2010-2014 Mustang Information on The S197 {GenII}

Dyno'd

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 02:11 PM
  #121  
Bert's Avatar
Legacy TMS Member
 
Joined: January 25, 2010
Posts: 3,971
Likes: 1,663
From: Massachusetts
Originally Posted by PTRocks
The major problem is that the "affordable" dynos don't measure torque directly, but rather infer it from acceleration of a rotating assembly . . . . . The point the article makes is that the most reasonable measure of real world performance is actual real wheel horsepower, without the correction factors.
now THAT all makes perfect sense . . . once you start applying "correction" (aka fudge) factors, we enter the relm of voodoo, not reality . . . . about as meaningful as bunnies with pancakes on their heads
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 02:13 PM
  #122  
eci's Avatar
eci
Banned
 
Joined: August 16, 2006
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Stormbringer
Well Im really in no position to argue with you. All I have is the graph and the statement from Dynojet. Is your G8 a GT or GXP?
GT. It can be manually put into gear. 4th is 1:1.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 03:05 PM
  #123  
RedCandy5.0's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: June 9, 2008
Posts: 2,061
Likes: 1
From: Rochester NY
Good way for Ford to sell more cars. Maybe inside line gets a little kick back from Ford with there dyno #'s.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 03:41 PM
  #124  
sknapp302's Avatar
V6 Member
 
Joined: September 15, 2004
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Stormbringer
A buddy of mine contacted Dynojet about this same discussion regarding with what gear the measurement is done. Looks to me like we could expect to see a higher HP number if this was done in the 1:1 gear. This is what Kevin Lockliear at Dynojet had to say:

"Typically, you will see the highest numbers in the 1:1 or closest to 1:1 ratio gear. This is because no additional power is being exhausted to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain. In 2nd gear, let’s say, because the gearing allows the car to accelerate more quickly, more HP will be used to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain than in 1:1. See my graph below. This example was a 1996 Pontiac Trans Am WS6, all gear run. Ignore the small shift spikes at the beginning of each gear as that’s an inertia spike (where letting the clutch out abruptly against an engine with higher RPM than matching the next gear at that speed causes a brief quick acceleration of the drums).


As you can see, the HP was the highest in the 1:1 gear, and lower in other gears. From what I have experienced, the further you get from 1:1, the lower the power getting to the wheels and drum surface will be, as more is used to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain, overcome frictional losses in meshing gears, side loading bearings, etc."
Thank you for posting this. When I have gone to dynos in the past and done simulated runs 1-4, the graphs have always looked like this. It just made sense to me that 4th (1:1) was the most efficient because the transmission has to work the least in this gear. Conservation of energy, what goes in must come out, and with a 1:1 ratio there is little place to loose energy. A dyno run from a different gear than 1:1 will load the dyno at a different speed. However, the math would yield the same horsepower in each gear if there was no difference in parasitic loss from gear to gear.

Power = work/time How fast can you use your available torque.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 03:47 PM
  #125  
RedCandy5.0's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: June 9, 2008
Posts: 2,061
Likes: 1
From: Rochester NY
ITS 395!!! GET OVER IT ALREADY!!!!
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 03:50 PM
  #126  
eci's Avatar
eci
Banned
 
Joined: August 16, 2006
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 0
lol! No, now it's more! 475 crank!!!!
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 04:27 PM
  #127  
whysoserious's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 350
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX
Wrong! It just went up to 500 crank and the redline has been raised to 8500 RPM.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 04:28 PM
  #128  
eci's Avatar
eci
Banned
 
Joined: August 16, 2006
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 0
Awesome!!!
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 04:47 PM
  #129  
Red Jay's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: September 9, 2009
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa OK
lol. if this engine is really pushing 430+ crank HP, then just imagine how much for the BOSS version of it. or any SE version of it.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 05:13 PM
  #130  
eci's Avatar
eci
Banned
 
Joined: August 16, 2006
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Red Jay
lol. if this engine is really pushing 430+ crank HP, then just imagine how much for the BOSS version of it. or any SE version of it.
At least 600HP, N/A. With tune/CAI, 750.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 05:22 PM
  #131  
tbi0904's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: January 10, 2010
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: huntley, il
Originally Posted by Stormbringer
A buddy of mine contacted Dynojet about this same discussion regarding with what gear the measurement is done. Looks to me like we could expect to see a higher HP number if this was done in the 1:1 gear. This is what Kevin Lockliear at Dynojet had to say:

"Typically, you will see the highest numbers in the 1:1 or closest to 1:1 ratio gear. This is because no additional power is being exhausted to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain. In 2nd gear, let’s say, because the gearing allows the car to accelerate more quickly, more HP will be used to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain than in 1:1. See my graph below. This example was a 1996 Pontiac Trans Am WS6, all gear run. Ignore the small shift spikes at the beginning of each gear as that’s an inertia spike (where letting the clutch out abruptly against an engine with higher RPM than matching the next gear at that speed causes a brief quick acceleration of the drums).


