Official: Stock 2018 Mustang GT Goes 12.0 In The 1/4 Mile - LMR.com

[Erik427]

They aren't allowed to underrate cars anymore. Guess that's not common knowledge like I thought.

Id like to know the DA for this pass. That tells volume.

Bunch of grey area, buy I suspect that they pick the average.

Sponsored

 

[mustang_guy]

Bunch of grey area, buy I suspect that they pick the average.

Disagree. That's the whole point of J1349/J1995

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

They aren't allowed to underrate cars anymore. Guess that's not common knowledge like I thought.

Id like to know the DA for this pass. That tells volume.

Ok, here is a lesson for people out there that aren't engineers. Everything is underrated. It's engineering 101. Nobody ever advertises a products limits, because they can be sued if it fails to perform to that limit. The very notion that the SAE could not (or would not) allow a manufacturer to underrate a certified or advertised figure is utterly ridiculous. If that were the case, the SAE would have to assume any and all liability for any legal action related to that figure, including suits from the manufacturer for the resulting damages to the brand as a result of said actions.

That said, all of the dyno's are showing 45hp and 40+lbft of torque more than the stock pulls of the 2015s on the same dynos. So, even if we entertained this notion that the dynos are happy and the output of the 2018 is exactly as advertised, then the 2015s would have had to have been over-rated by 20+hp and 20+lbft of torque!

Then again, it's also possible that Donald Trump colluded with the russian to affect the outcome of the dyno results...:headbonk:

 

[mustang_guy]

Do you even work in the industry to understand what SAE standard is?

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

Do you even work in the industry to understand what SAE standard is?

Not anymore, but the point is that it doesn't matter what the paperwork says, the SAE cannot legally force a manufacturer to advertise a product's performance above that which the manufacturer is comfortable with. Furthermore, they can't legally prevent a manufacturer from advertising a figure as SAE certified if the SAE certification exceeds that figure. They could publish the descrepency between the figures, but if they did so they would be legally liable for any actions based on their published figure.

This isn't an industry issue. It's is a legal issue.

 

[millhouse]

Ok, here is a lesson for people out there that aren't engineers. Everything is underrated. It's engineering 101. Nobody ever advertises a products limits, because they can be sued if it fails to perform to that limit. The very notion that the SAE could not (or would not) allow a manufacturer to underrate a certified or advertised figure is utterly ridiculous. If that were the case, the SAE would have to assume any and all liability for any legal action related to that figure, including suits from the manufacturer for the resulting damages to the brand as a result of said actions.

That said, all of the dyno's are showing 45hp and 40+lbft of torque more than the stock pulls of the 2015s on the same dynos. So, even if we entertained this notion that the dynos are happy and the output of the 2018 is exactly as advertised, then the 2015s would have had to have been over-rated by 20+hp and 20+lbft of torque!

Then again, it's also possible that Donald Trump colluded with the russian to affect the outcome of the dyno results...:headbonk:

Again, total Bullshit. Were not talking about factor of safety here.

One needs to only look at horsepower ratings of electric motors to understand that manufacturers don't always underrate.

 

[FastCarFanBoy]

And all of that doesn't mean they underrated the engine. All of you that think that Ford underrated these engines by 25hp are insane. Just look at their 2015 mustang dyno's....their dynos are EXTREMELY happy.




Much more inline...maybe even a touch low. Regardless, a much more reasonable result.

they stopped the pull early and when you look at their '15 plot that car picked up 20rwhp from the point where they terminated the '18 pull and where the '15 pull ends. This dyno graph proves nothing.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

Again, total Bullshit. Were not talking about factor of safety here.

One needs to only look at horsepower ratings of electric motors to understand that manufacturers don't always underrate.

Not a single word of your response was in anyway even remotely pertinent to the points I made. Since you obviously have no intention of having a reasonable discussion on this, I am just going to assume that you are constitutionally incapable of having an honest conversation.

Go away troll.

 

[millhouse]

Not a single word of your response was in anyway even remotely pertinent to the points I made. Since you obviously have no intention of having a reasonable discussion on this, I am just going to assume that you are constitutionally incapable of having an honest conversation.

Go away troll.

Maybe you should go back and re-read my post, as there was some very pertinent information that totally debunks your claim that "Everything is underrated".

At this point in time, you are grasping for straws in an attempt for the big giant "I told you all so"...."I told you guys the power would be higher".

I've worked in the automotive and engineering industry since 1996. There is a huge difference in an engineering rating and an advertised rating. Engineering is concerned with accuracy and safety. Advertising is concerned about sales.

At this point, there is nothing out there that anyone can conclude Ford has underrated anything. The best thing we have is a few dragstrip runs that point to the power being right on par for advertised.

 

[Zeke.Malvo]

Maybe you should go back and re-read my post, as there was some very pertinent information that totally debunks your claim that "Everything is underrated".

At this point in time, you are grasping for straws in an attempt for the big giant "I told you all so"...."I told you guys the power would be higher".

I've worked in the automotive and engineering industry since 1996. There is a huge difference in an engineering rating and an advertised rating. Engineering is concerned with accuracy and safety. Advertising is concerned about sales.

At this point, there is nothing out there that anyone can conclude Ford has underrated anything. The best thing we have is a few dragstrip runs that point to the power being right on par for advertised.

+1

If the GEN III Coyote is SAE Certified, it's certified to make +-1% of its rated power. There isn't any wiggle room in there, otherwise it would lose it's certification.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

Maybe you should go back and re-read my post, as there was some very pertinent information that totally debunks your claim that "Everything is underrated".

At this point in time, you are grasping for straws in an attempt for the big giant "I told you all so"...."I told you guys the power would be higher".

I've worked in the automotive and engineering industry since 1996. There is a huge difference in an engineering rating and an advertised rating. Engineering is concerned with accuracy and safety. Advertising is concerned about sales.

At this point, there is nothing out there that anyone can conclude Ford has underrated anything. The best thing we have is a few dragstrip runs that point to the power being right on par for advertised.

All I see is blah blah blah blah blah. Because you held a job for a few years 25hp = 50hp and 20lbft of torque = 40lbft. :lol:

 

[mustang_guy]

All I see is blah blah blah blah blah. Because you held a job for a few years 25hp = 50hp and 20lbft of torque = 40lbft. :lol:

Pillar of maturity here.

 

[UAmach1]

+1

If the GEN III Coyote is SAE Certified, it's certified to make +-1% of its rated power. There isn't any wiggle room in there, otherwise it would lose it's certification.

I'm wondering how much that 1% impacts their production costs. I mean you can put multiple cars on the same dyno right after each other and not be in 1% of each other. I'm also rather sure they are not putting very engine on the dyno. That's basically the difference of 1* timing. Not saying they cant be CLOSE TO 1% but I feel like that's pretty dang tight with how many sensors and all are involved.

 

[JOKER M1]

All I can say is let’s drink and be merry, holiday season is coming and it brings with it Black Friday Go Fast Specials

 

[02gtnh]

I'm wondering how much that 1% impacts their production costs. I mean you can put multiple cars on the same dyno right after each other and not be in 1% of each other. I'm also rather sure they are not putting very engine on the dyno. That's basically the difference of 1* timing. Not saying they cant be CLOSE TO 1% but I feel like that's pretty dang tight with how many sensors and all are involved.

I believe Fords are based off engine dyno, so being more accurate. We are seeing chassis dynos, and there are many variables that can effect numbers.:cheers:

Sponsored