BS thread - 2011 GT 11.80's @ 118 with bolt ons
#101
#102
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Schertz, Texas
Posts: 2,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Not much but here's some info...
http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2...g_GT_Specs.pdf
http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2...g_GT_Specs.pdf
#104
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Why does everyone act like this car is the second coming of Jesus?
How will we ever hit high elevens... Oh ya. Real easy.
This car is way cool and I would probably rather have one than the new camaro but really guys...
It ran low 13's stock mid 12's with bogarts mickeys and a full suspension evoltions driver.
Cool car but really guys... This thing keeps up. Nothing more.
If you want to have the best hp per liter buy a Honda you wanna win races keep your ls and your cubes.
How will we ever hit high elevens... Oh ya. Real easy.
This car is way cool and I would probably rather have one than the new camaro but really guys...
It ran low 13's stock mid 12's with bogarts mickeys and a full suspension evoltions driver.
Cool car but really guys... This thing keeps up. Nothing more.
If you want to have the best hp per liter buy a Honda you wanna win races keep your ls and your cubes.
#106
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
FIrst I will say I shouldn't have used the phrase 'tear apart' as it can all be summed up in what I said before logging off.
You ddint' read what I posted when I left. THat is my entire point, you have not come up proof.
Why would you say that? that right there is the basis of my point. That graph looks very similar to a cobra's N/A 4V in regards to the curve in the upper rpms. Are you trying to tell me that the best shift point for an N/A cobra is 7500rpms? WTF? The new 6speed tranny doesn't have a steep first gear ratio like a T45 or 3650, so wth would be the point to shift that high?
Again, speculation comes to mind. you have no idea as you are saying 'probably not far off'. I'm not saying it isn't, but you obviously haven't checked (and neither have I for that matter). you bet 380s and MAYBE 390? THis is another speculation.....
https://ls1tech.com/forums/dyno-benc...n-numbers.html
375rwtq with bolt ons and tune. That doesn't even factor in LT's, or cams. Again, you have no idea what TQ this motor will get into until the A/M gets into it.
Again, why do you need to shift at 8k rpms to see 450 rwhp? Hardly anything has been done with these motors. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if 8k isn't all that 'do able'; nor do I believe it to be necessary....but that's MO.
Again...speculation.
Why? There are plenty of cars running FI on 11:1. I personally would not put a PD blower on it, but yet again, MO. Let's also not forget about the GT350.
No one says it'll break the laws of physics. THe only one's making a "huge" deal out of this are the bowtie loyalists that can't simply say....."nice job", and leave it at that. I remember ford guys respecting the LS1 when it came out...hell, even the LT1 when the '93 came out. It's a shame the respect can't be mutual.
as for your question: speculatory.
I dont' think anyone can answer you as of yet, because of hte above.
Hmmmm, as I recall the Mach1 made a nice TQ curve. Maybe you aren't familiar with it. As for TQ and shift at 4k, as I recall, peak TQ stock was made at ~4500 rpm. I have no idea why you would even think 4k is the 'spot'.
WHy? Ford cared more about sales as I'm sure you are aware of. They are a business after all.
and no, the Boss 351s were rated at 330hp thank you. you are correct in it taking for a while to get there, you are wrong about which car. As for not counting the Shelby, I get that, it isn't factory.
Good post.
um...see above, you did not come up with anything but speculation to support your opinion. Therefore it isn't a very strong support.
I will say this though (in agreement with you), the fact that the peak numbers are ~2500rpms apart is pretty, well, crazy. Maybe I'm off on my memory, but I can't recall ford ever having that much of a gap factory. I'm willing to bet if they did the same thing to this car as they did with the mach compared to the 01 cobra, you'd see a better low end TQ. IE: Used different intake cams.
