Mustang GT gets 420hp stock!

[cab2g]

Originally Posted by Grabber

I honestly don't even know where you are going with this or how to answer. I've never heard of an IRS Vs SRA affecting Dyno numbers. :shrug: :wtf:

It's probably due to a high compression 5.0 4V motor that makes such good power.

And that's why people ask questions, to learn... Anyway, people say solid rear axles are better for drag racing. So I figured part of it may be due to drive-train loss. But I didn't research it myself and that's why I am asking.

[chain777]

Originally Posted by cab2g

And that's why people ask questions, to learn... Anyway, people say solid rear axles are better for drag racing. So I figured part of it may be due to drive-train loss. But I didn't research it myself and that's why I am asking.

Like 8cd03gro said, the SRA is more efficient at getting the power to wheels than the IRS. The MT-82 manual in the Mustang, with its lighter internals vs the heavier Tremec in the Camaro also plays a role.

[Grabber]

Originally Posted by cab2g

And that's why people ask questions, to learn... Anyway, people say solid rear axles are better for drag racing. So I figured part of it may be due to drive-train loss. But I didn't research it myself and that's why I am asking.

Sorry, it is very hard to divulge sarcasm from all of the crappy responses here on certain topics.

I was not sure if you are serious.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by cab2g

do you guys think the solid rear axle of the Mustang has anything to do with the superior dyno numbers compared to the supposedly higher HP Camaro?

yes

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by Grabber

I've seen bone stock 5.0's put down 370-375 RWHP and 365-370 RWTQ.

Not bad for a small 5.0 motor eh?

I don't believe you.

Originally Posted by lil_chef

underrated? doesn't being SAE certified prevent a company from under/overrating an engine by the 15 hp i've seen some people quote?

SAE-certification is supposed to prevent substantial rating problems, but performance cars are very complicated machines. The true best measure of a car's performance is a trip down the track, not a dyno. Those numbers mean nothing if it can't put them to the pavement.

Originally Posted by lil_chef

are they actually underrated or is the dyno slightly off? or are the actual drivetrain loss estimates off?

Dynos aren't very scientific machines. There is a margin for error on the dyno, as well as a margin for error on the drivetrain loss. Combining these really make a wide range for error. That leaves plenty of room for both underrating the vehicle and using a conservative dyno that might not deliver flattering results.

Originally Posted by cab2g

do you guys think the solid rear axle of the Mustang has anything to do with the superior dyno numbers compared to the supposedly higher HP Camaro?

That's affirmative.

[LimaCharlie]

I think Ford tweaked the factory tune to get the extra horsepower. Anyone know what the torque is now?

[den318]

It's way more than just the 8HP. Hid standard, Track pkg option with torsen differential, Recaro seat option, 4" lcd screen in the dash. Led lights in front and back. This can push the 2013 into 2012 Boss performance numbers. I am not surprise if the 13Gt is a mid 12 second car.

[Grabber]

Originally Posted by den318

It's way more than just the 8HP. Hid standard, Track pkg option with torsen differential, Recaro seat option, 4" lcd screen in the dash. Led lights in front and back. This can push the 2013 into 2012 Boss performance numbers. I am not surprise if the 13Gt is a mid 12 second car.

The 2011 GT has already run 12.44 through an Auto.

If they are revising the tune, making it more aggressive, etc. I think it will be a SOLId mid 12 second car, with a few people being able to dip a bit lower in the 12's Stock.

[aj2ssrs]

Originally Posted by Grabber

Take John's example above. His 5.0 put down 375 RWHP. We don't know the conditions, but, let's assume he took the lower end of Drivetrain loss.

375 x 15% drivetrain loss = 431 Crank HP. I'd say that is underrated from the original 412 HP Ford said those 5.0's made.

The proper equation is 375 divided by .85 = 441 Crank HP. Seems on the high side to me. Could be a very generous dyno.

[Grabber]

Originally Posted by aj2ssrs

The proper equation is 375 divided by .85 = 441 Crank HP. Seems on the high side to me. Could be a very generous dyno.

No one Dyno will be the same.

Actually, you multiple the crank number by the opposite number that is a loss. 412 X .85 - 350. However, I've NEVER seen a new 5.0 Dyno that low. So, it's possibly less of a drivetrain loss than we've seen.

Kinda like how LS1's claimed 330HP or something at the Crank but were putting 330-340 RWHP down?

[aj2ssrs]

Originally Posted by Grabber

No one Dyno will be the same.

Actually, you multiple the crank number by the opposite number that is a loss. 412 X .85 - 350. However, I've NEVER seen a new 5.0 Dyno that low. So, it's possibly less of a drivetrain loss than we've seen.

Kinda like how LS1's claimed 330HP or something at the Crank but were putting 330-340 RWHP down?

I realise what your saying and that all dynos read differently. You're formula is correct when you know what the crank hp is, but when you're starting with rwhp and trying to calculate crank hp, your formula doesn't come out right. You end up to low at the crank.

[Grabber]

Originally Posted by aj2ssrs

I realise what your saying and that all dynos read differently. You're formula is correct when you know what the crank hp is, but when you're starting with rwhp and trying to calculate crank hp, your formula doesn't come out right. You end up to low at the crank.

The point of the question someone asked was if the 5.0 was underrated. It clearly is, seeing as people dyno 360-370 RWHP and yet Ford claims 412 BHP. It's probably more between 430-440 BHP and not 412.

[aj2ssrs]

Apparently underestimated by quite a bit.

[Grabber]

Originally Posted by aj2ssrs

Apparently underestimated by quite a bit.

Seems normal. 03/04 Cobra was rated @ 390 HP from the Factory, but hundreds of people were making 365-375 RWHP stock on various dynos.

LS1 was rated at what, 330HP from the Factory, but made that kind of power at the tire.