2015-17 Mustang GT Ford Performance Power Packs

[GrabberBlue]

I just noticed a yahoo article talking about the power packs.

Enjoy!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/talked-ford-36k-495-hp-173000862.html

They pretty much confirmed that Ford will release a special edition with FRPP parts. Mach 1?

Sponsored

 

[[email protected]]

They pretty much confirmed that Ford will release a special edition with FRPP parts. Mach 1?

This is an arms race after all ;)

 

[Chad11491]

This is an arms race after all ;)

what would be great is if the midcycle refresh got the trickledown 350 parts and was around 465-475 hp to leave them room to push in the future. with maybe the PP getting the 350's magride or something like that.

 

[angermgmt14]

For those who are really interested in these kits, I am currently in talks about a possible group buy. Waiting for more info as far as pricing and how many buyers are needed. I will keep you updated.

 

[GrabberBlue]

For those who are really interested in these kits, I am currently in talks about a possible group buy. Waiting for more info as far as pricing and how many buyers are needed. I will keep you updated.

$375-$400 shipped for PP1 would be great!

 

[SK GT]

For those who are really interested in these kits, I am currently in talks about a possible group buy. Waiting for more info as far as pricing and how many buyers are needed. I will keep you updated.

Interested in the PP2

 

[MagneticMan]

Interested in the PP2

me too!

 

[Blk2015GT]

What I'd like to know is why Ford felt it necessary to use a 87mm TB with the Stage 2. Why can the PMAS magically get these numbers folks are advocating here with the stock TB and Ford can't with the intake it supplies or some other intake it designs with increased flow capability. Yes, I know that the PMAS flows more air. But if an 87mm TB is installed, allowing more air in from whatever it is attached to for an intake, why do I not see people installing an 87mm TB, slapping that up to a PMAS, and getting a tune for more or less $900 and taking the cake (in theory)? Makes me wonder how effective any CAI is without a tune. And if the dyno numbers provided by CAIs are after the ECU adjusts to the common increase in air flow. I remember a test with a previous car that showed that after like 50 miles a CAI did nothing without a tune because the computer adjusted to bring the car back to its nominal mapping. I don't know if the Mustang does this same thing but seems all dynos are done like right after the CAI is installed... maybe I missed some that aren't.

So much mystery behind these Ford tunes for little reason, haha. They had to have dyno'd the thing to test it. So show the results.

Well PMAS is a bit different, they're giving you a new mass air sensor not using stock. Their thread explains it, it is hyper-technical and way too long to get into here, offtopic at that.

Essentially from what I gather from all of the info, the stock TB is not the restriction. It is like taking a 1/2" straw and blowing through it and then a 1". The straw isn't the restriction at a certain point and going bigger doesnt have any effect; your lung capacity is the restriction at that point. The stock TB is that 1/2" straw; going bigger isn't doing a whole lot for the numbers. That's my understanding of their findings. And unless you're getting to superchargers or turbos that literally suck air, or a heavily modded engine, a TB isnt getting you huge gains on a very mildly modded car- especially not just a tune/CAI.

Why does Ford offer it? Because they can? It's likely their way to hook to the 350 CAI to the 5.0 motor without a weird coupler or something not user friendly or OEM looking.

The PMAS dyno sheets speak for themselves, I posted a user's a few pages back in this thread.

Ford so far has stated hypothetical crank numbers; not even at the wheels so... throwing stones at PMAS makes no sense. They proved their numbers over and over and over. Ford's are still untested in the real world or at the wheels.

These gains under the curves are pretty insane for a $400 no-tune CAI (this is a member's dyno not the company's)

 

[D.Brown]

I'd be in on the PP2 group buy.

 

[wildcatgoal]

[MENTION=13194]Blk2015GT[/MENTION] Not so much throwing stones at PMAS. I'm one of those a-holes that wants to know why it works and why it was done the way it was done, not just the results.

