Dyno'd My 2012 Gt

Discussion in '2010 - 2014 Specific Tech' started by Clair Smith, Jul 20, 2012.


  1. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    First off, the engine is stock, manual, 19" wheels, and factory tune. I did two pulls with 87 octane and two with 93 the next night. the correction factor was 1.02 on the first night and 1.03 on the second night. So no real diffence there.
    87 : HP= 371.16, Torque= 352.98
    93: HP=374.54, Torque= 358.94

    I'm going to go ahead and say that Ford left a lot on the table in the stock tune, my engine is tuned for 87 me thinks :)
  2. Ronin38

    Ronin38 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,250
    Likes Received:
    497
    Trophy Points:
    114
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    Are you sure the second run was on all-93 octane? I'm not sure how you did that, overnight.

    I would want to allow for several days to a week between runs, to make sure the engine is fully "set" for 93 oct.

    FWIW, those numbers are almost exactly what I got with a dyno. on my car, too. ;)
  3. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    Did you use 93? I can't imagine that it would take long to adjust to 93. But, I will run 93 over the weekend and run it next week :)


    Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk 2
  4. Ronin38

    Ronin38 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,250
    Likes Received:
    497
    Trophy Points:
    114
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    The main thing is: was your fuel tank almost empty when you put the 93 in? Otherwise you had a mix of 87+93. ;)
  5. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    Burned her down till I saw 9 miles till empty. Put 1.5 gallons of 93 in. burned it down to 9 miles left, then filled her up with 93. Drive her hard for 30 miles. Should have been very close to 93.

    To be honest, driving the two octane levels back to back. The 93 just felt a tiny bit smoother. But, that could have easily been all in my mind.

    Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk 2
  6. CCS86

    CCS86 New Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I don't imagine that the octane based changes are part of a long-term strategy. It's likely that it simply allows more spark advance (less knock retard), which would happen instantaneously.
  7. mbuckcoyote

    mbuckcoyote Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Portand, Or.
    What Dyno was used for those numbers?
  8. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    I burned the 87 down until I had 10 miles until empty. Put in 1.5 gallons of 93, then drove around until I had 9 miles until empty. Filled her up with 93 and drove around for 30 or so miles and then ran her on the dyno. And it was on a Dynojet.
  9. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    Agree, but I don't want any arguments. I seen a few posters who talk about only putting 93 in their cars, I wanted to know for sure if there was any real gain to be had in using 93 in a stock car. I'm going to say that it is minimal and not worth using with out a tune. Another thing that was interesting, at about 6500ish, the A/F was getting rich. Ford left some on the table with the stock tune, and it makes the large gains from a CAI and a tune from some of the reputable companies like Steeda, AM, ect. much more believable.
  10. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    Side note, are the 2013 recommending running 91 octane? Wayne, the guy with the dyno, has a new crate Coyote motor and it recommends 91 octane. My owners manual recommends 87. I am wondering if the 2013 5.0 are tuned for 91 and that is where the 420 HP comes from?
  11. chris28912

    chris28912 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    28
    They recommend at least 89. Not 91. Never e 85
  12. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    From 87 to 89, that would be the tuning change they mention in the literature? The crate engine instructions state to use 91, another tune maybe?

    Interesting, but not to important. What I have learned from this is to stick to 87 until I upgrade my tune :)
  13. 94DreamGT

    94DreamGT Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Indiana
    Wow...impressive RWHP #'s from a stock motor. These new 5.0's are making me think about getting back in the game after several years away.

    Can anyone tell me what its taking to get these cars to 400rwhp. Simple bolt-ons? Tune?
    Without touching the internals of the engine at all, what about to get to 500rwhp. How many lbs of boost?

    Lastly...the poster's car with 370+ rwhp, what would something like that run in the 1/4 given decent traction with drag radials? ET and Trap please.

    Thanks
  14. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
  15. vfast

    vfast Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Va
    the car can run or 87 and i believe something like a 10-12 hp loss over using 91
  16. Three50won

    Three50won Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    19
    So that would mean that with a 15% drive train loss your engine is actually at 440 hp!! That is impressive. I drove a Coyote back in March and I couldn't believe how fast it was!!
  17. Clair Smith

    Clair Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    29
    Location:
    Norfolk Va
    Yeah, I am in love with this car. I love driving it. I live for my next track outing. Can't wait to get it out on a road course or autocross course :D

    Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2
  18. chris28912

    chris28912 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    28
    No that is wrong lol
  19. MoBlackGT12

    MoBlackGT12 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    9
    Elaborate, please.
  20. Ibnzmonkey

    Ibnzmonkey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Wow, impressive numbers. I cant wait to get mine strapped to the dyno before I start buying mods.

Share This Page