2005-2009 Mustang Information on The S197 {Gen1}

New Updated 05 order guide

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 10:11 AM
  #21  
rhumb's Avatar
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
From: DMV
Another tidbit, I noticed a spoiler delete option for the GTs. (Option 13D). Woohoo, Ford's listening, lance that tacky boil off the Stang's butt! I'd rather have mine Steve McQueen cool and restrained rather than Little Richard flashy and gaudy (though I do like the IUP and ICAP -- so much for consistancy! :-)

Question, what exactly is a fleet only option? I tend to like bodyside moldings given my experience with parking lot oafs, but this is listed as a fleet only option.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 10:14 AM
  #22  
Boomer's Avatar
I Have No Life
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 12
From: Canada
Spoiler delete was on the second draft rhumb....like back when the 'first posting officially' hit.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 10:21 AM
  #23  
travste's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
I put together alittle compairson chart of the 05 and 04 engine specifications, I got the 04 specs from the ford site and the calaulations for the horsepower at the torque rating from this site. From what I can see the 05' GT engine should perform like a 04 Mach1 engine
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 10:58 AM
  #24  
Dan's Avatar
Dan
Do You Remember Me?
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 6,000
Likes: 0
The 2004 Mach 1 Hp and Torque Numbers got bumped from 2003 BTW:

2003 Mach 1
305hp
320lb-ft

2004 Mach 1
310hp
325lb-ft

And Ford under-rated the Mach 1 which is actually producing between 315-320hp and 333-340lb-ft. Check it out here

We can only hope the 05 is also under-rated.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 11:50 AM
  #25  
mr-mstng's Avatar
GTR Member
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 4,743
Likes: 4
From: NE PA
I'd be willing to bet that Ford underrates it.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 11:59 AM
  #26  
Dan's Avatar
Dan
Do You Remember Me?
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 6,000
Likes: 0
Originally posted by mr-mstng@August 31, 2004, 1:53 PM
I'd be willing to bet that Ford underrates it.
I'm sure they will, but hopefully it'll be as under-rated as the Mach. If I start hearing 275-285rwhp I'll be a pretty happy guy (324-335fwhp).
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 12:00 PM
  #27  
gw186's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: April 9, 2004
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Is the only way to tell the actuall HP to pull the engine and run a dyno?
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 12:10 PM
  #28  
Dan's Avatar
Dan
Do You Remember Me?
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 6,000
Likes: 0
Originally posted by gw186@August 31, 2004, 2:03 PM
Is the only way to tell the actuall HP to pull the engine and run a dyno?
The best way to measure how much power your car is actually putting down is by strapping the car onto a dyno.

This will tell you how much rwhp you're making (fwhp - losses through drivetrain).

To me, rwhp and rwtq are the most important values. Fwhp (fly wheel horsepower) is just the power put out by the engine at the flywheel. The question is, how much of that is being put down on the pavement after losses.

Typically, once you find the rwhp you work out the fwhp by assuming a loss percentage (say 15%).

Ex. If you're getting 270rwhp, you take 270/0.85 (15% losses) = 318 fwhp
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 01:57 PM
  #29  
rhumb's Avatar
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
From: DMV
Originally posted by Boomer@August 31, 2004, 10:17 AM
Spoiler delete was on the second draft rhumb....like back when the 'first posting officially' hit.
Still's pretty cool!

But still, what is this fleet order business anyway?
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 02:44 PM
  #30  
Purple Hayz's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: May 25, 2004
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Dan+August 31, 2004, 12:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dan @ August 31, 2004, 12:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-gw186@August 31, 2004, 2:03 PM
Is the only way to tell the actuall HP to pull the engine and run a dyno?
The best way to measure how much power your car is actually putting down is by strapping the car onto a dyno.

This will tell you how much rwhp you're making (fwhp - losses through drivetrain).

To me, rwhp and rwtq are the most important values. Fwhp (fly wheel horsepower) is just the power put out by the engine at the flywheel. The question is, how much of that is being put down on the pavement after losses.

Typically, once you find the rwhp you work out the fwhp by assuming a loss percentage (say 15%).

Ex. If you're getting 270rwhp, you take 270/0.85 (15% losses) = 318 fwhp [/b][/quote]
Is there any concensus about when it's okay to take a car in for a dyno run? Is it necessary to wait until the car is "broken in" (i.e. after 500 miles?) or can we pretty much take it in whenever?
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 02:48 PM
  #31  
os121's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: February 8, 2004
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Kevin, thanks so much for posting the updated Guide :worship:
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 03:18 PM
  #32  
rhumb's Avatar
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
From: DMV
Originally posted by Purple Hayz@August 31, 2004, 2:47 PM
Is there any concensus about when it's okay to take a car in for a dyno run? Is it necessary to wait until the car is "broken in" (i.e. after 500 miles?) or can we pretty much take it in whenever?
Guess that depends on whether it's your car or somebody elses...
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 03:23 PM
  #33  
dustindu4's Avatar
9 is not my lucky number.
 
