Sponsored

2015-17 Mustang GT Ford Performance Power Packs

Jeff LWR17GT

New Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
Location
Lakewood Ranch, FL
First Name
Jeff
Vehicle(s)
2017 Mustang GT Base Auto 3.15
I installed Power Pack Stage 2 on my 2017 GT auto a few weeks ago and so far it definitely sounds better, is more responsive, and feels faster. I took it to the drag strip to see what the improvement was and I ran a best of 12.79 bone stock a few months ago and then a 12.80 with PP2 installed (10 degrees warmer outside). Oddly I ran a 1.98 60' with the PP2 on the 12.80 run, which was a tenth faster than the 60' time on the 12.79 stock run, but I ended up losing that tenth by the end of the 1/4 with the PP2. Maybe it was just the air temp and humidity difference slowing me down.

Either way, for real world driving I'm more than sold on PP2 as a great upgrade for the money. I ended up installing it myself and forgoing the warranty benefit when the dealers near me wanted between $600 - $700 for labor.
Sponsored

 

Rocketman

Keep it stupid, stupid
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Threads
10
Messages
287
Reaction score
196
Location
Texas
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT PPPPPPP
After looking at this chart I'm glad I went with the PP2 over the PP3. More power overall where you need it. Plus at $600 shipped vs. $1800 it's a hell of a bargain.
Am I not reading this right? Or does the LS (not the LT?) make more power than the PP3 all the way until it's redline where the PP3 keeps going?
 

millhouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
1,216
Location
Simpsonville SC
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Am I not reading this right? Or does the LS (not the LT?) make more power than the PP3 all the way until it's redline where the PP3 keeps going?
Right, but that is not what determines acceleration...it's area under the curve. Look at my crude shifted image and you'll see the PP3 has a shitload more area under the curve when shifted to compare red-line to red-line. You just need to be in a higher RPM in the Coyote.
 

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Am I not reading this right? Or does the LS (not the LT?) make more power than the PP3 all the way until it's redline where the PP3 keeps going?
LS 6.2 in the 2016-2018 Camaro makes an average of 323 HP from 2500 RPM to 6500 RPM. A bandwidth of 4,000 RPM. The stock 5.0 makes an average of 313 HP from 3,000 to 7,000, also a bandwidth of 4,000 RPM.

PP2 ups the 5.0 to an average of slightly over 327 over a similar rev range (it's red line is technically now 7,150 not 7,000 so it real average is a tad higher).

PP3 ups the 5.0 to an average of 342 HP from 3,500 RPM to 7,500 RPM. Again, a bandwidth of 4,000 RPM. That higher rev range keeps you in a meatier part of the power band. It's more usable. However, in 1st gear, because you typically can't launch higher than 3,000 RPM, PP3's average power from 3,000 to 7,500 is the same as PP2's from 3,000 to 7,000.

Then there's gear amplification. If you use lower gearing to amplify the power (doing the same average work, but compressing the time frame at the expense of distance over which the work is done), things become more complicated.

Let's just say that PP2 brings the GT's actual crank power output on par with the SS over a 4,000 RPM bandwidth. PP3 brings that average up another 20 HP over PP2. Gearing however gives us a bigger impact, the GT's shorter gearing increases the effects of power adders more than SS's gearing. But the SS's gearing is set up to maximize power usage more effectively than the GT's (partly due to it's compressed power band).

Launching at 3,000 RPM, a stock PP GT 6M can put down an average of 348 WHP while the SS can put down an average of 371 WHP. 10 HP average is about 0.1 seconds quicker, so right there is 0.2 seconds. The GT is about 100 lbs heavier on average (unless you run lightweight wheels, a FP exhaust and option it lightly, then the difference in weight is within 25lbs). Another 0.1 right there.

So there's 0.3 seconds between weight and power down limits due to gearing. Add in IRS compliance and there's another 0.1 seconds and that's why the fastest drivers stock to stock typically are .4 quicker in the SS, both in the review magazines and on the fasts lists for mg6 and camo6g forums.

PP2 will give you back at LEAST 0.2, but possibly more because of gearing. Braski ran 0.6 quicker after PP2 and drag radials (12.08). IRS rework took off another 0.2 ish.

Best he could do with stock engine and IRS with just DR's was 12.7 at his particular track and DA. Stock on stock tires was 13.0. PP2 and DR's 12.08. PP2, DR's and IRS overhaul 11.86. He thinks the car had a bit more in it yet as well, but we'll stick with 11.86 which is a really good time for a mild power adder, DR's and some suspension work on a manual.

PP3 in a drag will net you another 6 hp average over PP2. So PP3 for drag isn't going to add much because of gearing. However on a track or auto X...the story changes quite a bit. Lots of 2nd and 3rd in the upper RPM range and PP3 will walk all over PP2 and the LS 6.2.

