The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[fazm]

Originally Posted by sik68

I am a HUGE fan of the 2010/2011 Mustang, but I think I am going to blow a big hole in these dyno results.

It comes down to Torque/Liter. Serious engine guys (not me) know that naturally aspirated horsepower comes from revs, and torque comes from displacement. You can rev an engine sky high to make power, but your displacement has the final say in how much torque you can make.

Here are some examples:
Ferrari's 458: 88.9ftlb/L (self proclaimed) record
Porsche 3.8 GT3: 83.42
Honda S2000: 81
2011 Mustang GT: 78
BMW M3 E92: 73.75
MB C63: 71.5
Camaro SS: 67.7
2008 Viper: 66.7


I listed some high tech and low tech engines there to show you a range of capabilities of engines right now (and you can see how relatively 'low tech' the LS3 motor is). If the 2011 GT makes 365 torque at the wheels, then using 13% drivetrain loss, is 420 at the crank, which is 420/5 = 83.9ftlbs/liter. HAHA, LOL, NO WAY. Their technology isn't there with this engine.

So all you Camaro fanboys, you can relax and use my argument in your intarnet debates until better numbers come out.

and you proof of it not being possible lies where?

[newagemuscle]

http://forums.themustangsource.com/s...d.php?t=481565

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by fazm

and you proof of it not being possible lies where?

He doesnt have any at all. It comes from the retarded belief that anything European is automatically superior to all things American.

If it was saying 100 ft lbs per liter..I'd believe it, but that very post shows higher tq per liter numbers.

Basically it comes to the point where he's saying "It isnt that good because it is a Ford".

[sik68]

Originally Posted by fazm

and you proof of it not being possible lies where?

Touche

[ViperTomcat]

yeah, there's already a thread in the "Other Vehicle Discussion" section.

[sik68]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

He doesnt have any at all. It comes from the retarded belief that anything European is automatically superior to all things American.

If it was saying 100 ft lbs per liter..I'd believe it, but that very post shows higher tq per liter numbers.

Basically it comes to the point where he's saying "It isnt that good because it is a Ford".

Neither one of my vehicles is European. And I like Fords. And I like Dodges too! I think your post is not as informed as mine above.

[mrray13]

Originally Posted by sik68

I am a HUGE fan of the 2010/2011 Mustang, but I think I am going to blow a big hole in these dyno results.

It comes down to Torque/Liter. Serious engine guys (not me) know that naturally aspirated horsepower comes from revs, and torque comes from displacement. You can rev an engine sky high to make power, but your displacement has the final say in how much torque you can make.

Here are some examples:
Ferrari's 458: 88.9ftlb/L (self proclaimed) record
Porsche 3.8 GT3: 83.42
Honda S2000: 81
2011 Mustang GT: 78
BMW M3 E92: 73.75
MB C63: 71.5
Camaro SS: 67.7
2008 Viper: 66.7


I listed some high tech and low tech engines there to show you a range of capabilities of engines right now (and you can see how relatively 'low tech' the LS3 motor is). If the 2011 GT makes 365 torque at the wheels, then using 13% drivetrain loss, is 420 at the crank, which is 420/5 = 83.9ftlbs/liter. HAHA, LOL, NO WAY. Their technology isn't there with this engine.

So all you Camaro fanboys, you can relax and use my argument in your intarnet debates until better numbers come out.

Ummm, you got the 2011 Mustang listed at 78lb-ft/L in your list, then 83.9ft-lb/l in your text at bottom. So.....what gives?


I think I can see the argument you are trying to make, and it makes sense, but you really need clarify the post and the evidence.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

He doesnt have any at all. It comes from the retarded belief that anything European is automatically superior to all things American.

If it was saying 100 ft lbs per liter..I'd believe it, but that very post shows higher tq per liter numbers.

Basically it comes to the point where he's saying "It isnt that good because it is a Ford".

No, I think his point is those engines at the top of the list are ridiculously expensive and for the most part hand built. His point is that it is pretty unlikely that the "cost-effective" design of the Mustang 5.0 is going to achieve those type of results.

[ULTRAZLS1]

It was done in the wrong gear. That alone will throw off the numbers by about 30rwhp. Could also be a high numbers dyno. And from the history of the people running this dyno something could definitely be miss calibrated.The motor is 412hp. CERTIFICATION PROCESS-CERTIFICATION PROCESS- CERTIFICATION PROCESS. Im not sure if the motor is currently certified...but it will be eventually.

Who says the ZR-1 is under rated? It is SAE CERTIFIED. Why does everyone refuse to understand this. An engineer from SAE sits and watches the actual dyno of the motor.

I have seen dynos of about 500-510 rwhp stock...most people were actually a little disappointed.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Some of you guys need to read what the mustang guys are saying. Most of them know what is going on.

http://forums.themustangsource.com/s...=481565&page=4

[76z28]

I think this is great
bring on the 450 or 460 horse camaro then
lighten it up and let the pony wars explode

my only gripe is that GM thinks corvette guys will get mad because the camaro has more power
well im sorry to say corvette fan boys but you all can shove it
the camaro is back and alive corvette....isnt doing as hot as the camaro but its doing alright
GM needs to invest in something that works...the Camaro

[berzerko]

pretty impressive for a 302

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...ang-gt-50.html

[ViperTomcat]

Already posted:
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72987

[VelocityC6]

Originally Posted by 76z28

I think this is great
bring on the 450 or 460 horse camaro then
lighten it up and let the pony wars explode

my only gripe is that GM thinks corvette guys will get mad because the camaro has more power
well im sorry to say corvette fan boys but you all can shove it
the camaro is back and alive corvette....isnt doing as hot as the camaro but its doing alright
GM needs to invest in something that works...the Camaro

Corvette has never been a huge seller for GM (at it's best a 30,000 a year production), in fact most sports cars that are 2 seaters sell in low numbers. I seriously doubt vette guys are as upset as you may make them out to be.