2005 GT Horsepower from MM&FF
5/26/04, 07:10 PM
#101
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 5, 2004
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It said:
I'm not saying it doesn't make 290-295 rwhp .. but magazines and rumors have gotten our hopes up before. Don't want the disappointment again.
In conclusion, I think you'll find that both cars hit the target audience. The Mach 1 puts an exclamation point on a strong model run, while the GTO breathes new life into a division of GM that really needed a hot rod. Better yet is the fact that both cars are fast and the competition will only breed better cars for us in the future. We hear there's a hood scoop coming for the GTO next year and rumor has it that '05 Mustangs are making 290-295 rwhp from their three-valve 4.6s in clandestine testing.
5/26/04, 11:29 PM
#102
Originally posted by holderca1+May. 23rd, 2004, 11:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (holderca1 @ May. 23rd, 2004, 11:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-atom777@May. 23rd, 2004, 3:04 AM
there is a certain sequence of events a cop is supposed to go through while using radar and actually taking the radar off hold and emitting a signal is the last one... ure detector iznt gonna detect anything until that happens and by then ill already know how fast u r going.. especially with laser.. therez no hidin from that..u can b singled out of the middle of a group of cars.. i luv that stuff...
there is a certain sequence of events a cop is supposed to go through while using radar and actually taking the radar off hold and emitting a signal is the last one... ure detector iznt gonna detect anything until that happens and by then ill already know how fast u r going.. especially with laser.. therez no hidin from that..u can b singled out of the middle of a group of cars.. i luv that stuff...
It is illegal to jam radar because its governed by the FCC. Laser on the other hand can be, it is governed by the FDA.
Usually an officer is shooting laser at multiple targets ahead of you, and the detector will pick up the activity.
5/27/04, 11:00 AM
#103
V6 Member
Join Date: April 12, 2004
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying it doesn't make 290-295 rwhp .. but magazines and rumors have gotten our hopes up before. Don't want the disappointment again
That's what I'm saying. I'm gonna laugh so hard when all these peeps go out and buy their new '05 and it's like 250-260 at the wheels (and I wouldn't doubt this to be true). Gotta love the rumor mills. LOLOLOL
That's what I'm saying. I'm gonna laugh so hard when all these peeps go out and buy their new '05 and it's like 250-260 at the wheels (and I wouldn't doubt this to be true). Gotta love the rumor mills. LOLOLOL
5/27/04, 01:46 PM
#104
Member
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks of it this way but I'll chime in because so far it's always worked for me. I've never thought RWHP as a percentage but rather as a semi-fixed amount of drivetrain loss. Meaning instead of 15% loss no matter what the power level, the drivetrain will absorb xx horsepower that only increases minimally with power gain.
I've always viewed a manual mustang as loosing 25hp.
Examples.
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 165rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 235 rwhp
Cobra 4.6L 390 hp = 365 rwhp
Mach 1 4.6L 300 hp = 275 rwhp
All off the rwhp numbers are common results and a 25 hp loss matches the factory specs perfectly.
I can do the same with the auto transmissions too, they loose about 35 hp
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 155 rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 225 rwhp
Mach 1 300hp = 265 rwhp
I am quite confident in saying that if Ford advertises 300 hp for the 3V 4.6L that when plopped on a dyno we will see an average of 275 rwhp.
I've always viewed a manual mustang as loosing 25hp.
Examples.
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 165rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 235 rwhp
Cobra 4.6L 390 hp = 365 rwhp
Mach 1 4.6L 300 hp = 275 rwhp
All off the rwhp numbers are common results and a 25 hp loss matches the factory specs perfectly.
I can do the same with the auto transmissions too, they loose about 35 hp
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 155 rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 225 rwhp
Mach 1 300hp = 265 rwhp
I am quite confident in saying that if Ford advertises 300 hp for the 3V 4.6L that when plopped on a dyno we will see an average of 275 rwhp.
5/28/04, 01:22 AM
#106
V6 Member
Join Date: February 23, 2004
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by YZBot@May. 27th, 2004, 1:49 PM
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks of it this way but I'll chime in because so far it's always worked for me. I've never thought RWHP as a percentage but rather as a semi-fixed amount of drivetrain loss. Meaning instead of 15% loss no matter what the power level, the drivetrain will absorb xx horsepower that only increases minimally with power gain.
I've always viewed a manual mustang as loosing 25hp.
Examples.
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 165rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 235 rwhp
Cobra 4.6L 390 hp = 365 rwhp
Mach 1 4.6L 300 hp = 275 rwhp
All off the rwhp numbers are common results and a 25 hp loss matches the factory specs perfectly.
I can do the same with the auto transmissions too, they loose about 35 hp
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 155 rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 225 rwhp
Mach 1 300hp = 265 rwhp
I am quite confident in saying that if Ford advertises 300 hp for the 3V 4.6L that when plopped on a dyno we will see an average of 275 rwhp.