PP2 is your best bang for buck hands down. Power PP3 does actually give you the most and really taps into the potential already built in from the previous generation Boss 302 (valve lift, valve spring rates 300 lbs, rods, crank and heads are all carry overs, but it does have new pistons). PP2 for drag / cost / street. PP3 for Auto X, HDPE or if you want to squeeze every last HP out of it. But remember gearing multiplies the effects of power. So the short gearing may net you more than a 10th over PP2 on the 1/4 mile as well. Your staying the lower gears longer and with a slightly higher average power, so the effects will be amplified, which is why the gains from PP2 are so substantial even though the average power is only about 15~20 over stock.
 

Sponsored

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Right, but that is not what determines acceleration...it's area under the curve. Look at my crude shifted image and you'll see the PP3 has a shitload more area under the curve when shifted to compare red-line to red-line. You just need to be in a higher RPM in the Coyote.
This is what your referring to?:
42211527171_318743b5fa_z.jpg


BTW these were generated in excel from actual dynos. So that is whp, not crank. Note that the GT's whp is in 4th gear, not 5th so the readings are about 10 to 15 hp lower than normal. The SS's dyno was in 4th gear also, but 4th in the SS is 1:1 so that is the ideal gear with the least drive train loss. Any 1:1 gear will always produce the highest numbers.

But gearing plays a big role as well. If your not using the area under the curve effectively it doesn't matter. GM did an awesome job with the SS and selecting gearing that maximizes power down. PP2 essentially makes your GT match the latest gen SS in straight line performance even though the gearing is making use of a slightly lower average (366 whp average for a PP2 GT vs. an SS at 371). PP3 exceeds both PP2 and stock SS. However the SS runs a really tall gearing, it could be much faster on the 1/4 mile, but it would loose it's track focused gearing. It's a good balance of line performance and track performance, which is where the PP3 shines, that extra rev range, while it won't buy you much over PP2 on the 1/4 mile due to gearing, gives you a lot more on the track. It's a good balance of both drag and track performance for an all around fun and fast car.
 

millhouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
1,216
Location
Simpsonville SC
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red GT PP
This is what your referring to?:
42211527171_318743b5fa_z.jpg


BTW these were generated in excel from actual dynos. So that is whp, not crank. Note that the GT's whp is in 4th gear, not 5th so the readings are about 10 to 15 hp lower than normal. The SS's dyno was in 4th gear also, but 4th in the SS is 1:1 so that is the ideal gear with the least drive train loss. Any 1:1 gear will always produce the highest numbers.

But gearing plays a big role as well. If your not using the area under the curve effectively it doesn't matter. GM did an awesome job with the SS and selecting gearing that maximizes power down. PP2 essentially makes your GT match the latest gen SS in straight line performance even though the gearing is making use of a slightly lower average (366 whp average for a PP2 GT vs. an SS at 371). PP3 exceeds both PP2 and stock SS. However the SS runs a really tall gearing, it could be much faster on the 1/4 mile, but it would loose it's track focused gearing. It's a good balance of line performance and track performance, which is where the PP3 shines, that extra rev range, while it won't buy you much over PP2 on the 1/4 mile due to gearing, gives you a lot more on the track. It's a good balance of both drag and track performance for an all around fun and fast car.

Nope, my crude edit...

powerband_shiftjpg.jpg


Not perfect, but shows why you cant compare point to point on dynos...and that it's area under that matters more. All I did was shift the LS curves redline to the coyotes to show what the area looks like when comparing their appropriate power-bands.
 

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Nope, my crude edit...

powerband_shiftjpg.jpg


Not perfect, but shows why you cant compare point to point on dynos...and that it's area under that matters more. All I did was shift the LS curves redline to the coyotes to show what the area looks like when comparing their appropriate power-bands.
Right, but then there is that whole "gearing thing". The SS finishes the 1/4 only using about 500 RPM of bandwidth in 4th gear. So while the LS 6.2 still has more area under the curve compared to a PP2 (but less than PP3), PP2 when combined with gearing makes a bigger difference than one would expect from a modest 20 hp jump.

So the amplification effect works for the 5.0 once you start adding power. You can look at it from two ways, but give you the same picture but from two different angles. Average power over it's useful rev range or total power (area under the curve). More area = higher average, but average is easier for most people to understand which is why I' started using it.

Yes, shifting the graphs paints a clearer picture, but what it's not accurate because those engines are not making that power in those rev ranges...so refrained. Your doing an area to area comparison.
 

millhouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
1,216
Location
Simpsonville SC
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Right, but then there is that whole "gearing thing". The SS finishes the 1/4 only using about 500 RPM of bandwidth in 4th gear. So while the LS 6.2 still has more area under the curve compared to a PP2 (but less than PP3), PP2 when combined with gearing makes a bigger difference than one would expect from a modest 20 hp jump.