I have seen dyno charts showing HP increases even with a PVC pipe air intake and cone filter from Autozone (not on our Mustangs, but still an engine run by a computer). Those increases eventually disappeared toward the original curve norm of the car without a tune after the computer must have adjusted to get the vehicle back into its prescribed ranges. Only thing that remained was some crisper throttle response (which, BTW, is the only benefit I've ever ascertained from a panel filter upgrade - like the one I have). My point, however terribly articulated, was that I want to see dyno tunes done at least 50-100 miles after the intake is installed and the owner has driven the car about it's daily routine for a while and the tune done comparing a brand new OEM panel filter vs. the what is a brand new cone filter on the new CAI. I am more than happy to have my experience (which, I will admit is a grain compared to many others... but I still value it) be proven wrong. But I am not convinced, in a computer-controlled vehicle, that simply allowing it access to more air will increase power permanently. That would imply that Ford has tuned the vehicle to be able to significantly benefit from more air significantly outside of its OEM physical limitations without any tune adjustment. I can see this having an effect in higher altitudes, but not in hot muggy GA. Again, I'm not proclaiming to be an expert. I'm a life long skeptic of bolt-on claims in computer-controlled cars when there's no tune to change that computer's parameters. These computers are biased towards keeping the car at a prescribed norm. I think that PMAS may be the first real-deal no-tune CAI I've come across because it includes a different sensor... which therefore makes it possible for me to believe it is actually doing something and not just "improving laminar air flow" and "removing restriction" - restriction that somehow still allowed the production of 435 CHP haha.

 

[mbeale68]

The yahoo article mentioned previously indicates that the rev limiter is at 7500 for all three power packs, but earlier information on this forum contradicts this. Could someone who has the stage 1 package let us know where the rev limiter is?

 

[D.Brown]

The yahoo article mentioned previously indicates that the rev limiter is at 7500 for all three power packs, but earlier information on this forum contradicts this. Could someone who has the stage 1 package let us know where the rev limiter is?

The increased rev limit is due to the GT350 manifold. You should not rev your car to 7500 with just the PP1 and PP2.

 

[mbeale68]

The yahoo article mentioned previously indicates that the rev limiter is at 7500 for all three power packs, but earlier information on this forum contradicts this. Could someone who has the stage 1 package let us know where the rev limiter is?

Being able to rev past 7K would be very useful for autocrossing, because it reduces the amount of shifting required and avoids bouncing off the rev limiter.

So could someone who has stage 1 please verify what the rev limit is?

 

[Gibbo205]

[MENTION=13194]Blk2015GT[/MENTION] Not so much throwing stones at PMAS. I'm one of those a-holes that wants to know why it works and why it was done the way it was done, not just the results.

I have seen dyno charts showing HP increases even with a PVC pipe air intake and cone filter from Autozone (not on our Mustangs, but still an engine run by a computer). Those increases eventually disappeared toward the original curve norm of the car without a tune after the computer must have adjusted to get the vehicle back into its prescribed ranges. Only thing that remained was some crisper throttle response (which, BTW, is the only benefit I've ever ascertained from a panel filter upgrade - like the one I have). My point, however terribly articulated, was that I want to see dyno tunes done at least 50-100 miles after the intake is installed and the owner has driven the car about it's daily routine for a while and the tune done comparing a brand new OEM panel filter vs. the what is a brand new cone filter on the new CAI. I am more than happy to have my experience (which, I will admit is a grain compared to many others... but I still value it) be proven wrong. But I am not convinced, in a computer-controlled vehicle, that simply allowing it access to more air will increase power permanently. That would imply that Ford has tuned the vehicle to be able to significantly benefit from more air significantly outside of its OEM physical limitations without any tune adjustment. I can see this having an effect in higher altitudes, but not in hot muggy GA. Again, I'm not proclaiming to be an expert. I'm a life long skeptic of bolt-on claims in computer-controlled cars when there's no tune to change that computer's parameters. These computers are biased towards keeping the car at a prescribed norm. I think that PMAS may be the first real-deal no-tune CAI I've come across because it includes a different sensor... which therefore makes it possible for me to believe it is actually doing something and not just "improving laminar air flow" and "removing restriction" - restriction that somehow still allowed the production of 435 CHP haha.

I will be able to answer this for you soon, so far I have done following all on same dyno and 200 miles after making the modification. It is also a maha dyno so the corrected figure takes into account temperature changes, tyre pressure changes etc.

Stock tune with panel filter: 415 / 390
SCT 93 tune with panel filter: 435 / 420
JDM 93 tune with airaid MIT & panel filter: 440 / 410

All runs were made 200 or more miles after the parts were fitted, the car only ever runs on Shell Vpower as well.

My next run shall be JDM 93 tune with PMAS "no tune" and will be made after the PMAS has being on the car for 200 or more miles. I shall get the dyno operator to overlay the JDM with stock intake with the new JDM PMAS run.

Give me a couple of weeks!

 

[mikeyjobu]

How is revving to 7500 more dangerous without the manifold -- versus say not getting a billet oil pump gear upgrade -- also, where is the previous info regarding lower limits on packs 1 and 2? Did I miss them? I haven't seen any notifications that the folks who have pack one have hit the rev limit yet?

Sponsored