5.0 coyote low end torque...or lack thereof?

[Chargersfan81]

It's not that the engine is lacking as it performs quite well but it "feels" short on low end grunt for 400tq. The autos seem to mask it better.

Go test drive a 16 Camaro SS or scatpack and you'll clearly see what I'm talking about...

In all honesty, I felt the torque was okay for the 3.31 gears but the 3.73 gears felt really good. The shorter gears 3.73 really gets into the powerband.

I test drove a Scat before I got the GT and it has a lot of low end torque but the car just felt to heavy. The SS M6 has massive torque and felt faster than the Scat tho (aluminum frame, light weight helps alot).

I like them all but as I said, if I had to do it over I would get a GT with the PP instead of my auto. Screw the mpg, if I wanted to save mph I would have gotten a Prius. The OP has a PP so I'm not sure what is lacking :shrug:

Sponsored

 

[robwlf]

i have np with it being how it is .. i have a manual with 3:55 gears . so far i did a x pipe and axle backs .. didnt change anything much as i didnt expect it to, but im use to having cars that are in that 3k range then let her rip .. i had 2 turbo cars . id rather have it like it is .. then when the power band kicks in she moves ... thats the reason i love these motors

 

[craigsix]

mine seemed like a torque monster compared to my gt350 intake i have now.

 

[Starman]

Man, 10+ years ago if I heard someone complain about low end on a 400+ torque car I would laugh myself to death... But I guess v8's have finally caught up with 4 bangers (mid-90's) and V6's (mid 2000's) in creating serious power.

This is a rev'ing engine... rev it up!

The thing I like about this car is that it feels like my 95 Honda that had 160 hp in a DOHC 1.6 liter engine which was unheard of back then, but it has to wind up. These new DOHC V8's are now finally pretty much the same with 4 more cylinders and also now almost producing 100hp/liter. I usually keep my Mustang at 3K RPM's when driving to keep it in power, just like those old Hondas.

 

[msweet]

My 16 GT A6 is a totally different animal but I think a lot of the feeling of "lack of torque" is the drive by wire throttle. I'm going to order a Pedalmax kit and see if that helps since I'm not tuning it under warranty.

I installed the Pedalmax on the weekend and it really picked up the feeling down low. There is a lot of throttle lag without it, classic drive by wire. I know it's not a tune, but I don't want to void warranty for a while, and the Pedalmax has exceeded my expectations.

 

[Chargersfan81]

mine seemed like a torque monster compared to my gt350 intake i have now.

I'm not following you, what do you mean? Did you lose torque with the GT350 IM?

 

[09jsw]

So, your 404 number with tuned by the dyno shop? Or did Lund do a remote dynotune? I assume you these numbers same day, same dyno?

What was the difference under the curve between the 2 at 2500-4,000 rpm?

Lund specifically told me they don't touch the tivct with headers as in their testing between stock manifold and headers, playing with tivct did not net any difference.

my honest input on that topic is you are being fed some BS. I have to look for the Lund/REV Auto graph. Yes they were on same day within min of each other because rev auto was tuning me. My Lund tune was an email tune.

Lund also said they don't tune the g350 tb but hey that's none of my business. Ford tunes for it on their new frpp tunes and a few others do as well.
I will say that I was one of the first s550s with the Lund tune and there were significant torque issues that I was put off with. my dyno was proof of that. 376tq.
I posted my current graph a few pages back I think

 

[09jsw]

09jsw, what headers and catback you running? So far I've only got a Borla S type cat back but looking for headers and CAI before I go dyno tune. I've been seriously considering the GT350 IM also.

I'm running ARH Full exhaust with H pipe. 1-7/8 size.
I'm very satisfied with my current setup btw. good luck.

 

[15GTBEN]

In all honesty, I felt the torque was okay for the 3.31 gears but the 3.73 gears felt really good. The shorter gears 3.73 really gets into the powerband.

I test drove a Scat before I got the GT and it has a lot of low end torque but the car just felt to heavy. The SS M6 has massive torque and felt faster than the Scat tho (aluminum frame, light weight helps alot).

I like them all but as I said, if I had to do it over I would get a GT with the PP instead of my auto. Screw the mpg, if I wanted to save mph I would have gotten a Prius. The OP has a PP so I'm not sure what is lacking :shrug:

This is all subjective of course.