So the amplification effect works for the 5.0 once you start adding power. You can look at it from two ways, but give you the same picture but from two different angles. Average power over it's useful rev range or total power (area under the curve). More area = higher average, but average is easier for most people to understand which is why I' started using it.

Yes, shifting the graphs paints a clearer picture, but what it's not accurate because those engines are not making that power in those rev ranges...so refrained. Your doing an area to area comparison.
Fully understand gearing (which is why the A10 is so powerful for the MY18). Was only trying show why you can’t directly compare dynos without understating area under the curve. :thumbsup:
 

Sponsored

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Fully understand gearing (which is why the A10 is so powerful for the MY18). Was only trying show why you can’t directly compare dynos without understating area under the curve. :thumbsup:
Understood. :D. PP3 makes more power than the LS 6.2, PP2 and stock 5.0. PP2 is darn close to the LS 6.2 and has a nearly identical average power over a 4,000 RPM bandwidth (gearing not factored in to how its used). A stock 5.0 make the same total power as the LS 6.2 because of it's higher rev range, but it's not all practically usable. While I don't have a Gen 3 5.0 dyno graph, I'd wager due to the power and RPM bump, it's making more than a PP2 5.0 or LS 6.2. Probably close to PP3 power output as it comes from the factory, gotta love that combination of DI and VVT.

The 6.2 has no where to go. you can't go DOHC / VVT on a larger displacement engine because it will become physically massive. Ford already had trouble squeezing in the much smaller 5.0, imagine it's internal displacement growing by 1.2L and the up-sizing in valves, intake manifolds etc. to match the displacement...it would be quite large and certainly would fit in any existing chassis GM has!

But I digress on the LS 6.2, it's a great engine, but has it's limits. The 5.0 was designed to rev out because it's literally a re-packaged Road Runner 5.0 (code name for the special edition 5.0 used in the previous gen 2013-2014 Boss 302).

The Boss 302 ran a 12.3 1/4 mile on MT. The Boss 302 weighed 3622 lbs. About 150~175 lbs lighter than S550 depending on optioning. So the 302 would run about a 12.4~12.5 at the same weight, no other changes. That variant of the 5.0 made a peak HP of 444 and reved out to 7400 RPM. PP3 makes about 472 peak HP which more than compensates for the added weight. In this case I can quote peak numbers with some level of confidence because it's the same family of engines with the same rev ranges, so the differences carry through fairly consistently.

Braski ran a 12.08 on a first gen PP GT 6M with just a PP2 and DR's. He could only manage a 12.7 with DR's and no power adders. After an IRS re-work on top of the PP2 and DR's, he ran an 11.86. PP3 would have netted even better results! But even a stock GT can pick up .2~.3 with just tires and IRS, which really hold it back in stock form over the previous gen and it's competitors. Fastest 8A SS on the fast list ran a 11.9 WITH DR's, otherwise bone stock. Fastest manual a 12.099 and it was run by McMark26 who also ran the fastest bone stock PP GT time on this forum at 12.56 just for reference, both in the negative -600 to -800 DA range. Sure faster times could be had on all of these cars with even better DA, but the DA was fairly close on McMark26's runs, so same driver, same track, similar DA's, so it's a little more apples to apples how how fast a good driver could manage them.

If you want your Gen 2 5.0 to match the LS 6.2's power band (hence match it in straight line power), go with PP2. You should be neck and neck in straight line performance. Track is another story because handling becomes as big if not bigger factor. If you want to EXCEED the LS 6.2's power band as the Gen 2 5.0 was set up to from the factory, go PP3:
41539389784_b42ed784d5_z.jpg


There was absolutely NO reason for Ford to use the Boss 302 valve lift, stiffer 300 lb valve springs, connecting rods and crank unless they intended for rev it out at some point with power packs because it wasn't necessary. That's also why I expect the gains for the Gen 3 to be much smaller. The Gen 2 5.0 is unique. It's rotating assembly was meant for high RPM operation, but it's intake manifold is barely any different from the Gen 1 standard 5.0's. The extra 15 HP and 10 ft-lbs over the 2013-2014 is mostly due to slightly increased flow. Theres a lot of hidden potential in that engine that I do not believe is in the Gen 1 or 3's (in that both are more tapped out from the factory).

Remember though, BOTH of the PP2 and 3 dyno graphs were in 4th gear, so in reality they read a bit lower by about 10 to 15 HP on average. Which explains why Braski's manual PP GT with just his few mods ran faster than the fastest stock SS A8 with only DR"s on it (yes they actually listed an otherwise stock SS A8 on the bone stock fast list even though the post said they used DR"s which bought them 0.07 seconds over street tires, which makes sense because of the very tall gearing, the SS is already giving them everything it has without breaking traction) despite it being a little heavier and making the same power (then again gearing also affects power usage as well).
 
