Livernois Dynoes '05 Mustang GT

[SVTdriver]

exactley.

Ford doesn't tune for hp, they tune for gas mileage and pollution.

I'm not sure that is quite true. But they do tune fo rmileage and pollution before hp.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Here's some food for thought: The 2004 Honda Accord V6 is tuned to make 240HP on premium but will run on regular. The computer detects the pinging caused by the lower octane and detunes the motor electronically. Do you know how much it makes in the detuned state? 220HP. 20HP less than in premium fuel mode. The tune everyone is talking about could very well be tuning the 4.6 for premium fuel which will allow you to run more aggressive timing etc. If it'll add 20HP to a Honda V6, I don't see why it couldn't add at least that much to the 4.6.

I know the RX-8 (sort of a Ford, heh) runs terribly conservative (read: rich) in order to meet emissions goals and run on 87 octane. With a proper piggyback and enough patience to make tuning changes slowly (big changes make the ECU freak out apparently), you can go from 220~238 (depends who you want to believe) to 265 or so at the crank. Granted, it's a radically different engine but still.

Ford may be underrating the HP for insurance purposes. Or more likely, they are doing it so that they don't have to mail out any more "missing HP" rebates. Yeah, the Chrysler and Chevy motors are making 345 and 400. But look at the cars they're in.

And let's not forget...they are running on premium gas. The new 3-valve on the other hand is recommended to run on 87 octane....which means the compression is something in the low 9 to 1 range, right? Which, in turn, means the motor could end up being able to handle more boost...if the internals, tranny, and rear end can handle the extra abuse, of course.

 

[GinoGT]

I realize that the new car will have VVT and throttle by wire, but here's how I figure it:

I don't see any performance gains by doing whatever to the throttle. A wide open throttle is a wide open throttle, no idea where HP is going to come from that.

The only way you're going to get more peak HP from the VVT is if Ford doesn't have the timing tweaked perfectly for every last bit of peak power. Basically, making power from the cam timing will consist of bringing the amount of advance/retard closer to the "sweet spot" for the specific RPM than what Ford has programmed. If Ford is pretty close, then you're not going to see huge gains. If Ford is off by a good bit, then the gains will be better.

Bumped ignition timing is most likely going to gain the same couple horses and lb/ft of torque like it does now.

 

[SVTdriver]

I realize that the new car will have VVT and throttle by wire, but here's how I figure it:

I don't see any performance gains by doing whatever to the throttle. A wide open throttle is a wide open throttle, no idea where HP is going to come from that.

The only way you're going to get more peak HP from the VVT is if Ford doesn't have the timing tweaked perfectly for every last bit of peak power. Basically, making power from the cam timing will consist of bringing the amount of advance/retard closer to the "sweet spot" for the specific RPM than what Ford has programmed. If Ford is pretty close, then you're not going to see huge gains. If Ford is off by a good bit, then the gains will be better.

Bumped ignition timing is most likely going to gain the same couple horses and lb/ft of torque like it does now.

But you could possibly alter the speed at which it opens or where it opens. Example being people talking about the LS having a lag that was fixed with a software update.

When has Ford ever had timing optimized perfectly? Either cam or ignition? Or A/F ratios dead on all the way through?

 

[TomServo92]

I realize that the new car will have VVT and throttle by wire, but here's how I figure it:

I don't see any performance gains by doing whatever to the throttle. A wide open throttle is a wide open throttle, no idea where HP is going to come from that.

The only way you're going to get more peak HP from the VVT is if Ford doesn't have the timing tweaked perfectly for every last bit of peak power. Basically, making power from the cam timing will consist of bringing the amount of advance/retard closer to the "sweet spot" for the specific RPM than what Ford has programmed. If Ford is pretty close, then you're not going to see huge gains. If Ford is off by a good bit, then the gains will be better.

Bumped ignition timing is most likely going to gain the same couple horses and lb/ft of torque like it does now.

The question is whether Ford is showing their all their cards or are they holding something back for the future? I believe (as do others in this forum) that Ford is sandbagging on the power.

