Where does 8 HP come from on 2013? - Page 2 - Ford Mustang Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Banned
 
12blackgt's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,507
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tosh.o View Post
I agree about the weather conditions, dyno calibrations, gearing and even the dyno operator causing variations. But that is not the total picture.

Not every engine built by the same manufacturer are 100% identical, not even on the same line, not even on the same day, and not even built during the same hour.

It is farily common knowedge that all manufacturers do, in fact, underrate their motors so that the absolutely WORST examples produced will still make the bare minimum rating if they were hooked to an engine dyno.

Ford for example has been doing this since the cobra fiasco of around 2001 i think it was (and probably even before that screw up).

Are there some that will only produce 410-412? Sure..those would be the "worst examples" i spoke of. Will many hit 420 to 430? Yes, absolutely. But don't be pissed if yours doesn't, as long as it makes the minimum 412.

What Ford here is raised that "worst case" minium. They may have changed a setting in the computer tune but it also a common indicator that the manufacturing process has, after 24 months, reduced the number and quality of those "worst examples" coming off the line.
Well said, but I'm not convinced the delta is that large with the motor by itself. Perhpas it can be with the entire drive line, but with the motor alone I'm thinking a 5 horsepower delta max.

12blackgt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
PONY Member
V6 Member
 
ChaosFury's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Location: Chardon
Posts: 872
 
Send a message via Yahoo to ChaosFury
So can anyone explain why the V6 camaro "magically" went from 304 to 312 to 323? Is Chevy really trying to lie to their loyal fans and buyers just because the Mustang has them in the corner?

Fail camaro!


Elenora. Watch out, she may kick.

2012 GT Premium: Race red - automatic - 3:31 gears - HID headlights - all weather 19" Pirelli tires - Roush axle-back exhaust, GT/CS Spoiler. Coming soon: quarter panel & rear window louvers
ChaosFury is offline  
post #18 of 25 (permalink) Old 11-19-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
 
8borerifle's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 59
 
Good question! I know the first bump to 312 was because it was "underrated" before.
8borerifle is offline  
 
PONY Member
 
unreal's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Gilbert
Posts: 356
 
The newer v6 camaros have a redesigned head and exhaust manifold which is why it is 323 now. New Hyundai coupe is 330.

2012 Candy Red GT Premium
2006 Corvette Z06
unreal is offline  
PONY Member
 
FirstFord94's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 946
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tosh.o View Post
I agree about the weather conditions, dyno calibrations, gearing and even the dyno operator causing variations. But that is not the total picture.
This stuff here, is absolute fact.

Quote:
Not every engine built by the same manufacturer are 100% identical, not even on the same line, not even on the same day, and not even built during the same hour.
This is also true.


Quote:
It is farily common knowedge that all manufacturers do, in fact, underrate their motors so that the absolutely WORST examples produced will still make the bare minimum rating if they were hooked to an engine dyno.
Now this...this is pure speculation. There is absolutely no evidence that ALL manufacturers under rate their motors. That's a completely false statement and I have three pieces of information to refute that.
A) The Mazda RX-8 was underrated by the factory
B) I actually did the factory tour at Porsche and when we got to the engine assembly room, they mentioned that every motor (at least for the 911) is dynoed after assembly to make sure the output is within a certain percentage of error--and I want to say that it was 1% error.
C) This one is going way back, but I even seem to recall some controversy with some older Mustangs, maybe a SVT version, where ford advertised a certain hp and supposedly it was underrated. I believe ford made updates the following year, IIRC, to the heads to make up for the power.

So no, there is absolutely no evidence that over rating engine output is a standard practice. The track times pretty much confirm this fact with regard to the current mustang. No one is legitimately making 430+ hp in a stock mustang GT. There isn't enough variability in the production process to add an additional 30 hp. The ECU also plays a role in keeping things within spec.


