Sponsored

Stock GT Mani vs F150 Mani Dyno

kwikS550

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
59
Reaction score
14
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT PP
Very interesting. That truck manifold provides decent amount of midrange punch.

I wonder which manifold would be faster in the 1/4 mile?
Sponsored

 

Eritas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
935
Reaction score
404
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Very interesting. That truck manifold provides decent amount of midrange punch.

I wonder which manifold would be faster in the 1/4 mile?
At best it shifts the power curve down 3-400RPM (not significant) at the cost of 12whp peak power.
 

AlmostFamous

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
575
Reaction score
293
Location
Austin
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
At best it shifts the power curve down 3-400RPM (not significant) at the cost of 12whp peak power.
I don't see it that way. Stock manifolds is only making 12whp more from 6,250rpms to 6,750 rpms. Nothing of great significance at the cost of much more useable torque and a hair more horsepower in the lower and mid rpms.
 
OP
OP

jcart953

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Threads
6
Messages
312
Reaction score
55
Location
Cherry Hill, NJ
Vehicle(s)
2015 Ecoboost Mustang Premium
Nice gains under the curve but after 5000 RPM your stock manifold results look...weird. The HP flatlines and then rapidly shoots up almost like you had knock. Looked at some other dyno results and actually I guess that flat line and then the ramp up is normal. Man, I'm really excited to see if the 2018 manifold offers an inexpensive version of the GT350 as these cars really look like they just need to rev to 7500 to make good power.
I thought that had to do with the Cat overprotection

Something seems wrong with the car, as if the manifold "charge motion" valves aren't working properly. Is the PP2 Ford's tune?

PP2 with the GT manifold and the F150 manifold look identical up to 3,500RPM, then some weird stuff happens with aggressive torque dips and spikes from 3,500-5,250RPM. There's a pretty extreme torque dropout at 3,700RPM and a horrible aggresive power increase at 6,300RPM.

For the F150 manifold, the aggressive torque spikes at 3,700 & 4,700RPM must have a pretty noticeable "surge" to it. Hell, I can feel the stock torque surges between 3,500-5,500RPM, I can't imagine how unrefined and bad that curve would feel. That's one thing I miss about the extremely flat torque curve of my S65 BMW M3.

What other mods have you done to your car?

Would have been nice to see the pulls start at a lower RPM, like 2,000RPM.
No other power mods have been done to the car except what has been noted in the original post. I think the weird dips probably has to do with the PP2 tune and cam timing not really being made for the F150 manifold. In addition most logs I've done always show spark advance 22-26* in 2-3.5K rpm then slides to 18-22* between 4-5k . I believe with a proper tune this should be rectified and maybe even haven those dips straighten out. I can always test again but can't say I've ever felt those dips.

I don't see it that way. Stock manifolds is only making 12whp more from 6,250rpms to 6,750 rpms. Nothing of great significance at the cost of much more useable torque and a hair more horsepower in the lower and mid rpms.
+1 I give up 12 whp peak to gain +5 to 30ish throughout the curve.
 

Sponsored

MasterCylinder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Threads
14
Messages
354
Reaction score
91
Location
Fort Worth, Tx
Vehicle(s)
(sold)17 GT
Sadly? Its an OEM package with throughout R&D and testing..
You misunderstood what I was saying. PP2 tune is designed for the GT manifold and is making more power than a tune designed for the specifically for that car. Something isn't right.
 

millhouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
1,216
Location
Simpsonville SC
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red GT PP
At best it shifts the power curve down 3-400RPM (not significant) at the cost of 12whp peak power.
That's what I see. While the F150 manifold produces more low-mid range torque, the standard GT produces more power and torque up high...which is where you'll be during WOT 1/4 mile runs.
 

Eritas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
935
Reaction score
404
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
I don't see it that way. Stock manifolds is only making 12whp more from 6,250rpms to 6,750 rpms. Nothing of great significance at the cost of much more useable torque and a hair more horsepower in the lower and mid rpms.
6,750? It clearly shows 7,000RPM redline on the graph, and IIRC, the PP2 raises the rev limit beyond 7K. Hell, his stock dyno was about 300rpm short from the real rev limit, so one could predict PP2 also having another 300rpm above what the pull showed.

Either way, a 750-1,000RPM spread of a higher peak power is pretty significant. IMO, more so than the 3-400RPM lower power shift. Basically, the stock GT manifold (at worst) makes the same power as the F150 but 3-400RPM later. Not significant.

No other power mods have been done to the car except what has been noted in the original post. I think the weird dips probably has to do with the PP2 tune and cam timing not really being made for the F150 manifold. In addition most logs I've done always show spark advance 22-26* in 2-3.5K rpm then slides to 18-22* between 4-5k . I believe with a proper tune this should be rectified and maybe even haven those dips straighten out. I can always test again but can't say I've ever felt those dips.

