GT350 1/4 mile

[02gtnh]

As a few others have stated, your assumption or statement is wrong.

The 01 Cobras were under rated afte the '99 horsepower debacle. My 01 cobra put down 286rwhp bone stock, down to the factory paper filter with 600 miles. This was a 320hp rated motor with an IRS. My 03 Cobra put down 380rwhp bone stock. Those motors were both under rated.

The '15's are dynoing higher than the '14's. Been proven over and over. They should, they make more power.

Depends on the Dyno. Many 01 Cobras were dynoed at 270whp. Here is a quote from Car and Driver.

The technicians at APE strapped our gray coupe onto the dyno rolls and recorded 272 horsepower at the rear wheels. If you correct for driveline losses (about 15 percent), the rear-wheel dyno number correlates to 320 crankshaft horsepower, exactly as advertised. We then put the white convertible Cobra onto the dyno, and although we expected to see some typical production variation, we did not. It too made 272 rear-wheel horsepower. So you can take it from us: At least two 2001 Cobras produced the advertised 320 horsepower.

Sponsored

 

[nametoshowothers]

Nobody has. That's because it simply hasn't been said by anyone reputable. Dave Pericak said that the R would make a little more because of the resonators being removed, but they weren't going to change the rating on the R versus the regular. That's it, and that's all that's been said as far as a power difference.

I remember this being said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nataphen]

It's not 23lbs. The MT82 is dry weight with no fluid. The tr6060 is wet with fluids. How much oil in the MT82?

Sorry, I misread that. My mistake. The MT82 takes three quarts. It's still lighter, just not 23lbs. lighter. Probably more like 15-18lbs.

 

[Todd15Fastback]

Depends on the Dyno. Many 01 Cobras were dynoed at 270whp. Here is a quote from Car and Driver.

The technicians at APE strapped our gray coupe onto the dyno rolls and recorded 272 horsepower at the rear wheels. If you correct for driveline losses (about 15 percent), the rear-wheel dyno number correlates to 320 crankshaft horsepower, exactly as advertised. We then put the white convertible Cobra onto the dyno, and although we expected to see some typical production variation, we did not. It too made 272 rear-wheel horsepower. So you can take it from us: At least two 2001 Cobras produced the advertised 320 horsepower.

I owned mine for 4 years. Was around a ton of these cars at different events, etc. Lots of them put down 280+. Ford was going to ensure they made more power and not have another '99 Cobra debacle.

 

[02gtnh]

I owned mine for 4 years. Was around a ton of these cars at different events, etc. Lots of them put down 280+. Ford was going to ensure they made more power and not have another '99 Cobra debacle.

I don't disagree that you got those numbers, but many also got lower. Dynos are not the most accurate tool, but more for tuning.:cheers:

 

[mustang_guy]

I dynoed higher then he did on a dyno type known for lower numbers then dyno jet. It was in 85 degree weather and 1700 da. His dyno sounded stingy compared to most mustang dyno or dynamic dynos ive seen. Termi were most definitely underrated. Anyone that says other wise really has no clue. Not trying to be an ass here. But this is common knowledge.

 

[Fox9350]

The 99 cobra debacle was perhaps the darkest days of the sn-95. So embarrassing. Luckily the terminators saved the day for that era as they moved on and the rest since then is history.

 

[Sasuketr]

False. The termi was underrated. My 04 did 401whp on a dyno dynamic. The trinity gt500s were under too. My 14 gt500 put down 607whp on a dyno dynamic. Most of the dynos ive seen for the s550 have been 375-395whp. Last time i checked thats more then the s197s.

Interesting. It has to do with the force induction then. Uncontrolled boost parameters or something must be causing that. Back to NA engines, any underrated engines we have seen so far?

 

[Sasuketr]

As a few others have stated, your assumption or statement is wrong.

The 01 Cobras were under rated afte the '99 horsepower debacle. My 01 cobra put down 286rwhp bone stock, down to the factory paper filter with 600 miles. This was a 320hp rated motor with an IRS. My 03 Cobra put down 380rwhp bone stock. Those motors were both under rated.

The '15's are dynoing higher than the '14's. Been proven over and over. They should, they make more power.

Since day one most of the dyno results i have seen on this forum shows similar whp dyno's to the s197 gt's. Infact they say solid rear axle puts more efficinet whp than the irs. I see nothing to be proven so far. Cobra's are not NA engines, and i didnt include them in my statement. Boosted car's will always have an advantage.

 

[mustang_guy]

You didnt have too mention them. You made a vague statement saying ford never under rates their engines, which is untrue. Had you said ford never under rates their NA engines that would have been more specific. I can think of one Na ford engine that were under rated off the top of my head. The 428 cobra jet was 75hp under rated.

For giggles the last ford gt we got was 80hp under rated roughly. Pretty sure none the reasons those super charged cars were under rated was because of boost parameters.

 

[DrumReaper]

I heard the 12/13 Boss 302s were underrated. PP001 may be able to enlighten us on this as he knows those cars better than anyone.

 

[Nataphen]

Most Bosses I've seen make about 400whp stock, which puts them at 444 with 10% drive train loss.

 

[Erik427]

You didnt have too mention them. You made a vague statement saying ford never under rates their engines, which is untrue. Had you said ford never under rates their NA engines that would have been more specific. I can think of one Na ford engine that were under rated off the top of my head. The 428 cobra jet was 75hp under rated.

For giggles the last ford gt we got was 80hp under rated roughly. Pretty sure none the reasons those super charged cars were under rated was because of boost parameters.

Boss 302/Boss351 are two motors that are underrated. '93 Cobra is another. How about the 351 Lightning? '95 Cobra?

 

[f e r]

Boss 302/Boss351 are two motors that are underrated. '93 Cobra is another. How about the 351 Lightning? '95 Cobra?

Y2K Cobra R's were underrated too. They put down between 366-375rwhp/377-385rwtq. Advertised crank specs were 385rwhp/385rwtq.

 

[Erik427]

Y2K Cobra R's were underrated too. They put down between 366-375rwhp/377-385rwtq. Advertised crank specs were 385rwhp/385rwtq.

Yep, I think that I've made my point about Ford underrating their motors from time to time. The epa has very little to do with that unless the brand is claiming more hp than there really is.

Sponsored