Ive driven all 3 as well and would have bought scatpack if I could've afforded it. I loved the performance of the maro SS but not the car and still out of my price range. The auto feels every bit as quick as the PP (especially with my 3.55 gear) to me but in turns, that's a different story.

The PP is nice for sure but if you're more into straight line performance (like me)I think you're fine with your auto imo.

 

[Lonmon]

my honest input on that topic is you are being fed some BS. I have to look for the Lund/REV Auto graph. Yes they were on same day within min of each other because rev auto was tuning me. My Lund tune was an email tune.

Lund also said they don't tune the g350 tb but hey that's none of my business. Ford tunes for it on their new frpp tunes and a few others do as well.
I will say that I was one of the first s550s with the Lund tune and there were significant torque issues that I was put off with. my dyno was proof of that. 376tq.
I posted my current graph a few pages back I think

Just thought I would point out we have very similar numbers. We are both in the same area (Md) with similar set ups. You have long tubes (worth about 10-15whp over cat deletes) and the 350tb (not sure if its really worth anything), and I have e85 (worth about 10-15whp). I have a LUND FF TUNE. I have been thinking about giving a dyno tune from REV Auto a try but just not sure if its going to be worth the money and time. I still need to dyno with my revised tune with more timing down low. If my numbers don't improve, I think I will give them a call and see how much an e85 dyno tune will run for comparison.

 

[SpeedLu]

This is all subjective of course.

Ive driven all 3 as well and would have bought scatpack if I could've afforded it. I loved the performance of the maro SS but not the car and still out of my price range. The auto feels every bit as quick as the PP (especially with my 3.55 gear) to me but in turns, that's a different story.

The PP is nice for sure but if you're more into straight line performance (like me)I think you're fine with your auto imo.

For sure, the auto likes to downshift way too early in turns. Solution: keep it in "S" and use the paddle shifters.

 

[2015 Silver GT]

This is all subjective of course.

Ive driven all 3 as well and would have bought scatpack if I could've afforded it.

I traded in my GT for a Scat Pack. Best decision I ever made. As heavy as the Scat is it just comes to life compared to the GT when you mash the gas.

 

[15GTBEN]

I traded in my GT for a Scat Pack. Best decision I ever made. As heavy as the Scat is it just comes to life compared to the GT when you mash the gas.

Yeah unless something even better comes out for the money, I'll probably trade for a scatpack in a couple years when my wife's car is paid off. The 5.0 is fun enough for now as a daily commuter

 

[768mph]

I have owned a couple and driven several coyote stangs since 2010 (manual/auto with all of the different rear gear options). My 2015 auto with 3.55 gears has felt the least lacking down low. I believe the 3.55 combined with the 6r80 gearing has more gear in 1st gear than the mt82/3.73. No 16' Camaro SS or scatpack but not lacking either. The auto seems to mask this issue better. You want more, put your foot down to downshift into the power band.

Stock mt82 with 3.31's feels like a 4 banger down low to me. Tuning makes the car quicker over all but doesn't do much for the low end soft character of the coyote.

This.

I had a 09 G8 GT FBO-tune, sold for a 14 Track pack. I hated the loss of low end torque...the only thing that would even come close is after CAI, AED tune, LU47, O/R X and E85 is where was "acceptable" to me.
Sold the Mustang for a 14 Chevy SS- FBO- tune; now sold for a 16 Mustang A6 with 3.55s... I wasnt even going to pull the trigger due to the memory of lack of torque until I drove it. Ive only put Airaid MIT and reso delete to hold me over. No tune yet... and Im happy (for now).
Not quite as comparable to the SS as far as low end torque, but an extreme difference from my previous 14 Track pack.

Im impressed with the Auto with 3.55s.

 

[15GTBEN]

This.

I had a 09 G8 GT FBO-tune, sold for a 14 Track pack. I hated the loss of low end torque...the only thing that would even come close is after CAI, AED tune, LU47, O/R X and E85 is where was "acceptable" to me.
Sold the Mustang for a 14 Chevy SS- FBO- tune; now sold for a 16 Mustang A6 with 3.55s... I wasnt even going to pull the trigger due to the memory of lack of torque until I drove it. Ive only put Airaid MIT and reso delete to hold me over. No tune yet... and Im happy (for now).
Not quite as comparable to the SS as far as low end torque, but an extreme difference from my previous 14 Track pack.

Im impressed with the Auto with 3.55s.

I agree, the auto GT with 3.55's isn't bad and the best so far out the the other GT's I've owned (including my tuned one).

Sponsored