After all that z, I have to say, maybe I'm just totally missing your point. If that is the case, I do apologize. The way I see it though, is you are just coming up with assumption to support your opinion.![Icon Confused](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/icon_confused.gif)
and no, we don't have to have a childish debate on this.
now, regarding the 5.0L, it is an impressive engine. I saw evolution made about 375 rwtq at peak with boltons. now I know im gonna get a lot of **** for saying this but I don't foresee that engine making a whole lot more power without really increasing the RPM range and it already probably wants to be shifted at 7500 rpm judging by its hp peak at about 6700-6800 rpm.
looking at BMEP anything over 200 psi is pretty damn good for an all motor engines. nascar and F1 engines run at 215-220 psi range. a 302 running at 220 psi BMEP is making about 440 ft lbs of torque which is probably not far off from where that bolt on evolution car is sitting. I bet you'll see some go in to the 380s rwtq MAYBE touch 390 rwtq which is no doubt impressive from a 5.0L. they are hitting 400 rwhp at 6700 rpm which is 313 rwtq.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/dyno-benc...n-numbers.html
375rwtq with bolt ons and tune. That doesn't even factor in LT's, or cams. Again, you have no idea what TQ this motor will get into until the A/M gets into it.
the power curve is really gonna have to be shifted up to see substantial gains because you are not going to be increasing torque very much to get the gains.. to see ~450 rwhp you're looking at shifting above 8000 rpm. Can the bottom end support this kind of RPM? Im sure it will be fun flat out but what will the bottom end power look like when you have to shift the torque curve up that high? this is why I dont think we're gonna be seeing 475 hp like some ford fans are claiming this engine will produce in years to come directly from ford. I don't think they have left much room to grow.
which is why your argument is silly. why would you not WANT more displacement? why would you be happy with less? with an LS1 you can go from 330 rwtq to 430 rwtq. one could say "well that engine is lazy from the factory" while another can say "damn that engine has some killer potential" you're not going to be seeing these new 5.0s go from ~350 rwtq stock to ~450 rwtq. as I showed earlier youre probably not gonna see them hit 400 rwtq.
as for your question: speculatory.
so where does ford go from here? the genV GM V8s are coming and theyre gonna be impressive. ford really can't make much more torque. they will have to continue by shifting the RPM band upward. at some point you start sacrificing high RPM power for low end torque. can you get that through your thick head? this car still weighs 3650 lbs you need some low end torque unless you want to shift at 4000 rpm everywhere which WILL negatively effect fuel economy (which is gonna get kind of important over the next few years).
GM had a 5.7L engine making 405 hp in 1993. why did it take ford 7 years to catch GM?
GM was also first to one hp per cube back in 1957. how long did it take ford to have a V8 that hit one horsepower per cube? the 289 made, at most, 271 hp. I believe the boss 351s would be the first fords to achieve this feat and they came some 10+ years later.
childish ford fans, keep digging yourselves holes.
GM was also first to one hp per cube back in 1957. how long did it take ford to have a V8 that hit one horsepower per cube? the 289 made, at most, 271 hp. I believe the boss 351s would be the first fords to achieve this feat and they came some 10+ years later.
childish ford fans, keep digging yourselves holes.
and no, the Boss 351s were rated at 330hp thank you. you are correct in it taking for a while to get there, you are wrong about which car. As for not counting the Shelby, I get that, it isn't factory.
zigroid, you are asking questions that NONE of us could know, unless one of the members here designed the 5.0. How would anybody know how strong the bottom end is and how much RPM it could take before popping? The ONLY way to find that out is trial and error and I don't think there are any 5.0's on the road yet but I may be wrong.
I will say you are correct about the displacement and torque arguement, but come on man. Who races from such a low RPM you have to rely on low end torque? We aren't diesels.
I will add however that bolting on a supercharger will solve the whole low end torque problem and Mustang guys have been going the boost route because of the expense of an NA build for the better part of 15 years now. The last time it didn't cost a first born child to do a massive NA build was in 1995 with the death of the famed 302.
Like I said, as far as torque goes the LSX has the 5.0 beat purely because of displacement.
I'm very interested in what this engine's capabilities are both NA and with FI. It should make for a very interesting few years for the GM-Ford wars.
I will say you are correct about the displacement and torque arguement, but come on man. Who races from such a low RPM you have to rely on low end torque? We aren't diesels.
I will add however that bolting on a supercharger will solve the whole low end torque problem and Mustang guys have been going the boost route because of the expense of an NA build for the better part of 15 years now. The last time it didn't cost a first born child to do a massive NA build was in 1995 with the death of the famed 302.
Like I said, as far as torque goes the LSX has the 5.0 beat purely because of displacement.
I'm very interested in what this engine's capabilities are both NA and with FI. It should make for a very interesting few years for the GM-Ford wars.