+1 I give up 12 whp peak to gain +5 to 30ish throughout the curve.
There's some pretty significant and not-normal dips in the PP2 with the GT manifold. This leads me to believe something may be wrong with the tune or his car. I doubt Ford would make such a poor tune.

It's not 5-30tq increase throughout the curve when they're the same up to 3,500RPM (down low is where the F150 manifold was suppose to make a big difference). The F150 just makes more torque from 3,500-6,00RPM - essentially shifting the powerband down 3-400RPM. That means you get the same power in the GT manifold at 5,000 as you do from the F150 at 4,700RPM. If that 2-300RPM is significant to you, then the 750-1,000RPM of more peak power from the GT manifold has to blow your mind.

That's what I see. While the F150 manifold produces more low-mid range torque, the standard GT produces more power and torque up high...which is where you'll be during WOT 1/4 mile runs.
Agreed, but "low"? I'd just say the F150 makes more mid-range since they look damn near equal below 3,500RPM.

You misunderstood what I was saying. PP2 tune is designed for the GT manifold and is making more power than a tune designed for the specifically for that car. Something isn't right.
Agreed. Neither is PP2 having such a poor looking curve that jumps up and down like it is. So either something is wrong with the car, the tune isn't Ford's, or Ford is incompetent.
 

AlmostFamous

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
575
Reaction score
293
Location
Austin
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
6,750? It clearly shows 7,000RPM redline on the graph, and IIRC, the PP2 raises the rev limit beyond 7K. Hell, his stock dyno was about 300rpm short from the real rev limit, so one could predict PP2 also having another 300rpm above what the pull showed.
The power peaks (+12whp) at 6,250rpms to 6,750rpms and drops off. If you're making the argument that the stock manifold makes more power at the end of the powerband, I agree. I think most people made this assumption before the first F-150 manifold was installed.

From 3,750rpms to 6,000rpms, the F150 manifold is making more horsepower and much more torque throughout the powerband. I would much rather have more power in this range than the quick increase up top. In a 1/4 mile, the F150 manifold will have the fastest times. Stock manifold wins the dyno queen award.

I'm impressed the F150 manifold had that much more usable mid range power compared to the stock manifold, with a PP2 tune not designed for it.

Personally, I think a better tune will pull out a little more power and smooth out the curve with the F150 manifold. I'm not impressed with Rob's tune one bit.


Hell, I can feel the stock torque surges between 3,500-5,500RPM, I can't imagine how unrefined and bad that curve would feel. That's one thing I miss about the extremely flat torque curve of my S65 BMW M3.
Sounds like your dream car would be a Tesla S P100D.
 
Last edited:

Eritas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
935
Reaction score
404
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
From 3,750rpms to 6,000rpms, the F150 manifold is making more horsepower and much more torque throughout the powerband. I would much rather have more power in this range than the quick increase up top. In a 1/4 mile, the F150 manifold will have the fastest times. Stock manifold wins the dyno queen award.

I'm impressed the F150 manifold had that much more usable mid range power compared to the stock manifold, with a PP2 tune not designed for it.

Personally, I think a better tune will pull out a little more power and smooth out the curve with the F150 manifold. I'm not impressed with Rob's tune one bit.
Gains between 3,750-6,000 would be great for the street, but it wouldn't be faster than on the track. Because the GT manifold's higher redline, the entire powerband is shifted to the right.

If you shift 500rpm later, then you'll be 500rpm higher in the next gear. Since the F150 manifold makes the same power as the GT, but 3-400rpm earlier, the 500rpm later redline (and far higher power in this range) negates the torque advantage. Basically shift the entire RPM band of the GT pull to the left 500rpm. It'll show huge gains in the GT manifold's favor.

Now if you shift both cars at the same low/stock redline, the F150 wins hands down. But why would you do that when you can rev a GT out and have faster acceleration and more total power?

Sounds like your dream car would be a Tesla S P100D.
Not really...?

Teslas have a flat HP curve and a linear and decreasing torque curve (kind of like a modern ecoboost in general shape). I like my M3's flat torque curve and linear (increasing) HP curve -which makes the car feel like it pulls harder as the revs climb -because it does. The Tesla/Ecoboost does not do this and feels 'flat' and boring.
 

Sponsored

AlmostFamous

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
575
Reaction score
293
Location
Austin
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Gains between 3,750-6,000 would be great for the street, but it wouldn't be faster than on the track. Because the GT manifold's higher redline, the entire powerband is shifted to the right.

