Where does the 2013 GT 5.0 get the extra 8 horsepower?
11/24/11, 05:19 PM
#103
Cobra R Member
11/26/11, 08:24 PM
#105
Cobra Member
To me , it would appear the engineers would change the tune because of internal changes. Probably , probably, the engineers would not feel the needed tune do to the internal changes was not enough to tell many people about. So all may be correct when saying either tune or internal change, just not completely correct.
11/26/11, 08:53 PM
#107
Got the latest issue of Autoweek today. According to them the extra hp is, and I quote:
"...thanks to the internal friction reductions migrating from the Boss 302 engine."
"...thanks to the internal friction reductions migrating from the Boss 302 engine."
11/26/11, 09:05 PM
#109
Cobra R Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Southeastern Virginia
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I don't understand is why all the secrecy about it? Why doesn't Ford just provide the deets now? Like Elton John reading a Playboy, it makes no sense. 
11/29/11, 10:06 PM
#112
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can almost gurantee ford used a different piston coating on the skirts.
Secondary though is they micro polished and coated all the bearing surfaces although unlikely.
Either of those gets around 10hp.
As for DI, Ford should and will do DI on a variant of the 5.0, as for aftermarket, they will either have to overdrive the injectors or make higher flowing units. However DI engines starve in the upper rpm, this is where the aftermarket could potentially add port injection on-top of the di setup, this would mean a much flatter torque curve with a higher detonation threshold. This allows the secondary injectors be placed much higher in the runners giving inter cooling effect, di also cools the charge drastically as well.
Imagine a 5.0l mustang pushing 450-500hp in NA form and netting 30+ mpg.
Secondary though is they micro polished and coated all the bearing surfaces although unlikely.
Either of those gets around 10hp.
As for DI, Ford should and will do DI on a variant of the 5.0, as for aftermarket, they will either have to overdrive the injectors or make higher flowing units. However DI engines starve in the upper rpm, this is where the aftermarket could potentially add port injection on-top of the di setup, this would mean a much flatter torque curve with a higher detonation threshold. This allows the secondary injectors be placed much higher in the runners giving inter cooling effect, di also cools the charge drastically as well.
Imagine a 5.0l mustang pushing 450-500hp in NA form and netting 30+ mpg.
11/29/11, 10:18 PM
#113
Bear Eats King...
Bear ****s Bone
Bear ****s Bone
Join Date: September 5, 2011
Location: Cleburne, Tx
Posts: 5,302
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by jaguarking11
I can almost gurantee ford used a different piston coating on the skirts.
Secondary though is they micro polished and coated all the bearing surfaces although unlikely.
Either of those gets around 10hp.
As for DI, Ford should and will do DI on a variant of the 5.0, as for aftermarket, they will either have to overdrive the injectors or make higher flowing units. However DI engines starve in the upper rpm, this is where the aftermarket could potentially add port injection on-top of the di setup, this would mean a much flatter torque curve with a higher detonation threshold. This allows the secondary injectors be placed much higher in the runners giving inter cooling effect, di also cools the charge drastically as well.
Imagine a 5.0l mustang pushing 450-500hp in NA form and netting 30+ mpg.
Secondary though is they micro polished and coated all the bearing surfaces although unlikely.
Either of those gets around 10hp.
As for DI, Ford should and will do DI on a variant of the 5.0, as for aftermarket, they will either have to overdrive the injectors or make higher flowing units. However DI engines starve in the upper rpm, this is where the aftermarket could potentially add port injection on-top of the di setup, this would mean a much flatter torque curve with a higher detonation threshold. This allows the secondary injectors be placed much higher in the runners giving inter cooling effect, di also cools the charge drastically as well.
Imagine a 5.0l mustang pushing 450-500hp in NA form and netting 30+ mpg.
12/2/11, 11:33 PM
#115
Originally Posted by dmhines
I think 11/12 folks are thinking the 2013 may be more durable.
Then the 15/16 folks are thinking the 2017 may be more durable and so on. Where does it end. Enjoy what you got run that pony into the ground and then start all over with new and repeat.
12/3/11, 06:22 AM
#116
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
That's funny because no doubt hands down I bet 13/14 folks will be thinking the 2015 may be more durable.
Then the 15/16 folks are thinking the 2017 may be more durable and so on. Where does it end. Enjoy what you got run that pony into the ground and then start all over with new and repeat.