I will say this though (in agreement with you), the fact that the peak numbers are ~2500rpms apart is pretty, well, crazy. Maybe I'm off on my memory, but I can't recall ford ever having that much of a gap factory. I'm willing to bet if they did the same thing to this car as they did with the mach compared to the 01 cobra, you'd see a better low end TQ. IE: Used different intake cams.
After all that z, I have to say, maybe I'm just totally missing your point. If that is the case, I do apologize. The way I see it though, is you are just coming up with assumption to support your opinion.
![Icon Confused](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/icon_confused.gif)
and no, we don't have to have a childish debate on this.
#107
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dont forget a joeblow went 11.7@114 with similar mods in a 2010 SS.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21013
Not really... GM contracted Lotus to design, and Mercury Marine to build the LT5. So you can't really call it a GM motor in all fairness.
#109
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The only issue I can see concerning the stock short block and boost potential is the cast aluminum pistons. I assume the crankshaft is forged, like the connecting rods, but that site doesn't mention the crankshaft.
#110
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (17)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This was a fun read. I think the car will do really well, and probably start outselling the camaro quickly. Great work by ford giving the people what they want. Not to mention the new V6 stang is putting out almost as much as last years V8. If it weren't for the ugly *** end and my irrational fear of car loans I would be trying to buy one.
I think the variable valve timing employed here is the real secret to its success, with how much control the computer can have over the power curve. That's just my opinion though.
I think the variable valve timing employed here is the real secret to its success, with how much control the computer can have over the power curve. That's just my opinion though.
#111
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nashville / Indianapolis
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This was a fun read. I think the car will do really well, and probably start outselling the camaro quickly. Great work by ford giving the people what they want. Not to mention the new V6 stang is putting out almost as much as last years V8. If it weren't for the ugly *** end and my irrational fear of car loans I would be trying to buy one.
I think the variable valve timing employed here is the real secret to its success, with how much control the computer can have over the power curve. That's just my opinion though.
I think the variable valve timing employed here is the real secret to its success, with how much control the computer can have over the power curve. That's just my opinion though.
#112
TECH Fanatic
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
WOW! What a read! Seems this Ford V GM debate 'argument' is happening on both sides of the world. Here down under in NZ i have been on another LS site in Australia, the Ford Falcon boys on that GM site are also crowing about the new Coyote engine as they will be getting it in their new Falcon later this year.
OK as a factory engine, it's impressive indeed. Bolt ons & tune sure will get this engine running up with us LS guys.
What we have to think about is when the aftermarket stuff comes on stream for this engine, and it will.
Bigger cams, head packages, etc. Also with our LS engines, we build strokers, fit turbos & blowers, nitros etc, they will too.
You say their comps to high, it will certainly help their H/C & cams only engines, for those that want blowers etc, the motors will just be built with less comp.
If i could look into the future i'd say FORD has come of age and we definately now have a true equal fight on our hands, will be interesting to see how long it takes for the aftermarket stuff to be come available.
Not sure i'm going to like the future.....maybe change my Holden for a Gen 1 Camaro and fit a 572cu GM Crate motor haha!
OK as a factory engine, it's impressive indeed. Bolt ons & tune sure will get this engine running up with us LS guys.
What we have to think about is when the aftermarket stuff comes on stream for this engine, and it will.
Bigger cams, head packages, etc. Also with our LS engines, we build strokers, fit turbos & blowers, nitros etc, they will too.
You say their comps to high, it will certainly help their H/C & cams only engines, for those that want blowers etc, the motors will just be built with less comp.
If i could look into the future i'd say FORD has come of age and we definately now have a true equal fight on our hands, will be interesting to see how long it takes for the aftermarket stuff to be come available.
Not sure i'm going to like the future.....maybe change my Holden for a Gen 1 Camaro and fit a 572cu GM Crate motor haha!
#113
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Since we're discounting V6's and sticking with ones you're actually likely to catch a race with (Cobras, GT's, and Mach 1's), I'm thinking that 4% is going to shoot up quite a bit for 2004, and shoot up from the 9% mentioned if you go with 2003.
Also, while I appreciate that you're trying to look at this from a purely numbers driven bench race standpoint, my actual experience at the stoplight drags and drag strips is that I've run into quite a few Cobras and "discounting" them doesn't mean the races never happened.