If you shift 500rpm later, then you'll be 500rpm higher in the next gear. Since the F150 manifold makes the same power as the GT, but 3-400rpm earlier, the 500rpm later redline (and far higher power in this range) negates the torque advantage. Basically shift the entire RPM band of the GT pull to the left 500rpm. It'll show huge gains in the GT manifold's favor.

Now if you shift both cars at the same low/stock redline, the F150 wins hands down. But why would you do that when you can rev a GT out and have faster acceleration and more total power?

Not really...?

Teslas have a flat HP curve and a linear and decreasing torque curve (kind of like a modern ecoboost in general shape). I like my M3's flat torque curve and linear (increasing) HP curve -which makes the car feel like it pulls harder as the revs climb -because it does. The Tesla/Ecoboost does not do this and feels 'flat' and boring.
Am I missing something? The only reason the F150 manifold redlined at 6,500rpms is the F150 manifold is not designed to use the PP2 tune. The Rob run clearly shows the F150 manifold can rev to 7,250pm. Keep in mind, the F150 manifold is making that kind of power with a PP2 tune it's not designed to use.

You're using the old Supra peak horsepower argument. Yes, the GT manifold makes (+12whp) at 6,250rpms to 6,750rpms. This is an insignificant increase and it's only for a brief moment in the powerband.

Fairly modified Supra's would dyno at over 600hp horsepower yet would only run 12s in the 1/4 mile. It was quite obvious why whenever you saw dyno charts. Not only were they torqueless wonders down-low, but they wouldn't make 200hp until 4,500pms and you would see this ridiculous jump of 300hp to 600hp from 5,000rpms to 6,500rpms. Looks great on paper but not necessarily in the 1/4 mile.
 

millhouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
1,216
Location
Simpsonville SC
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Am I missing something?
Area under the curve between redline (where you would shift each) and the drop to next gear is higher on the GT manifold by quite a bit. Just picture the GT manifold dyno shifted downwards by 500 rpm and it's easy to see there will be far more area compared to the F150. For a 1/4 mile race, that F150 manifold is toast compared to the GT.
 

Eritas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
935
Reaction score
404
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Am I missing something? The only reason the F150 manifold redlined at 6,500rpms is the F150 manifold is not designed to use the PP2 tune. The Rob run clearly shows the F150 manifold can rev to 7,250pm. Keep in mind, the F150 manifold is making that kind of power with a PP2 tune it's not designed to use.

You're using the old Supra peak horsepower argument. Yes, the GT manifold makes (+12whp) at 6,250rpms to 6,750rpms. This is an insignificant increase and it's only for a brief moment in the powerband.

Fairly modified Supra's would dyno at over 600hp horsepower yet would only run 12s in the 1/4 mile. It was quite obvious why whenever you saw dyno charts. Not only were they torqueless wonders down-low, but they wouldn't make 200hp until 4,500pms and you would see this ridiculous jump of 300hp to 600hp from 5,000rpms to 6,500rpms. Looks great on paper but not necessarily in the 1/4 mile.
Where did he 'clearly show it can rev to 7,250RPM' -when his PP2 pull only went to 7K? Fair enough on the tune not being optimized for the F150, but you see the TQ dropping very quickly at 6,500RPM, I don't think a tune is going to fix that choked off manifold.

You keep saying 6,250-6,750RPM (where are you getting 6,750 from???) when his pulls show big gains and total AREA UNDER THE CURVE from 6,250-7,000 (which would be even more area if he revved it out to 7,500RPM). There's got to be something wrong with his car or tune because of the dip from 5,500-6,500RPM. If that was smoothed out, the GT manifold's gains would likely be from 6,000-7K+.

That's funny, I have a couple friends with 600-800HP supras here in FL. I'm quite familiar with them. And that's a HORRIBLE analogy. We're not talking about a turbocharged car with an oversized turbo and poor flowing heads, we are talking about the significance of the GT making the same power 3-400RPM later, with a 500RPM higher redline and making far more power from 6,250-7,000RPM (a 750RPM+ span).

Look at it in simple terms and rounding the numbers:

GT manifold makes same power as F150 manifold but 500rpm later.
GT manifold has a 500 rpm higher redline
=By shifting 500rpm later, the power bands pretty much even out.

BUT:

GT makes 12whp more peak power than the F150s peak
GT makes WAY more power than that past 6,000RPM
GT makes way more power in last 750rpm of its powerband.


-Pretty simple to me. GT>F150 when shifting at 7K.

[/IMG]
 

Strokerswild

Shallow and Pedantic
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Threads
74
Messages
6,610
Reaction score
5,393
Location
Southern MN
First Name
Dave
Vehicle(s)
Things With Wheels
I'd love to see results of a thorough dyno tune, including VCT.....
 
 




Top