Then the 15/16 folks are thinking the 2017 may be more durable and so on. Where does it end. Enjoy what you got run that pony into the ground and then start all over with new and repeat.
I love MY Mustang. I guess I'm just not "Zen" enough to let my car go and trust that I'll be ready for the next one.
What I want is the best possible version of the Coyote in the car I have now...and while I want Ford to make ever better versions, I am a big enough man to admit that I'd be A-OK for progress to stay sill for a couple years before the motor is labeled inferior.
12/3/11, 09:40 AM
#117
Legacy TMS Member
IIRC Lexus has a hybrid DI/PI system on one of thier V8s, at low engine speeds and idle it uses port injection then transitions to direct injection for the rest of the operating cycle.
I think this was done to offer the smoothest possible engine operation rather than any performance advantage.
Using an ad hoc port injection system to get around DI tuning limitations and problems is a pretty sound (albeit complex) idea and something that was done back in the 80's and 90's to address the limitations of the first domestic fuel injection systems when they didn't have the variety of injector and pump sizes we have today.
I think I saw this used on a turbocharged Lingenfelter vette back in the old 1st gen smallblock days. They used his signature manifold and plumbed the injectors way upstream in the plenum area.
I've also seen a supplemental injector set plumbed into the throttlebody spacer on a pushrod 5.0 for a high horsepower forced induction application.
The advantage of doing this is that you dont have to interface with the factory controller or fuel system at all, just plumb in the hard stuff and tune it to work in harmony with the factory fuel system.
I think this was done to offer the smoothest possible engine operation rather than any performance advantage.
Using an ad hoc port injection system to get around DI tuning limitations and problems is a pretty sound (albeit complex) idea and something that was done back in the 80's and 90's to address the limitations of the first domestic fuel injection systems when they didn't have the variety of injector and pump sizes we have today.
I think I saw this used on a turbocharged Lingenfelter vette back in the old 1st gen smallblock days. They used his signature manifold and plumbed the injectors way upstream in the plenum area.
I've also seen a supplemental injector set plumbed into the throttlebody spacer on a pushrod 5.0 for a high horsepower forced induction application.
The advantage of doing this is that you dont have to interface with the factory controller or fuel system at all, just plumb in the hard stuff and tune it to work in harmony with the factory fuel system.
12/3/11, 11:26 AM
#118
Member
Join Date: September 4, 2011
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC Lexus has a hybrid DI/PI system on one of thier V8s, at low engine speeds and idle it uses port injection then transitions to direct injection for the rest of the operating cycle.
I think this was done to offer the smoothest possible engine operation rather than any performance advantage.
Using an ad hoc port injection system to get around DI tuning limitations and problems is a pretty sound (albeit complex) idea and something that was done back in the 80's and 90's to address the limitations of the first domestic fuel injection systems when they didn't have the variety of injector and pump sizes we have today.
I think I saw this used on a turbocharged Lingenfelter vette back in the old 1st gen smallblock days. They used his signature manifold and plumbed the injectors way upstream in the plenum area.
I've also seen a supplemental injector set plumbed into the throttlebody spacer on a pushrod 5.0 for a high horsepower forced induction application.
The advantage of doing this is that you dont have to interface with the factory controller or fuel system at all, just plumb in the hard stuff and tune it to work in harmony with the factory fuel system.
I think this was done to offer the smoothest possible engine operation rather than any performance advantage.
Using an ad hoc port injection system to get around DI tuning limitations and problems is a pretty sound (albeit complex) idea and something that was done back in the 80's and 90's to address the limitations of the first domestic fuel injection systems when they didn't have the variety of injector and pump sizes we have today.
I think I saw this used on a turbocharged Lingenfelter vette back in the old 1st gen smallblock days. They used his signature manifold and plumbed the injectors way upstream in the plenum area.
I've also seen a supplemental injector set plumbed into the throttlebody spacer on a pushrod 5.0 for a high horsepower forced induction application.
The advantage of doing this is that you dont have to interface with the factory controller or fuel system at all, just plumb in the hard stuff and tune it to work in harmony with the factory fuel system.
http://r-gt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2gr-fse.pdf
Last edited by Scottward; 12/3/11 at 11:32 AM.
12/4/11, 02:08 PM
#120
Swamp Donkey Aficionado
Join Date: November 23, 2006
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