![Cheers!!](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_cheers.gif)
Last edited by ScreaminRedZ; 05-09-2010 at 07:40 AM.
#114
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Well Its got oil squirters which should help out some. I believe I read somewhere that whipple is already working on a 2.3L kit for the '11.
#115
Staging Lane
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I'm just wondering how long until we see the first Coyote 5.0 built to the hilt, nailing 8,500rpm shift points, in a old school late 80's Mustang LX stripped down to its G string and pulling 8 second 1/4 miles. You just know it's gonna happen! The block and head castings might be the only stock things on it, but someones gonna make a true screamer out of it before that poor engine even makes it to it's first gas station after it leaves the lot.
#116
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
They are definitely no slouch. I'm still waiting for Ford to put a bigger motor in those cars. Obviously they're just showing that they can get a lot out of a small motor in stock factory form, but everyone already knows it's possible. I think they should step it up in CI.
#117
TECH Addict
iTrader: (7)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I say great job to Ford on this one. I'm sure the sales numbers will back that up very soon.
#118
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
BMEP = 150.8 x torque / displacement
4 stroke engines are limited to how much torque they can make. you wont ever see a 302 cube engine making 500 ft lbs of torque. if you see one making 450 ft lbs of torque you should probably play the lottery more often as that is one incredibly stout engine not often seen.
Why would you say that? that right there is the basis of my point. That graph looks very similar to a cobra's N/A 4V in regards to the curve in the upper rpms. Are you trying to tell me that the best shift point for an N/A cobra is 7500rpms? WTF? The new 6speed tranny doesn't have a steep first gear ratio like a T45 or 3650, so wth would be the point to shift that high?
Again, speculation comes to mind. you have no idea as you are saying 'probably not far off'. I'm not saying it isn't, but you obviously haven't checked (and neither have I for that matter). you bet 380s and MAYBE 390? THis is another speculation.....
https://ls1tech.com/forums/dyno-benc...n-numbers.html
375rwtq with bolt ons and tune. That doesn't even factor in LT's, or cams. Again, you have no idea what TQ this motor will get into until the A/M gets into it.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/dyno-benc...n-numbers.html
375rwtq with bolt ons and tune. That doesn't even factor in LT's, or cams. Again, you have no idea what TQ this motor will get into until the A/M gets into it.
BMEP = 150.8 x torque / displacement
pretty cool equation right there.
once again this isnt some magical engine that will break the rules of physics. unless there is forced induction involved that engine will not see over 450 ft lbs EVER. 450 ft lbs is probably going to be around 390 rwtq.
the only speculation in that paragraph was my prediction that you wont see them hit 400 rwtq. but that speculation is pretty god damn well educated.
No one says it'll break the laws of physics. THe only one's making a "huge" deal out of this are the bowtie loyalists that can't simply say....."nice job", and leave it at that. I remember ford guys respecting the LS1 when it came out...hell, even the LT1 when the '93 came out. It's a shame the respect can't be mutual.
WHy? Ford cared more about sales as I'm sure you are aware of. They are a business after all.
and no, the Boss 351s were rated at 330hp thank you. you are correct in it taking for a while to get there, you are wrong about which car. As for not counting the Shelby, I get that, it isn't factory.
and no, the Boss 351s were rated at 330hp thank you. you are correct in it taking for a while to get there, you are wrong about which car. As for not counting the Shelby, I get that, it isn't factory.
Ill say it one more time. ford did a good job of getting big power out of a small package. ~425 hp and ~400 tq is pretty damn good out of a 5.0L. my initial argument was that ford doesn't have a whole lot more they can do with the engine from a production level. the aftermarket has the luxury of removing catalytic converters, running very aggressive tunes, running larger camshafts without worrying about fuel economy or emissions. you can't squeeze a whole lot more torque out of this engine so the only way to make more horsepower is to push the RPM band up. obviously if they choose to do this they will build a bottom end that can support the power but my other question was at what point does it become a high strung race engine? Ive driven M3s that need to wind to 8000 rpm to make 330 hp. ive riden in S2000s that need 8500 rpm to make 240 hp. they are not fun cars to drive normal. they suck, actually. my personal preference is big power as soon as I hit the gas. others are different, I understand that.
#119