BS thread - 2011 GT 11.80's @ 118 with bolt ons
#61
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nashville / Indianapolis
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Haha well you seem to be a little more intelligent and mature than 02 wife
Congrats? Technology is a wonderful thing
Hmm do I really need to say it? Where was the camaro from 03-09????? And what about the cobra's? But its ok I can tell you are one of those "brand" nut swingers so I would expect a comment like that lol
Congrats? Technology is a wonderful thing
Congrats to Ford... Took you what 17 years but better late then never right? I am looking forward to my first run in with one. But like I've said CHANGE THE TAILLIGHTS! ******* hideous... The front of them are bad ***. I preferred the GT rear style before.
But like my sig says...
But like my sig says...
#62
Yeah..cause your such a regular around here you completely understand why I made that post right? sounds like you need to take you're own advice.
And GOSH DANG that "you're on LS1tech" is pretty lame. Especially given the below..........
Kind of a contradiction of mentality no? If you respect and auto enthusiast, why would you point the immaturity of being a ford guy on LS1tech? A Ford guy that has been on here longer than you, more posts, and has a decent amount of respect on this board given I'm a labeled a ford guy.
And GOSH DANG that "you're on LS1tech" is pretty lame. Especially given the below..........
Kind of a contradiction of mentality no? If you respect and auto enthusiast, why would you point the immaturity of being a ford guy on LS1tech? A Ford guy that has been on here longer than you, more posts, and has a decent amount of respect on this board given I'm a labeled a ford guy.
post count
#65
#67
12 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
A diesel?
#68
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Schertz, Texas
Posts: 2,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That would be pretty nasty, and I'd probably end up with one in my driveway. Actually, when is the next gen stang due? with the Camaro up in '14 (am I right?), the Mustang usually follows by a year or two, correct? (Kind an odd question to ask since it just got a refresh)
#69
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its hard to compare a Ford to a GM because Ford hasn't ever recently made a motor that was the same size. Closest thing you can get is the N/A 5.4L out of the Cobra R and compare it to the still bigger and less powerful LS1 or for the cry baby GM owners we can compare it to the LS6 just to shut them up. Still, less cubic inches = same or more power. Ford = winner IMO.
we can use ricer math too in this situation.
LS6 = 405 hp = 1.1705 hp/cube
5.4L = 385 hp = 1.1667 hp/cube
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. 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.
I wouldn't go looking toward putting a blower on it either with 11:1 compression and no direct injection...
Last edited by zigroid; 05-08-2010 at 03:15 PM.
#70
#72
I never understood this train of thought. why would you want an engine that is PHYSICALLY larger, heavier, more complex, etc that makes the same power as a physically smaller, lighter, less complex engine while having less displacement AND not being to go much more than ~6 liters.
we can use ricer math too in this situation.
LS6 = 405 hp = 1.1705 hp/cube
5.4L = 385 hp = 1.1667 hp/cube
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. 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.
I wouldn't go looking toward putting a blower on it either with 11:1 compression and no direct injection...
we can use ricer math too in this situation.
LS6 = 405 hp = 1.1705 hp/cube
5.4L = 385 hp = 1.1667 hp/cube
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. 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.
I wouldn't go looking toward putting a blower on it either with 11:1 compression and no direct injection...
excellent post. the way i see it, the new mustang is fast from the factory, but doesn't have much room for improvement. It's great that they put out a fast n/a stang finally, but it's not reinventing the wheel or anything to go absolutely nuts over.
#73
Not to mention I knew the first GM nut swinger would bring up the 2001-2004 LS6 and compare it to an earlier model Ford. I didn't know the first one to reply would though. Sad
Why don't we compare a 2000 5.4L against a 2000 5.6L?
Last edited by Stopsign32v; 05-08-2010 at 03:47 PM.
#74
Where do you idiots come from?! "Doesn't have much room for improvement" you are saying this based on what technical information given about the 2011 5.0? Stick to what you know...
#75
Haha, already got some of that. I love it, but don't like the the idea that I'm probably going to need it to take out a bolt-on/cammed Mustang GT! Oh well, the competition is a great thing, especially since it gives incentive to keep the mods coming.
Definitely curious what it's gonna run at the track. With the power you've gotten out of that 331, I can only imagine what you'd be able to squeeze out of a 400+ ci motor.
Definitely curious what it's gonna run at the track. With the power you've gotten out of that 331, I can only imagine what you'd be able to squeeze out of a 400+ ci motor.
#76
it is just my OPINION that i dont foresee too much room for improvement with the new stang. yet i am however open to my mind being changed with proven results or a good counterargument.
#77
Looks to me that they already went from high 12's @ 112 mph to high 11's at 118 mph with bolt-ons...what do you consider "much room for improvement"?
#79
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nashville / Indianapolis
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Why did you choose the 2002 LS6 over the 2001 LS1 when comparing it to the 2000 5.4L Ford?
Not to mention I knew the first GM nut swinger would bring up the 2001-2004 LS6 and compare it to an earlier model Ford. I didn't know the first one to reply would though. Sad
Why don't we compare a 2000 5.4L against a 2000 5.6L?
Not to mention I knew the first GM nut swinger would bring up the 2001-2004 LS6 and compare it to an earlier model Ford. I didn't know the first one to reply would though. Sad
Why don't we compare a 2000 5.4L against a 2000 5.6L?
Thank you.. Someone who isn't close minded and biased. Simple bolt ons and picked up a second and 6 mph is pretty respectable to me for any car. But remember "they don't have room for improvement"
#80
They only squeezed around 40whp out of the motor over factory, i don't foresee much more power out of that motor without boost or nitrous.
So where I stand now is, you can easily make an ls1 have over 450-460 at the wheels with h/c/i, now i have a feeling the mustangs heads, cams, and intake dont have much room for improvement, so they are limited to just over 400 at the wheels.
so a 5.7 with 450-460, and a 5.0 with around 400...it's not reinventing the wheel. they made a comparable motor power to cube wise to the ls1, finally. congradulations ford.
***edit*** and like i said before, i'm open to anyone changing my mind with proven results.