As you can see, the HP was the highest in the 1:1 gear, and lower in other gears. From what I have experienced, the further you get from 1:1, the lower the power getting to the wheels and drum surface will be, as more is used to accelerate the inertia of the drivetrain, overcome frictional losses in meshing gears, side loading bearings, etc."
That's what the post from another forum I posted pretty much stated as well (not as technical, though). If they ran it in 5th, the numbers would be higher. Personally, it's a little over my head, but it makes for some good chatter.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 05:23 PM
  #132  
tbi0904's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: January 10, 2010
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: huntley, il
Originally Posted by eci
At least 600HP, N/A. With tune/CAI, 750.
Flux capacitor option:1200rwhp, 40mpg, stock internals. Truth.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 05:26 PM
  #133  
Five Oh Brian's Avatar
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
Joined: November 14, 2007
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 8
From: Pacific NW USA
Oh my, this is getting rather silly. Let's not make too much noise about this dyno pull. Dyno's are tuning tools, no more.

Want to know how much power is really getting to the ground? Take an '11 GT to the dragstrip and let's see what it'll run. With 412 flywheel hp and weighing 3600 lbs (closer to 3800 lbs with a driver), that equates to 112 mph trap speeds in the 1/4 mile. If it really makes 395 rwhp, then it'll run 114 mph through the traps. The proof is all in the timeslips when they start happening.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 05:56 PM
  #134  
todd03blown's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: November 30, 2009
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
From: South
Originally Posted by eci
Doesn't mesh with my dynosheets or anyone elses. I really wish Insideline would clear it up, or someone else would throw one on the dyno. Are we now to believe the car would put out 410 in 5th? Are we to believe the engine is actually worth 475 crank HP, and Ford is just "underrating it" to 412?

I pulled my two sheets from the G8 out, 331 in 3rd, 301 in 4th. Dynojet 248c.

I'll be on a 224xLC with my Mustang in a week, I'll have them run it in 3rd which is close to the ratio of the GT's 4th.
did the other poster provide a dyno sheet and a response from the Dyno manufacturer regarding dynoing in the "wrong" gear?
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:00 PM
  #135  
whysoserious's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 350
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX
Actually eci they have already tested these, the real problem with the 750 HP variant is that at that point (9500 RPM) torque has been sacrificed to the point that it no longer exists. That's right. Zero torque. Can't have it all.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:03 PM
  #136  
eci's Avatar
eci
Banned
 
Joined: August 16, 2006
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by whysoserious
Actually eci they have already tested these, the real problem with the 750 HP variant is that at that point (9500 RPM) torque has been sacrificed to the point that it no longer exists. That's right. Zero torque. Can't have it all.
A singularity? Hm....
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:12 PM
  #137  
dmhines's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: September 11, 2006
Posts: 2,349
Likes: 5
From: Cumming, GA
FYI ... back when I had the 4.0 and X-Charger I had the Dyno guy do a run in 3rd. The 4th Gear run showed higher HP/TQ than 3rd Gear.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:13 PM
  #138  
Jeffs08GT's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: February 28, 2008
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Greeley, CO
Originally Posted by Ltngdrvr
Ford may well have gone conservative on the power ratings so that they can put up new numbers against whatever new numbers the bowtie boys put out in response.

Also, remember that most of the 03-04 terminator cars dyno'd stronger than what their official power ratings would have suggested they would.
Heck my 03 Cobra dynoed 390rwhp bone stock and 415rwhp with just exhaust. I have high hopes for the 5.0

I'll say if these engines really are this underrated when they start getting into public hands, and there aren't huge HP fluctuations between cars, I might just have to purchase one sooner then I wanted.. ugh!!

Last edited by Jeffs08GT; Mar 25, 2010 at 06:17 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:22 PM
  #139  
Fazm's Avatar
Cobra R Member
 
Joined: September 21, 2004
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Jeffs08GT
Heck my 03 Cobra dynoed 390rwhp bone stock and 415rwhp with just exhaust. I have high hopes for the 5.0

I'll say if these engines really are this underrated when they start getting into public hands, and there aren't huge HP fluctuations between cars, I might just have to purchase one sooner then I wanted.. ugh!!
and mine at 382
Reply
Old Mar 25, 2010 | 06:33 PM
  #140  
dmhines's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: September 11, 2006
Posts: 2,349
Likes: 5
From: Cumming, GA
It's just very bizarre that Ford would UNDER rate the GT considering their primary competition is the Camaro SS and they would want to beat it in HP ratings. Heck ... they made sure to beat the V6 Camaro by 1 HP just to say they did.
Reply



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:13 PM.