It may, all of us in the industry are still trying to learn more about this engine. As we get more familiar with it we will find out. But what we have now is safe and very useable.

 

Any plans to mess with the exhaust?

 

Yes, I'm aware that lower gears will show less power, and I commend you for going through the time and trouble of explaining why you did what you did. What struck me was the 32 RWHP difference, which seems quite a bit more than the 10-ish or so RWHP difference that I've seen in other tests, but ok.

I would like to make sure I'm clear on this: You're saying there is a 27 to 28 HP difference (stock) between 87 octane and 93 octane, per SCT's testing?

I *think* you mean that you expect to see 27-28 RWHP increase going from stock to tuned/CAI with 93 octane gas in both tests, correct?

Thanks for taking the time to address this.

 

I was talking about the speed limiter and the rev limiters. SCT said adjusting that helps a lot with power, plus I'd like to see a good 5th gear pull on the dyno So far I'm impressed by the numbers like usual from you guys

 

Going from 87 to 93 octane, and custom tuning on the stock airbox we saw around 27 to 28hp at the wheels on our car.

 

The rev limiter alone wont give you power, but getting it out of the way and playing with other paramaters in combination definitely gets you very good top end power gains. We did remove the speed limiter and raise the rev limiter as part of our tuning.

 

Ok. Will do some research and see if there is some data on how much of a HP hit one should expect with 87 octane versus 93 octane - with all else staying the same.

Raising the rev limiter should absolutely pay big dividends in the performance of this car, given that peak power is at 6600 rpm and the rev limiter is only a couple hundred rpm above that.

Bob

 

Did you dyno the car with the hood open or closed?

 

Automatic 6-speed Gear ratios for 2011 Mustang GT
1st 4.17
2nd 2.34
3rd 1.52
4th 1.14
5th 0.87
6th 0.69
Final drive 3.15:1

 

Hood was open, shop temp was between 88 and 97 degrees throughout the day, heat index topped out at 105 that day.

 

Wouldn't it be more accurate to test with the hood closed, in order to see how effective the C&L kit seals out the under hood air? The stock air box is sealed and only draws air from the front of the car. A 15C temp difference changes air density by about 5%.

 

I'm sure you meant the Steeda kit

We already tested this back in 2010 on this airbox design which is based on our 2010 cold air. I have already posted threads in the past on how our airbox not only seals against the hood, but draws in cold air from the factory supplied cold air duct for the stock airbox.

Our competitors have all ignored the stock cold air ducting on the 2010, and from what I have seen so far also on the 2011. Most of their airbox designs are not closed designs that seal against the hood like ours. Those that do try to seal do not enclose the filter and seal as well as ours, and they dont tie into the factory cool air ducting ignoring it altogether. That is the most important part to keep air charge temps down.

Here is one of the threads where I have already referenced how our airbox design works as well as showing the factory installed ducting to route cool outside air into the box that we tie into.

https://themustangsource.com/f726/st...teaser-477649/

 

My bad. That's what I get for being lazy and not reading back through the thread.

I have seen that other thread, and I do like the fact that you make use of a known-good source for the air. I also see that you've made more of an effort than most to seal the airbox from the rest of the engine compartment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the ducting around the element isn't 100% sealed off from the engine compartment (even with the hood closed). If so, then I feel the best way to show the credibility of your design is to test it under the most realistic conditions possible. Close the hood and have the big fan blowing air at the front grille. Testing with the hood open leaves some questions unanswered, which from what I've seen, is inconsistent with the engineering work you put into your other products.