 

[DBMSTNG]

I realize that the new car will have VVT and throttle by wire, but here's how I figure it:

I don't see any performance gains by doing whatever to the throttle. A wide open throttle is a wide open throttle, no idea where HP is going to come from that.

The only way you're going to get more peak HP from the VVT is if Ford doesn't have the timing tweaked perfectly for every last bit of peak power. Basically, making power from the cam timing will consist of bringing the amount of advance/retard closer to the "sweet spot" for the specific RPM than what Ford has programmed. If Ford is pretty close, then you're not going to see huge gains. If Ford is off by a good bit, then the gains will be better.

Bumped ignition timing is most likely going to gain the same couple horses and lb/ft of torque like it does now.

Ford did not program it for the most horsepower because of emissions just like how they stuck 6 cats on 96-98 stangs and 4 cats on 99+ stangs when 2 will do the job just fine. Ford has been freaks about pollution over the last decade. adjusting the cam timming in certain spots in the RPM range can net some pretty dramatic gains. take the SVT Focus for instance. it has VVT and can pick up decent amounts of power with just a tune (10whp in a 2.0L). then combine that with a timming increase for 91+ octane and the gains grow.

 

[DBMSTNG]

I'm not sure that is quite true. But they do tune fo rmileage and pollution before hp.

i hope you were just having a brain fart.

 

[ttown]

Where's the dyno? Peak numbers really don't mean squat in general, it's how long you can hold peak or near to it. Most Mustang have a mountain peak for it's peak HP not a smooth curve.

A 5500 rpm peak tells me it run hard to red line but that's about it. Peak HP on the Mach around 5250 but it has a 7k red line not 6k. If the new GT runs as stong as the Mach on regular that's about all you can ask for. These are cars about the same weight and the 3v head aren't outflowing the 4v heads. We just went thorugh this with the GTO.............. I'll wait and see, hope it work out for you guys I got what I wanted.

 

[mach1dsg]

Dude, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the 2005 has MUCH better F/R weight balance (53/47 vs 57/43) than your Mach 1. As I've said before, any idiot who has ever been to a drag strip knows the first thing you do to make your car go faster in the 1/4 is to move weight rearward. Add to it the new 3 link rear suspension and we have the simple fact that the '05 GT will hook up off the line way better than any SN-95 Mustang. That's why M/T got a 5.1 sec 0-60 for an '05 Auto. Yes the Mach has more top end, but the '05 GT will be very close in speed to the Mach 1.

However I could car less about a couple tenths in the 1/4 mile one way or the other. The important thing is that the '05 GT will be a far better overall car than the '03-04 Mach 1.

And thank you for answering "My car is still better" challenge.

easy man...
any idiot would wait for the damn car to go out and hit the streets, any idiot would wait for the owners to report track times, any idiot would at least wait for more dyno reports...
answering the "My car is still better" challenge, i would say it again
better, yes,but faster??? ,i don't think so....
and again, if you or someone close to orange county,ca has a 05 GT and want to try a friendly run against an almost stock 5 speed mach 1, pm me or email me, i would more than happy to show you who is the boss

 

[SVTdriver]

Time for a little reality check on the Mach 1 vs 05 issue. Does it REALLY matter? The 05 is a new car. It should be able to out perform most of the past mustangs. I know when I bought my Cobra. I was never told that Ford would not build anything better than it. There has never been a section on thier website. Where customers could tell them not to ever make a better mustang than what is currently available. I bought my Cobra and have been happy with it. Now the gt is making better power than mine. Am I arguing against it? Am I saying there is no way the gt can be better than my Cobra? No I accpet that this is a new car. And that it should be superior to what has been available. What sort of warped pride issue has Mach 1 owners arguing that the 05 can't be as fast as their cars? Do you want it to be a poor performer. And not have any pride in the mustang lineup other than your Mach? Mach 1 owners have a limited edition car. With a motor not available in the common gt without spending a lot of money to transplant. And one that is significantly better than the gt's of the same and many previous years. If I did not like the look of the 05. I would definately have bought a Mach1. And I congratulate all the people who did buy one.

