Has the Coyote lost significant low RPM power through the generations?

[young at heart]

It was most likely to beat the gas guzzler tax. Any reduction in 0 to 60 was an unintended benefit.

I have an auto and if I use factory shift points the car feels like an underpowered turd but gets 18 MPG in town. If I set the shift points to make the car drive properly this drops to 12 - 13 range.

I suppose I need to get out more but how does one go about setting the shift points on the A10?

Sponsored

 

[Balr14]

Didn't Mustang have a solid rear axle with gen 1 coyote engine? That might account for difference in traction and feel.

 

[K4fxd]

I suppose I need to get out more but how does one go about setting the shift points on the A10?

I use tuning software and tune my own car.

 

[young at heart]

I use tuning software and tune my own car.

Gotcha, thanks!

 

[Pistol_91]

I use tuning software and tune my own car.

I don't have a 10 speed. Or have drag mode or whatever some of these fancy 5.0s have. But wouldn't drag mode or sport mode change the shift points to be more aggressive? Or are they all the same?

 

[K4fxd]

wouldn't drag mode or sport mode change the shift points to be more aggressive?

Yes, it will also bang shift too. Not my cup of tea for a cruise to the grocery store.

 

[Oakley]

everything is a trade off. if you want torque everywhere you won't have a high end pulling like a freight train as it nears redline. i got the coyote because i wanted something fun. when it hits vtec, or whatever ford calls it, and is screaming at full trot there ain't much like it in the world.

the gen 3 coyote is pretty much perfect IMO.

 

[ice445]

FRP tune adds a ton down low, so that's a lot of it. Gearing is also a factor, although the Mach 1 has more favorable gearing than an equivalent GT would.

My car feels completely different with the FP tune. You can effortlessly climb hills in 6th gear at 80mph with barely any throttle lol

 

[Aks550]

Starting in 2018, Ford messed up the manual transmission ratios (my opinion).

Anyway, another my opinion... if you want a manual transmission Mustang that's fun to drive on the street, buy a 2017 or earlier car.

This is one reason why I bought a used 2017 this last go around rather than buying a newer GT or Mach 1. I think the Mach front end styling is beautiful and I love the handling pack rim design, but the gearing was a no for me. It's similar to the GT350 gearing. Works good for the road course, but for driving on the street I don't want first gear to rev out to ~50 mph. It makes the engine seem really crappy.

Why even have 6 gears if you really only need first and second? .. end rant.

I would be on full retarded mode to go a few step backward to settle for 2017 vs newer 5.0 with direct injection according to your advice! Enjoy your backwardness...

 

[accel]

I would be on full retarded mode to go a few step backward to settle for 2017 vs newer 5.0 with direct injection according to your advice! Enjoy your backwardness...

engine alone does not make the car great

 

[Torque123]

This transmission thing explains a lot. I would also say the car did not feel like it had 3.73, it felt taller than my 3.31. If I ordered a new 6m I’d want 3.73 or aftermarket lower yet

hopefully frpp is going to have a tune for 23 24

 

[ice445]

This transmission thing explains a lot. I would also say the car did not feel like it had 3.73, it felt taller than my 3.31. If I ordered a new 6m I’d want 3.73 or aftermarket lower yet

hopefully frpp is going to have a tune for 23 24

Sadly most likely not, the new emissions requirements made it basically impossible to certify the kit anymore.

 

[fast306stang]

This transmission thing explains a lot. I would also say the car did not feel like it had 3.73, it felt taller than my 3.31. If I ordered a new 6m I’d want 3.73 or aftermarket lower yet

hopefully frpp is going to have a tune for 23 24

Did you drive the Mach in Sport mode? Normal mode does feel sluggish to me. Sport woke the car up a lot. Track is sluggish also for in-town driving.

 

[kz]

This transmission thing explains a lot. I would also say the car did not feel like it had 3.73, it felt taller than my 3.31. If I ordered a new 6m I’d want 3.73 or aftermarket lower yet

hopefully frpp is going to have a tune for 23 24

But you understand that rear end ratio you are talking about it is all relative - depending on - you got it - transmission ratios - it's piece of the puzzle - two gears you have engaged in the transmission in a current gear, ring/pinion pair in the diff and drive axle tire size determine "the feel" you get.

If felt taller than 3.31 in a previous car because it probably was (don't have time to look up gear ration now and do the math).

 

[Angrey]

Great discussion and honestly, it has a lot of implications.

First, it's largely all of the above. Curiously, over the years Ford (and obviously other OE's) have altered the final drive multiplication as we've seen the transmissions from Tremec drastically change ratios.

Whether this was to extend fuel economy or comply with some bureaucratic EPA rule, the pairing of the short format trans and the rear end has changed. In the old days, you had lower multiplication in the lower gear ratios paired with higher numerical values in the rear. In fact, there's a discussion right now about a Magnum XL swap and the challenges of it not pairing up quite right without a corresponding ring/pinion swap. For the TR6060 and the TR3160 and the MT82, for some reason (can discuss here) the ratios are quite different than the old pairings we were used to (in the older days, a 3.73 car was about the lowest ratio you'd see on a modified mustang). 3.90, 4.09, 4.30, 4.56, etc were common swaps. The Magnum comes in 2.66 and 2.97 1st gear variants, which is quite a bit lower than the 3.66 and 3.25 or the MT and 3160.

I once had a discussion with FRPP about rear ratios (supplied by US Gear, which was owned by Axletech) and he mentioned that the 4.09/4.10 was as high as they could go and still be CARB certified.

Then there's the issue of total torque multiplication and traction. Why have mustangs become the punch line of overtorque loss of control and crashes and crowds? Because over the years the power train (stock) has come to overwhelm the capabilities of the chassis.

Imagine and compare and contrast a car that you can mash your foot and never get it to spin or oversteer. Much safer than a car that has spin the tires in virtually any situation for the first couple of gears.

Then there's engine tuning and TC associated with those. My last custom tune, my car was able to make almost 900 ft-lbs of torque at peak. Paired with a 1st gear total multiplication of 10.89, that meant the axles were transmitting almost 10,000 ft-lbs of torque to the wheels in 1st gear at full sauce. To say it's completely useless would be an understatement. It didn't just make 1st gear useless, it made it downright unsafe and scary. Turning left at a light where I'm first and want to get going quickly was STRESSFUL ("am I going to spin out in this intersection)?

I recently had it retuned through MOTEC. The current torque curve is a table top flat 750-ft lbs from about 3k all the way to 7500 rpm. The tuner said yeah, we can make more torque early by shoving in more timing, but why? With the proper traction control strategy in place, the computer and the motor are never going to allow you to make that much anyway. It'll simply be theoretical. It's going to constantly be choking the throttle and timing all the way to almost 160 mph before you have the lower multiplication and the traction to see full effort from the motor.

So the question I pose is, would you want more low end torque? Given the limitations of most mustang setups, street conditions, etc, most are going to be overtorqued in the first several gears anyway.

Whether for fuel economy or even nanny component protection (some of the torque tables are actually there to prevent damage to drive train components), Ford has elected to limit lower end torque and honestly, I don't think it's enough. A car that spins is actually slower than one setup to optimize grip and torque in each gear.

IN summary, between the EPA pressures and just sheer motor output growing beyond the limitations of the tire and chassis setup, I think the coyote platform can and does limit torque production down low, should probably do more. But with custom tuning you can manipulate and change that to your liking.

When someone asks me how much power the car makes now, I honestly reply, it depends. It only makes as much as the tires/road can handle without me ending up against a poll or in a ditch.

Sponsored