05GT DYNO NUMBERS!!

[[email protected]]

Well, today was the day to strap one of these bad boys on the rollers.

After a 1.5hr drive to the dyno and NO cool down time the car put down 262rwhp/289rwtq

After a cool down of about 20min, the car put down 265rwhp/292rwtq. After this pull, I yanked the Air Silencer (which is pretty skimpy to start with) and the car made 266rwhp/297rwtq

These car's run PIG RICH and there is easily another 20-25rwhp and about 10-15rwtq in this beast. These cars get better and better every day.

The car had 325km on the odometer at the time.

Tuned numbers to come in a week or so....just waiting on some software updates.

The printer at the dyno ran out of ink, so as soon as I can get back there I will post the sheets.

We are the first in Canada to get our hands on one of these bad boys. We have made the quickest 2v's, 4v's and soon to be 3v's in Canada :ca

 

[NotoriousGT350]

congrats and can't wait to see the sheets. Great pics by the way.

 

[just some guy]

thats a big switch from the 300+ everyone said they would put down before they came out...you know...saying they are underrated and all.

 

[M1Rifle]

thats a big switch from the 300+ everyone said they would put down before they came out...you know...saying they are underrated and all.

265 rwhp IS at least 300 crank. Your point is.... ?

 

[SadbutTrue]

265rwhp ends up being a good bit more than 300 at the fly... about 312, and thats one of the lower i've seen. So if every mustang out there is underrated by at least 10 horses without being broken in, I'll be happy

 

[TomServo92]

thats a big switch from the 300+ everyone said they would put down before they came out...you know...saying they are underrated and all.

The 300HP that is quoted by Ford is fly-wheel horsepower (or FWHP). The figures quoted in this thread are rear-wheel horsepower (or RWHP). The reason that RWHP is lower than FWHP is that some power is lost in the transmission and differential before it gets to the wheels. The generally accepted percentage of loss for a manual transmission is 15-18%. If you divide the RWHP by 0.85 you get FWHP for the 15% loss. In this case it's 265/0.85 = 311.8. That's a good bit more than the advertised HP. The numbers I've seen for automatics runs from 20-25% loss.

 

[Cook89Notch]

I would say that those number aren't so bad for a car that has such a small amount of miles on it. COOL!

I can't wait to see what bolt ons and sometuning is going to do for these cars.

It seems like there should be a great deal of potential in the VCT all by it's self.

Waiting for results, Matt.

 

[CatmanJJ]

It's still about 30 - 40 rwhp more then the outgoing GT, seems pretty good to me.

 

[JaysGreenLX]

Wow those are some pretty decent numbers. I can't wait to see what they cars are capable of.

 

[AzSnake]

Need the new tune numbers!!! Must have them now!!!

 

[vrpirata]

The 300HP that is quoted by Ford is fly-wheel horsepower (or FWHP). The figures quoted in this thread are rear-wheel horsepower (or RWHP). The reason that RWHP is lower than FWHP is that some power is lost in the transmission and differential before it gets to the wheels. The generally accepted percentage of loss for a manual transmission is 15-18%. If you divide the RWHP by 0.85 you get FWHP for the 15% loss. In this case it's 265/0.85 = 311.8. That's a good bit more than the advertised HP. The numbers I've seen for automatics runs from 20-25% loss.

Looking at the pictures seems like that Stang is Automatic, that means <b>265/.80 = 331FWHP !!!</b>

 

[2000BLKGT]

Looking at the pictures seems like that Stang is Automatic, that means <b>265/.80 = 331FWHP !!!</b>

Not these guys (Steeda.ca)...that car is a stick

 

[AzSnake]

Looking at the pictures seems like that Stang is Automatic, that means <b>265/.80 = 331FWHP !!!</b>

Looks like a M5 to me

 

[Mr_dcj2001]

Not too shabby. That ride is a manual, you can see in the last couple of pics.

 

[TomServo92]

Looks like a M5 to me

Yep. If you look at the last pic you can see the boot around the shifter.

 

[watch]

Why didn't you take out the hydrocarbon trap to get those results ?

 

[01GT/03ZX9]

when you say "removed air silencer" are you referring to the obstruction in the air hose just after the airbox,or something in the fenderwell.removing it gave ya only 1 hp ,but 5 lbs of torque-not bad.

 

[[email protected]]

when you say "removed air silencer" are you referring to the obstruction in the air hose just after the airbox,or something in the fenderwell.removing it gave ya only 1 hp ,but 5 lbs of torque-not bad.

Between the air box ad fender there is a small rubber silencer, similar to older car's but less restrictive.

The car is a 5psd.

 

[svtguy]

Between the air box ad fender there is a small rubber silencer, similar to older car's but less restrictive.

The car is a 5psd.

Was it MustangDyno or Dynojet numbers?

 

[Lawman85]

Actually, Ford is advertising on a 12% power loss in drivetrain for the manual 5spd. So with that... 266rwhp = 302 hp at the crank.