The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[ULTRAZLS1]

So why is this car only trapping 110 with 435 horsepower and 3600 lbs?

This engine is supposed to be SAE certified in the near future. So I will be looking for ford to change the output if what some of you say is true.

Also...I have seen videos of SAE certification in the process. An engineer from SAE physically watches the dyno along with an engineer from the given manufacturer.

Once that SAE certification is handed down to the 5.0 I will take those numbers ALL DAY LONG over random rwhp dynos from different dynos across the country, with god knows who operating them, in who knows what gear, with who knows what correction factor, with who knows what has been done to the car, with who knows what kind of conditions etc etc etc I could go on forever.

Ill stick with SAE certification as maybe just being a TAD more reliable/accurate than random rwhp numbers and conspiracy theories...but maybe im crazy.

Ill be waiting...

[SamSS]

Originally Posted by syr74

They estimate what percentage of loss the car experiences through the drive-line, and it is an estimate. In this case MT used a 15% correction factor which, for a modern manual transmission car, is arguably much too high. 10-11% is probably more like it which puts the car closer to 420-425hp at the crank according to their rwhp numbers.

Here is who you would do it. If a car makes 385rwhp on the dyno and I think there is 10% loss through the drivetrain I divide 385 by .90 and come up with ~428hp.

So even less accurate. Should've just gone with rwhp.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

So why is this car only trapping 110 with 435 horsepower and 3600 lbs?

If it's under-rated there could be a lot of reasons why.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

This engine is supposed to be SAE certified in the near future. So I will be looking for ford to change the output if what some of you say is true.

Certified to which SAE specification? I'll admit I haven't killed myself looking for how the SAE is handling this now, but the outgoing 2010 Mustang was rated to the old SAE net standard and that means that nobody from SAE was watching Ford do anything. Is the new car rated to the old spec or the new one?

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Also...I have seen videos of SAE certification in the process. An engineer from SAE physically watches the dyno along with an engineer from the given manufacturer.

For the new certification process, yes, but not for the older SAE net process. Which is Ford using on the 2011GT?

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Once that SAE certification is handed down to the 5.0 I will take those numbers ALL DAY LONG over random rwhp dynos from different dynos across the country with god knows who operating them in who knows what gear with who knows what correction factor etc etc etc I could go on forever. Ill stick with SAE certification.

Which SAE certification are you sticking with?

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Ill be waiting.

For what?

[SSmoked]

This stang is serious ehh. performance is very impressive, better than the camaro. too bad the stang doesnt look as good.
step it up gm 2010 is going to be the year of the blue oval.

[bpmurr]

Originally Posted by 81z28355

GT 500 in 2010 was rated 12.3 from Ford if I remember. When you start getting into these high HP cars traction is a big problem and that is why the numbers for the GT500 are all over the map. I have seen an 11.9 - 12.8 for the big Ford.

You're right on with the GT500. It's all about the driver. A bad driver and traction will get you high 12's. A good drive can get a 11.9 on the stock Super Slow Goodyears. With slicks your looking at the mid 11's with a good driver. I'm interested to see how the 2011 GT500 performs with and without the SVT Performance Package.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by SamSS

So even less accurate. Should've just gone with rwhp.

Accuracy here depends on a lot of variables, some of the human. Since I don't know these guys there is no way for me to know how accurate they are.

But you are correct, rwhp ratings gathered for both cars on the same dyno under the same conditions (same day, etc) woulc tell you much more.

[SS 376]

I know it's early but I wonder how the 5.0 will respond to mods. One good thing about cam-in-block engines like the LS3 is that you can really have a whole new engine if you swap out the cam. If the Ford guys are anything like us, they'll want a motor that doesn't cost an arm and a leg to modify.

[SLOWHITE]

Originally Posted by 81z28355

GT 500 in 2010 was rated 12.3 from Ford if I remember. When you start getting into these high HP cars traction is a big problem and that is why the numbers for the GT500 are all over the map. I have seen an 11.9 - 12.8 for the big Ford.

I've seen what they can do, but MotorTrend has said the GT500's they have tested run high 12's. Now, the GT runs high 12's they say they tested a GT500 that's ran 12.4. I'm not doubting one will go 12.4, but until this article, they seem to have never given a GT500 credit for going faster than high 12's. Remember it's nice and cold out now, remember when the G8 GT's were first tested, and they were mid high 13's and by the hot summer days when people started running them at the track, they couldn't seem to match the times.

[ULTRAZLS1]

All I know is that the current SAE certification has been in place since 2005. I am sticking with the certification that is currently used and that is what will be used on the 5.0. Why would they use the old standard on a new engine.

I dont know why this has to be so complicated.

I am WAITING...for ford to change the rating. If 5% of this under rating stuff is true.

And im not sure why the jury is in on this anyway...it has been dynoed twice on dynojets...I have seen camaros on dynojets at 39x before...this still means nothing.

Like I said Ill stick to whatever cert this new mustang gets over random rwhp numbers/conspiracy theories/over complication of the issue all day long

Until one of us cares to find out more or this thing actually gets certified by some kind of standard, I respectfully agree to disagree with you

[scrming]

Originally Posted by SS 376

I know it's early but I wonder how the 5.0 will respond to mods. One good thing about cam-in-block engines like the LS3 is that you can really have a whole new engine if you swap out the cam. If the Ford guys are anything like us, they'll want a motor that doesn't cost an arm and a leg to modify.

From the article I read by one of the lead Ford guys, the 5.0 is going to be pretty optimized from the factory... gone are the days of easy HP with simple bolt-ons, cams, headers, etc....

[syr74]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

All I know is that the current SAE certification has been in place since 2005. I am sticking with the certification that is currently used and that is what will be used on the 5.0. Why would they use the old standard on a new engine.

You tell me, Ford used the old system on the 2010 Mustang.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I dont know why this has to be so complicated.

I was wondering the same thing

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I am WAITING...for ford to change the rating. If 5% of this under rating stuff is true.

When did I say it was under-rated by 5%? I said it could be under-rated and that nothing we know rules that out. And if it is under-rated, why would Ford need to change their rating?

[HondaEx]

Originally Posted by nova

Competition is good. The more they fight, the better off we are...

Amen Brother! He is to my new 2014 Z-28!

[ROD1]

Originally Posted by Chiefstang

2010's dude. I wouldn't worry about FORD'S confidence right now...

dOH! I was reading an article about the 2011s and clicked a link on pricing. I thought it was for 2011s my bad. I did find that a GT will start at $38499,dude.

[scrming]

Originally Posted by ROD1

dOH! I was reading an article about the 2011s and clicked a link on pricing. I thought it was for 2011s my bad. I did find that a GT will start at $38499,dude.

Tack on another $5,000 for Market Value Adjustment...