Joined: March 12, 2004
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 1
Originally posted by rhumb+August 31, 2004, 4:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (rhumb @ August 31, 2004, 4:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Boomer@August 31, 2004, 10:17 AM
Spoiler delete was on the second draft rhumb....like back when the 'first posting officially' hit.
Still's pretty cool!

But still, what is this fleet order business anyway? [/b][/quote]
Fleet ordering is for like rental car companies that buy 10,000 units at a time or something
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 03:50 PM
  #34  
order#1's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: June 14, 2004
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Dan+August 31, 2004, 12:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dan @ August 31, 2004, 12:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-gw186@August 31, 2004, 2:03 PM
Is the only way to tell the actuall HP to pull the engine and run a dyno?
The best way to measure how much power your car is actually putting down is by strapping the car onto a dyno.

This will tell you how much rwhp you're making (fwhp - losses through drivetrain).

To me, rwhp and rwtq are the most important values. Fwhp (fly wheel horsepower) is just the power put out by the engine at the flywheel. The question is, how much of that is being put down on the pavement after losses.

Typically, once you find the rwhp you work out the fwhp by assuming a loss percentage (say 15%).

Ex. If you're getting 270rwhp, you take 270/0.85 (15% losses) = 318 fwhp [/b][/quote]
I'm with you Dan, the rear wheels are where the work is put to the pavement!!!!!!!
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 06:31 PM
  #35  
Longhorn-gal's Avatar
V6 Member
 
Joined: July 13, 2004
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
They didn't remove the little blurb on the 3rd page under Safety/Security features about the rear doors having child safetly locks. Hmmm.....
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 07:00 PM
  #36  
kevinb120's Avatar
Thread Starter
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 6,730
Likes: 3
Originally posted by rhumb+August 31, 2004, 4:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (rhumb @ August 31, 2004, 4:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Purple Hayz@August 31, 2004, 2:47 PM
Is there any concensus about when it's okay to take a car in for a dyno run? Is it necessary to wait until the car is "broken in" (i.e. after 500 miles?) or can we pretty much take it in whenever?
Guess that depends on whether it's your car or somebody elses... [/b][/quote]
It wont hurt the car at all either way. Most likely after about 400 miles of a healthy break in(lots of ups and downs, and a not a little lead footing) the motor will most likely be set in its way. A weaker baby-break in most likely will not let the motor ever make its best horsepower.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 07:40 PM
  #37  
alrox's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: February 12, 2004
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Dan@August 31, 2004, 11:01 AM
The 2004 Mach 1 Hp and Torque Numbers got bumped from 2003 BTW:

2003 Mach 1
305hp
320lb-ft

2004 Mach 1
310hp
325lb-ft

And Ford under-rated the Mach 1 which is actually producing between 315-320hp and 333-340lb-ft. Check it out here

We can only hope the 05 is also under-rated.
According to Ford's website for the 2004 Mach 1, the HP/torque numbers from 03 to 04 did not change.


- Horsepower: 305 hp @ 5800 rpm

- Torque 320 lb-ft. @ 4200 rpm


I know in reality it's more than that, but from what Ford is saying, Mach 1's for both years make the same power. If you have another source for your information I'd love to see it.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 08:12 PM
  #38  
V10's Avatar
V10
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: March 11, 2004
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
Don't know if you guys remember this, but back about 4 - 5 months ago Brad posted an e-mail from a Ford Cologne engineer who said that the V6 put out over 222 HP. We were questioning this as at that time Ford was saying it had 200.

I bet that Ford is using some real conservative ratings that the V6 really has 220 HP as the Cologne engineer said and I'll bet the V8 has at least 310 HP.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 08:30 PM
  #39  
mgdumont's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: August 29, 2004
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Thanks for the order guide, now I can make a decision on what I want.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2004 | 10:04 PM
  #40  
Dan's Avatar
Dan
Do You Remember Me?
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 6,000
Likes: 0
Originally posted by alrox+August 31, 2004, 9:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (alrox @ August 31, 2004, 9:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Dan@August 31, 2004, 11:01 AM
The 2004 Mach 1 Hp and Torque Numbers got bumped from 2003 BTW:

2003 Mach 1
305hp
320lb-ft

2004 Mach 1
310hp
325lb-ft

And Ford under-rated the Mach 1 which is actually producing between 315-320hp and 333-340lb-ft. Check it out here

We can only hope the 05 is also under-rated.
According to Ford's website for the 2004 Mach 1, the HP/torque numbers from 03 to 04 did not change.


- Horsepower: 305 hp @ 5800 rpm

- Torque 320 lb-ft. @ 4200 rpm


I know in reality it's more than that, but from what Ford is saying, Mach 1's for both years make the same power. If you have another source for your information I'd love to see it. [/b][/quote]
I definately remember an official change in the Mach 1 horsepower and torque ratings. I'm quite confident I'm correct here. Can someone confirm?

I got my info from here: Mach1Registry.com /FAQ (look at # 5)
Reply



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:09 PM.