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks of it this way but I'll chime in because so far it's always worked for me. I've never thought RWHP as a percentage but rather as a semi-fixed amount of drivetrain loss. Meaning instead of 15% loss no matter what the power level, the drivetrain will absorb xx horsepower that only increases minimally with power gain.
I've always viewed a manual mustang as loosing 25hp.
Examples.
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 165rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 235 rwhp
Cobra 4.6L 390 hp = 365 rwhp
Mach 1 4.6L 300 hp = 275 rwhp
All off the rwhp numbers are common results and a 25 hp loss matches the factory specs perfectly.
I can do the same with the auto transmissions too, they loose about 35 hp
Base 3.8L 190 hp = 155 rwhp
GT 4.6L 260 hp = 225 rwhp
Mach 1 300hp = 265 rwhp
I am quite confident in saying that if Ford advertises 300 hp for the 3V 4.6L that when plopped on a dyno we will see an average of 275 rwhp.
Heres a novel idea: what if part of the reason the RWHP may be higher is due to Ford making the drivetrain more efficient? We know the new 3 valve 4.6 is an all aluminum engine, why not an aluminum flywheel and MAYBE an aluminum driveshaft? That would reduce some of the parasetic loss of hp to the wheels. Just a thought.
5/28/04, 09:10 PM
#108
Car and driver uses 15% for drive train loss and calls it "the industry standard". So take a dyno reading and divide it by .85 and you'll get the horsepower at the flywheel.
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
5/28/04, 09:23 PM
#109
Banned
Join Date: March 4, 2004
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dustindu4@May. 28th, 2004, 11:13 PM
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
5/28/04, 09:56 PM
#110
Do You Remember Me?
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Posts: 5,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dustindu4@May. 28th, 2004, 11:13 PM
Car and driver uses 15% for drive train loss and calls it "the industry standard". So take a dyno reading and divide it by .85 and you'll get the horsepower at the flywheel.
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
Car and driver uses 15% for drive train loss and calls it "the industry standard". So take a dyno reading and divide it by .85 and you'll get the horsepower at the flywheel.
The Ford engineering manager I talked to at Foxboro confirmed to me that the 300HP rating was "robustly underrated" which means the car is going to have much more. He refused to give me the real numbers but said it was way over 300.
6/15/04, 10:06 PM
#112
Member
Join Date: June 15, 2004
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for digging this old thread up, but everyone gets mad when you start new threads about things discussed before..
I keep hearing all this talk about the GT being underrated, how about the v6? Anyone hear anything about that?
I keep hearing all this talk about the GT being underrated, how about the v6? Anyone hear anything about that?
6/16/04, 02:08 AM
#113
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Kotzenjunge@May 23, 2004, 12:54 AM
1/4 million in my hands and I'd be investing in a 612 Scaglietti. That has a back seat too.
1/4 million in my hands and I'd be investing in a 612 Scaglietti. That has a back seat too.
6/17/04, 02:47 PM
#118
I Have No Life
Originally posted by theguy10@June 17, 2004, 2:25 PM
:nono: Actually, it is R...
R replaced Q in the latest one "Die Another Day"
Played by john cleese
:nono: Actually, it is R...
R replaced Q in the latest one "Die Another Day"
Played by john cleese
Bond joked with "Cleese" in "The World is Not Enough"
'So what are you? R?'
He WAS...R..until...
In Die Another Day, he's now the new Q...because Desmond Llewelyn passed away.
Check the credits
6/17/04, 03:05 PM
#119
GT Member
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
don't have any hard evidence of sleeper numbers for the v6, but it stands to reason that since the corbra debacle of a few years back that ford would run consevative on the power numbers. one thing to consider about the 4.0 v6 that replaces the 3.8, it is a purpose built v6...it's not a knock off like the 3.8. the 4.0 did start life as an ohv v6 in europe but the 60 degree bank makes for a smooth engine. i had the ohv version in my 93 explorer and that motor DID NOT like anything above 4k...it got really thrashy....hopefully, the ohc version which has a balance shaft where the cam in block used to be, is much smoother and will pull real quick to the redline...jackg 90seville 94k
6/17/04, 04:22 PM
#120
Originally posted by Boomer@June 17, 2004, 1:50 PM
Try it again sparky....
Bond joked with "Cleese" in "The World is Not Enough"
'So what are you? R?'
He WAS...R..until...
In Die Another Day, he's now the new Q...because Desmond Llewelyn passed away.
Check the credits
Try it again sparky....
Bond joked with "Cleese" in "The World is Not Enough"
'So what are you? R?'
He WAS...R..until...
In Die Another Day, he's now the new Q...because Desmond Llewelyn passed away.
Check the credits
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post