MauriSSio

youre right. But before getting a 2seater id get a motorcyle,seats just as many!

demarco313

No comparison... Stock c5z (02-04)with a good driver usually on average trap 116-118

While the 5.0 usually trap about 111-112 with a good driver from what i hear although at the track i have never seen anyone trap more than 110 stock.

Like scrambler said it will take full exhaust, CAI, tune to be a good race for a stock c5z especially form a roll and i would still say the c5z has a slight advantage even with the 5.0 having those mods.

A base c5 m6 with bolt ons and tune would be a good race for a stock 5.0

TooMuchMoney

iTrader: (1)

I get what your saying, who doesn't like more room but for most of us that are on tech were here to race our cars and make them as fast as possible within our budget. The vette is a average mans race car, the F-Body is a sports car they are in too very different classes. Out of all my toys I have the ones with a backseat never get used, only those rare occasions when the girl and I go out with some friends. But when I am racing I only have one extra person b/c usually we are filming the race, but those HD Pros are pretty badass, almost to the point I don't need a camera man. I can mount 2 of them and get the perfect angles.

interlscubes

good kill

oddwraith

iTrader: (1)

I see what you're saying. But even though I may be the minority, I want my back seats and I actually don't agree that we all make our cars as fast as we can, within our budgets. My car could be WAY faster within my budget (today's "budget"=guts 'n' a pen anyways lol) but I haven't yet since it is just not a priority for me, time-wise especially. Hell, fuel isn't even a factor for how many miles I put on her (mostly summer dd miles but not far).

oddwraith

iTrader: (1)

Shoot, sorry for not multi-quoting here, but that would make the coyote about 440 bhp if factoring for 15% drivetrain loss! Pretty not bad! I wonder if also the transmissions eat up a LOT less these days to (actually I'm pretty sure they're more efficient-but still)?

Bdubbs

Good kill op, haven't even seen any new 5.0's in my area yet, but can't wait!

Ju1ce

That dyno of the 5.0 is about 20whp higher than the average. Wouldn't expect anything less from Mustang fanbois though.

fiveoh

That looks like an auto dyno chart. Most manuals are making 370-380.

Bdubbs

For the manual it also depends on what gear they are dynoing it at. Some places have been using 4th gear which shows more hp/tq. 5th gear should be used as it's 1:1 ratio.

Ju1ce

This has gotta be the biggest piece of misinformation regarding dynos to ever circulate.

It is not an auto dyno chart. It's an SAE corrected 6spd manual chart. Most manuals are also making 355-360whp SAE corrected.
All the 370-380-390 numbers are uncorrected in great conditions. **** my GTO made like 410whp uncorrected in the winter. But only puts down 380ish SAE.

Irunelevens

So is this one not valid?

Ju1ce

Looks like the CF was played with a little. It's essentially uncorrected at SAE 1.00, yet the conditions it was run 71 degrees and 8% humidity is wayyyyyyyyy better conditions and the CF should have been more like .97. I've seen first hand dynojet operators purposely do that when selling their tunes. They'd come out and say "OMG SAE CORRECTED MY TUNE > ALL" but if you look closer you can see somethin was up.

Irunelevens

That would be the same correction factor as this graph that you posted, where the temperature is ~80 degrees and the humidity is ~20%.

Ju1ce

I'm saying way better than a 1.00 CF. It's very possible that they both should be .97. The elevation over at MD speed is below 500 ft, but the air pressure was only 29.13, a full point below the air pressure at the other dyno shop.

It's tough to say exactly what the CF should be, but I can tell you that it should NOT be 1.00 with those figures.
A CF of .97 turns that 375whp into 363 which is more believable. At .96 it's 360, **** it could even be .95 with those numbers and make 356.
CF's are too easily manipulated and it misleads a LOT of people and causes a ton of confusion.

The best way to know for sure is take uncorrected dyno numbers and correct them yourself with an SAE formula.

Bdubbs

Really? You want me to post up all the 5.0 mustangs and fast fords magazine articles where they proved this?

MauriSSio

4th gear usually usually comes out to lower numbers. 1:1 fifth gear actually produces higher numbers.

Ju1ce

Relying on 5.0 Mustangs and Fast Ford Magazines for accurate information is like watching Fox News for accurate and fair political information.

Seriously did you just reference the 2 biggest Mustang fanboi magazines in existence to try and prove your point?

TooMuchMoney

iTrader: (1)

LOL you guys are arguing over nothing really who cares what it really makes STOCK, just mod the bitch till it blows! I like the new 5.0's and there gonna take off like the LS1 did with after market parts and a huge fan base. If your that worried about stock #'s your too slow and need to mod asap.

MauriSSio

ok here comes juicer with the name calling

20rwhp higher?? youre trippin. If i was a fanboy i would have posted the 395rwhp sheet from Insideline or the 395rwhp dyno sheet that Livernois Motorsports got from one of their 5.0 cars (370rwhp new, 395rwhp after break in. Did a quick search:
370rwhp


and heres one from one of LS1TECHS SPONSORS--372rwhp


and another 373rwhp