Coyote1

Took my 2011 GT to LVMS (Vegas) last week, they had a rare open test and tune. Ran 13.35 and 13.61 at 107. Was hoping to get
itno the 12"s but from what I gather from internet posts, mine was about average. It's an auto with 315 gears. Would consider lower gears (3.73)
if I was going to get to track more often, but those opportunities seem to be limited. When in LA could go to track every weekend (and I did),
but different game here in Vegas. Are my times consistent with yours?

05stangkc

Here is a Road Test With a 3.73 Equipped Stick Car!

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2...-premium-test/

Equipped with the available 3.73 rear axle ($395), our 5.0 needed just 4.3 seconds to hit 60 and only 12.8 at 110.8 mph to knockout the quarter mile.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ake-road-test/

Car & Driver Ran a 13.2

So Sounds Like You Were getting All She Had With the 3.15 & Auto.

Maybe An Owner Or Two Will Chime In With Some Actual Track Experience!

KC

Coyote1

Yeah, I read that. it was a 6spd manual, mine an auto, but yes, the 373's were the difference. The part of that article
that jumped out at me was the dyno. Are these really 435 hp cars? They **** well should run 12's if so. There's another
article where a speed shop dyno'd it out at 465!! Not sure I can buy that, but the engine is obviously underrated.

05stangkc

Magazine Cars Are Noted to Be Super Tuned / Blueprinted for Optimum Results !

KC

Coyote1

Good point, hadn't thought of that

Rather B.Blown

Not to mention using a ringer to drive it depending on the publication. Evan Smith would always squeeze more out of a Mustang for a Ford centric publication than other magazines could.

05stangkc

Add in Some Ideal Track Conditions and Results Keep getting Better! I would Not Be Surprised if the Timers Were Rigged as Well!



KC

Rather B.Blown

Like negative density altitude numbers with enough compound to stick John Force in place?

Rather B.Blown

You make a good point. I really haven't searched and watched any numbers, but I think my new car is underrated, not a 5.0, but Coyote based anyway. My last 11 with the 5.4 was really dang quick, but this new one is scary fast. Especially after 4k rpm through the first few gears, you better be focused on what you're doing and what's coming up in front because you're going to be there before you can process it. To paraphrase Doc in Back to the Future, when this baby hits 4k rpm, you're going to see some serious ****.

NC14GT

^^^ The horsepower numbers baffled me at first in my 420 HP 2014 GT w/ A6. I thought my GT wasn't really that much quicker off the line than my other cars with less HP, but like stated above, the car gets crazy fast in the higher RPM range. I was stunned what it could do. Impressive to say the least. Unfortunately I rarely get near that performance level unless on really rural desolate roads. Kind of a waste in that regard as I don't go to the track either. I drive the same as when I owned my 2007 GT with 120 less HP. Oh well.....I know the power is there when needed, especially passing. Hold on!!!

Rather B.Blown

I get exactly what you're saying, and this is the first Coyote family engine I've owned or driven. The last Mustang I had was the 11, and it was 550 hp and this one is 760. I know it's a big difference, but it feels like more than it should which is why I wondered if this one is underrated.

The 11 felt more instantly tourqey down low but started running out of steam up top (5.4 modular family). This 5.2 has plenty of torque down low, but it winds up to that 4k area so quick that you miss a little of it and then it's holy mother of God is thing ever going to stop pulling? By the time that goes through your mind it bangs off a shift and right back into that range. I'm sure the 7 speed has a lot to do with it but I could bang gears on that manual 11 and there's just no comparison to how long and how hard the new one keeps pulling.