleasantly surprised. There just is not as much room for improvement in a 4V 4Cam V8 to get more power, expecially at 5.0 L displacement. I am not saying that it won't ever be done, but the theory just doesn't support your logic.
05-27-2010, 03:58 PM
#392
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I highly doubt it, but I wouldn't mind be pleasantly surprised. There just is not as much room for improvement in a 4V 4Cam V8 to get more power, expecially at 5.0 L displacement. I am not saying that it won't ever be done, but the theory just doesn't support your logic.
Livernois already has the motor apart so I am sure you will see something much quicker than you think
Besides, The car was in an owners hands for less than 24 hours before they broke into the 10s with it. I am willing to bet the same cannot be said for the Chevy camp
JPC Racing did just that with exhaust, gears and the hose. Last edited by nanokpsi; 05-27-2010 at 07:01 PM.
05-27-2010, 04:30 PM
#394
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If what has been talked about for the last year or so can be believed, this new 5.0 is slated to replace all current 4.6 (and some 5.4) motor duties in Ford's lineup. So you should be seeing a trim level of this motor in the F-series trucks at least. Would have been nice to see them bring over the Falcon from down under, but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.....at least not right now. It'd also be nice to see them produce a mass production successor to the Ford GT......something to compete head to head with the Vette. A lightweight, mid-engined sportscar powered by this new 5.0 would be pretty tight.
05-27-2010, 05:08 PM
#396
TECH Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germantown, MD
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DOHC cars still have to pass emissions, no? The OEM still has durability/driveabilty requirements, no? That is why aftermarket cams pick up so much power in todays cars. Not to mention there is plenty of room for Revs with a 3.65" stroke. F-cars have no problem making plenty of power with less than 5.0L now don't they
Livernois already has the motor apart so I am sure you will see something much quicker than you think
Besides, The car was in an owners hands for less than 24 hours before they broke into the 10s with it, and there are already two stock longblock cars in the 10s. I am willing to bet the same cannot be said for the Chevy camp
Livernois already has the motor apart so I am sure you will see something much quicker than you think
Besides, The car was in an owners hands for less than 24 hours before they broke into the 10s with it, and there are already two stock longblock cars in the 10s. I am willing to bet the same cannot be said for the Chevy camp
05-27-2010, 05:11 PM
#397
Launching!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Azusa, Ca.
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dark SS and AdmiralB, they just came out a day ago and already in the 10's. You know for a fact that the same cannot be said for the 2010 SS. Come on You cant be that biased bro, if that's not the case then You are just in denial. It is what it is... PERIOD. Bore diameter. stroke, C.I.D. etc... Doesnt mean crap. Its just gonna get faster. This is just the beginning. I own GM's but Im not that ignorant and hard headed to be so biased. No matter what You think, it's tail light city for the new SS. Im done with this thread. P.S. its okay for someone to be faster than You. You're just gonna have to accept it cause thats life.
05-27-2010, 05:35 PM
#398
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-27-2010, 05:37 PM
#399
Teching In
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Black1997T/A;13390204] You are just in denial.QUOTE]
Huh?
All I've said is that it's a lot more highly tuned out of the box than the LSx engines, even the LS7. The result of this is that it isn't going to have the same $/HP potential for expansion as other designs.
It's a helluva engine, and Ford deserves a lot of credit for it. But it's gonna cost a LOT more to hop up than, say, the old 302...NA at least.
Huh?
All I've said is that it's a lot more highly tuned out of the box than the LSx engines, even the LS7. The result of this is that it isn't going to have the same $/HP potential for expansion as other designs.
It's a helluva engine, and Ford deserves a lot of credit for it. But it's gonna cost a LOT more to hop up than, say, the old 302...NA at least.
05-27-2010, 05:41 PM
#400
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who said that?
I'm saying that most of the easier/more cost-effective routes have either already been taken at the factory (decent exhaust, VVT), or won't be possible (boring/stroking).
You surely can throw a blower on it. But making significantly more NA power is gonna be really expensive.
I'm saying that most of the easier/more cost-effective routes have either already been taken at the factory (decent exhaust, VVT), or won't be possible (boring/stroking).
You surely can throw a blower on it. But making significantly more NA power is gonna be really expensive.
After bolt ons, everyhting else goes out the window anyways. It turns into "who can spend more on modding thier car".
Stock manuals are running into the mid 12s at ~112 and I have seen a stock auto that ran 12.73 at 115.x. The car is lighter and putting 370-380 to the tire bone stock. It is certianly worthy of some "hype".