 

[mach1dsg]

Time for a little reality check on the Mach 1 vs 05 issue. Does it REALLY matter? The 05 is a new car. It should be able to out perform most of the past mustangs. I know when I bought my Cobra. I was never told that Ford would not build anything better than it. There has never been a section on thier website. Where customers could tell them not to ever make a better mustang than what is currently available. I bought my Cobra and have been happy with it. Now the gt is making better power than mine. Am I arguing against it? Am I saying there is no way the gt can be better than my Cobra? No I accpet that this is a new car. And that it should be superior to what has been available. What sort of warped pride issue has Mach 1 owners arguing that the 05 can't be as fast as their cars? Do you want it to be a poor performer. And not have any pride in the mustang lineup other than your Mach? Mach 1 owners have a limited edition car. With a motor not available in the common gt without spending a lot of money to transplant. And one that is significantly better than the gt's of the same and many previous years. If I did not like the look of the 05. I would definately have bought a Mach1. And I congratulate all the people who did buy one.

what sort of warped pride ?????
it is the fastest/more powerful 4.6L N/A mustang in stock trim to date.
wheather the 05 GT would outperform this car in the 1/4 mile or no, is yet to be seen. that's all i'm saying....geezzz

 

[GinoGT]

I think it's safe to say an 05 vs. Mach 1 would be a driver's race.

That being said, get some practice on those 60's before stepping up to an 05.

 

[TomServo92]

I think it's safe to say an 05 vs. Mach 1 would be a driver's race.

That being said, get some practice on those 60's before stepping up to an 05.

I agree with you. HTT said that the performance target for the '05 GT was the Mach 1 so they should be very close. The skill of the driver should be the deciding factor. I guess we'll know within the next couple of months!

 

[SVTdriver]

what sort of warped pride ?????
it is the fastest/more powerful 4.6L N/A mustang in stock trim to date.
wheather the 05 GT would outperform this car in the 1/4 mile or no, is yet to be seen. that's all i'm saying....geezzz

It was not meant directly towards you per se. But towards all the Mach owners who don't think it's possible that it could happen. I agree it has yet to be seen widely. But there are people who are posting that it is being done. I agree the Mach has been a great car. But it is just as bad as last months computer. If you spent the extra money then hopefully you still have the best. If not...

 

[Dan05GTOwner]

I think it's safe to say an 05 vs. Mach 1 would be a driver's race.

That being said, get some practice on those 60's before stepping up to an 05.

I agree, though the 05Gt and the Mach 1 will be very close power/speedwise, it will be easier for 05 owners to have consistantly good 60' times due to the improved rear suspension allowing much better hookup.

And, since launch can very often determine who wins the race, the average driver in the 05 might just beat the average Mach 1 driver.

This would make for an interesting head-to-head comparison. You know someone at the rags wants to do it too. I can't wait.

 

[GinoGT]

I agree, though the 05Gt and the Mach 1 will be very close power/speedwise, it will be easier for 05 owners to have consistantly good 60' times due to the improved rear suspension allowing much better hookup.

And, since launch can very often determine who wins the race, the average driver in the 05 might just beat the average Mach 1 driver.

This would make for an interesting head-to-head comparison. You know someone at the rags wants to do it too. I can't wait.

Screw that, I'll get an 05 and see if any Machs want to play at the track. Stock vs. stock of course.

 

[351CJ]

easy man...
answering the "My car is still better" challenge, i would say it again
better, yes,but faster??? ,i don't think so....

You're hanging on to that one thread "my car is faster than yours".

As I said, it appears from the intitial tests, RW dyno and 1/4 mile times, that a 03/04 Mach 1 and a 05 GT will be very similar in performance, both 0-60 and 1/4. Which is fastest will come down to the driver and that's a great thing.

I really don't care if your Mach 1 is 0.2 sec faster in the 1/4 than my '05 GT will be, or even if the opposite turns out to be true. The 05 is such a better car in every other aspect that a couple tenths in the 1/4 is at the bottom of my priority list.