Quote:
Will many hit 420 to 430? Yes, absolutely. But don't be pissed if yours doesn't, as long as it makes the minimum 412.
You're talking out your rear, sir. You have absolutely no legitmate evidence of this. Find me an engine dyno of a stock 5.0 making more than 420 hp and I will absolutely change my opinion on the topic. But, some dude posting up chassis dyno results isn't legitimate evidence and anyone who knows anything about dyno tuning will tell you this. There are significant differences even between dynos. DynoJet and Mustang dynos are notorious for being 10+ hp off from each other. There are simply way too many variables associated with a chassis dyno to come to any legit conclusions about what Ford is doing with their motors. I mean I could potentially even see your side of things if every chassis dyno was even a little bit above the rated hp, but even that's not true. People dyno all over the place in reality. Even the calculation of whp to crank hp is whacky. We see it here with one guy claiming 15% DT loss and someone else saying it's like 8%. That's a HUGE difference and that difference is merely an estimate, not a well defined calculation. So I'll say it again--either you provide an engine dyno and put the argument to rest, or you stick with the chassis dyno data and not prove or disprove anything.
FirstFord94 is offline  
PONY Member
 
aaholland's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 775
 
the most common publicized answer (and the simplest) is that ford learned a thing or two while working on the boss and applied that knowledge to the 13 GT. i would expect HP to always go up at least a little every couple years - for now anyway.

2007 ROUSH M90 Supercharged Mustang GT
2011 Vortech V-3 Si-Trim Mustang GT
aaholland is offline  
GT Member
 
fake's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Location: Roswell
Posts: 1,872
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstFord94 View Post
This stuff here, is absolute fact.

C) This one is going way back, but I even seem to recall some controversy with some older Mustangs, maybe a SVT version, where ford advertised a certain hp and supposedly it was underrated. I believe ford made updates the following year, IIRC, to the heads to make up for the power.
That was the 99 Cobra and it was overrated from Ford. Ford advertised 320hp and SOME SVT Cobras cars were not making that HP at the crank. Our engines are underrated, beacause almost every single dyno I have seen is putting down 365-375 rwhp. That puts these 5.0 engines over 412hp at the crank. The normal seems to be between 420-435 crank hp for our cars.

Overrated= not meeting the advertised HP figures.
Underrated=more HP than the advertised HP figures

SOLD: Black 2011 GT 5.0.
1997 SVT Cobra Mustang
Full Steeda Suspension; OR X-Pipe; Flowmaster Exhaust; AMR wheels; Pro 5.0 Shifter, etc..
fake is offline  
PONY Member
 
Longboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Location: Tucson
Posts: 254
 
Lesson #1) bigger numbers sell!

Quote:
Originally Posted by heavyD View Post
You answered your question. It's one of the following:

1) 2011-2012 Coyotes were slightly underrated from the factory and for 2013 Ford has revised their ratings for the engine. Very possible as there were reports very early that the engine was underrrated by Ford.

2) Slight tuning adjustment to yield a very minor 8 hp. With two years to tweak it's very possible Ford found an additional 8 hp to be had reliably. Very common to all manufacturers to tweak tuning following years after new engines are introduced.

Either way we are talking about 8 hp which will not even be noticeable to the average driver. Don't be surprised if 2013 Mustangs put up identical times to 2011/2012 cars or less depending on if the new front ends have changed the aerodynamics of the car.
:nogrinner....naw, heres the real deal! 1) sum educated idiot sed, " Hey, GM does it" and just tossed a "plausable #" into the air and the marketing types agreed that they could sell that nonsense to every 25 Yr old. Or B).... wash the internet with "rumours" that this 412HP was truely understated so when the 2013 models come out we can look like heros announcing the new ratings.
Longboy is offline  
Apprentice
 
Tosh.o's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Location: Capitalofworld
Posts: 212
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstFord94 View Post
Find me an engine dyno of a stock 5.0 making more than 420 hp and I will absolutely change my opinion on the topic. But, some dude posting up chassis dyno results isn't legitimate evidence and anyone who knows anything about dyno tuning will tell you this. .
Quote:
Originally Posted by fake View Post
. Our engines are underrated, beacause almost every single dyno I have seen is putting down 365-375 rwhp. That puts these 5.0 engines over 412hp at the crank. The normal seems to be between 420-435 crank hp for our cars.
Firstford, you make a fair argument that its just dyno error/inaccuracy and that all of the engines are actually produced at a much tighter spec then i argued. As you might could gues...i don't have a way to prove my assessment that the cars can vary quite a bit.

However, between your quote and Fakes quote..."one of these things is not like the other" as the song goes.

Ill let the two of you fight it out.

GT/CS 3.73s, Nav/comfort pckg.
Mods: Roush Axleback, Airaid CAI/Bama Tunes (i am always changing the tune). In the market for a shift kit and lowering kit.
Tosh.o is offline  
Banned
 
2011gt85's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: calgary
Posts: 788
 
Simple changes to the factory calibration.
2011gt85 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1