Last edited:

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I should note that I don't believe PP3 will be any faster on the 1/4 mile than PP2 unless you gear down to 4.10's...why? We can have some idea of what the car will trap at based on power. PP2's are trapping around 115~116. PP3 makes about 10~15 HP more peak, so trap should be about 117~118 all other things being equal.

Your not going to rev it out in 4th gear with PP3. So it's not making full use of the power band in 4th, where with PP3, at a trap speed of 115~116, you just about tapped out 4th gear at 6900 RPM. PP2 has a rev limit of 7150.

PP3 on the other hand, keeps making power and peaks at 7300 RPM, red lines at 7,000...so that's why I think unless your going to Auto X or Track the car, PP2 makes more sense. Both will run about the same 1/4 mile, but PP2 is cheaper by far and less involved to do in the first place and nets you about the same 1/4 mile unless you change the final drive to 4.10's. The average applied power below were done over the RPM ranges of each gear based on the rev range of each power pack. 1st gear starts all assume a 3,000 RPM launch, which is common on street tires.

Applied Power for Mustang GT (1/4 Mile)
Average Applied Power (1st Gear): 313
Average Applied Power (2nd Gear): 353
Average Applied Power (3rd Gear): 358
Average Applied Power (4rd Gear): 368
Final Average Applied Power: 348

Applied Power for Mustang GT (1/4 Mile) PP2
Average Applied Power (1st Gear): 327
Average Applied Power (2nd Gear): 377
Average Applied Power (3rd Gear): 382
Average Applied Power (4rd Gear): 388
Final Average Applied Power: 368

Applied Power for Mustang GT (1/4 Mile) PP3
Average Applied Power (1st Gear): 326
Average Applied Power (2nd Gear): 381
Average Applied Power (3rd Gear): 381
Average Applied Power (4rd Gear): 389
Final Average Applied Power: 369

So a cheap and fast setup that's good all around would be PP2 on a PP GT 6M with a little IRS work and some decent tires, it would out run a stock Gen 6 SS on the 1/4 mile and with some suspension tweaking match it on the track all while keeping the attributes that we DO LIKE. Such as much better livability (compared to the SS, the trunk in the GT is massive...or could it just be that the trunk in the SS is uselessly small...?), bigger interior and in most people's opinion better looks. Down side is you need to spend about 2k to 3k to get there, but it's nothing radical by any means.

Hopefully this will help everyone decide on what to do. For me, it will come down to what I"m doing with the car once I'm ready to buy a Power Pack. PP2 sure is appealing from a daily / cost / 1/4 mile standpoint. But PP3 squeezes the most out of it and would also be awesome for auto x! If high speed roll racing is your think PP3 will be your go to, that top end will just keep pulling and pulling and pulling.
 
Last edited:

Hotlaprc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
118
Reaction score
21
Location
Santee
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT
I am so on the fence . I have a 2017 PP MANUAL 3:73 gears. Do a little street, a little SDCCA and a little back and forth to work. Was set on PP3 and don’t mind reving it out but after reading through all your posts multiple times ..... based on what you posted has me thinking PP2 ...... hahaha but my question is from a roll race if I am at 4K rpm and up the PP3 would dominate correct?
 

NvrFinished

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Threads
22
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
504
Location
So Cal
Vehicle(s)
2016 DIB GTPP
I am so on the fence ��. I have a 2017 PP MANUAL 3:73 gears. Do a little street, a little SDCCA and a little back and forth to work. Was set on PP3 and don’t mind reving it out but after reading through all your posts multiple times ..... based on what you posted has me thinking PP2 ...... hahaha but my question is from a roll race if I am at 4K rpm and up the PP3 would dominate correct?
Yes, but I believe it comes down to this for most people; If you are serious about the 1/4 mile at the track or you do a lot of HPDE, then the PP3 is the obvious choice. However, if you are a part time player of either or you enjoy most of your driving on the street, then the PP2 is really the best bang for your buck and enjoyment.
 

LucaGT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Threads
20
Messages
115
Reaction score
10
Location
San Diego
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT Premium
I just came back from the shop, PP2 installed. First impression: I love it. It feels like it should had been from the factory. After 3k rpm I can tell the difference, pulls harder with the engine happier to rev, the exhaust feels a bit different too, more raspy after 4k rpm.

We will see if the first impressions will be confirmed, right now super happy with the money spent on PP2. Sure a tune with E85 could have been even better, but for the price and the piece of mind of having the warranty I definetely would do it again and recommend to who is on the fence.
Sponsored

 
 




Top