 

[351CJ]

Here's some food for thought: The 2004 Honda Accord V6 is tuned to make 240HP on premium but will run on regular. The computer detects the pinging caused by the lower octane and detunes the motor electronically. Do you know how much it makes in the detuned state? 220HP. 20HP less than in premium fuel mode. The tune everyone is talking about could very well be tuning the 4.6 for premium fuel which will allow you to run more aggressive timing etc. If it'll add 20HP to a Honda V6, I don't see why it couldn't add at least that much to the 4.6.

The PCM on the 2005 Mustang is Ford's "Black Oak" system. It is similar (if not the same) as the PCM used on the 2003-2004 Lincoln LS and T-Bird. The LS & T-Bird have a 10.55:1 compression ratio (3.9 V8), and they are designed to run on 91 Octane.

The PCM system automatically advances the timing as far as it can for whatever octane you are using. Just like the Honda, if you put 87 Octane in your LS or T-Bird, you should not harm the engine, but the PCM retards the timing reducing HP and gas mileage also goes down. If you put in 93 0ctane in them, you will get a few more HP and slightly better gas mileage. I have tried this in my Lincoln LS. When I tried 87 octane, you can feel the drop in performance. Gas mileage suffers by about 1 MPG on the highway and 2 MPG around town.

The 2005 Mustang should work very much the same, that is the PCM system will automatically optimise the timing for whatever octane you put in it. The 4.6 3V has a 9.8:1 compression ratio and is desigined to run on regular. If you put in 91 or 93 octane I would expect that you will gain a few HP and get slightly better gas mileage. However because the CR is lower on the 4.6, the gain in HP and mileage that you get by putting in 91 Octane in your 05 Mustang will be less than the loss in HP and mileage that occurs when you put 87 in a car designed for 91, like the LS, T-Bird and Honda.

But since the PCM automaticlly adjusts the timing for whatever octane you are using (though the knock sensors) I really question what "tuning" the timing will do on an '05 Mustang. The 99-04s have a much simpler PCM system. We all know that you can get some performance boost with a timing adjuster that changes the intitial advance. I'm thinking that such a timing adjuster on an '05 won't do much. If you can re-program the PCM you will be able to make such changes in software, but since the knock sensors allow max timing advance I don't think advancing the intitial timing will do much.

 

[LBJay]

I know the RX-8 (sort of a Ford, heh) runs terribly conservative (read: rich) in order to meet emissions goals and run on 87 octane.

Many of today's car are set up to run very rich at the high end. The government has declared that the cats must last 120K miles. The only solution the manufactures seem to have at present is to run a rich mixture, lowering EGTs to keep from burning out the cats.

One would think that a rich mixture would increase the EGT but once all the oxygen in the exhaust gas is consumed, a rich mixture lowers EGT.

An ECU reprogram nets a 20HP gain on an RX-8 and can be bumped to 40+HP with a more aggressive tune but cat life drops dramatically.

 

[SadbutTrue]

no...how you measure has no bearing on the value of your result. Torque is torque, no matter how you measure it. Imagine you have a canteliever beam with a wieght on the free end of it, and want to measure the torque at the point where it is fixed. You can either measure the force at the end of the beam, and multiply it by the distance from the wall, or you could put a strain gauge on the beam and back the torque out of the equations governing deformable body mechanics. They will boh yield the same result (+ or - any error). The only way the results could be marginally different is that either one method produced lots of error, or you were just measureing different things.

I am assuming that the level of accuracy and precision is fairly high for both dynos since they are very expensive items, and customers would not stand to pay that kind of money for an inaccurate measuring device. So the only conclusion I can come to for the differing HP and torque numbers is that the two dynos measure different things. Just like your analogy of rwhp vs. flywheel hp....the numbers differ by 20% or so because you are measuring two different things...they do not differ because a different method of testing was used.

So a more accurate version of my question would be not which dyno is correct, but which dyno is measuring the hp and tq that is most relevant to going fast?

Furthermore, what is the diference in what is being measured on each dyno?

Couldn't be further from the truth...