Search results

This. This is what I want to know, plus wasn't a 1le beating boss 302s around the track? I'm starting to get sceptical if the 15 pp can beat a 14 1le around the track. :headbonk:

I was thinking more of around a track, the handling reviews seem uninspiring?

So from what I'm seeing the gtpp won't beat a 1le? Disappointing.

Very very cool jarstang. With that being said, I've seen the same numbers from a TP 14 auto bone stock. I'm still curious about that. The torque looks pretty good but the horses aren't there especially for a manual. Maybe they got a lazy motor though. Great gains from that exhaust if true.

After looking around I'm seeing about the same numbers from 13-14s, I'm hoping like someone said above this was before pcm relearn and there is 5-10 more horses there.

Nice sound. How does that wheel horsepower and torque compare to 2014s?

QFT, I know of F-150 owners who jumped ship because of the 3.5 from their Rams and GMCs. They all want a 2015 F-150 too. The EPA ratings are lower than I expected. New testing probably played a part. I want to compare against new models in 15 before I put too much weight on them. No pun intended.

My 94 mustang owners manual has instructions for installing the hard top. I have seen one 95? Cobra with one, it was pretty slick, the weight would suck though

No no no, yeah the 93 tune will make more. 91 tune NOT CHANGING THE TUNE will make more power at 91 than the SAME 91 tune with 93 octane in it. And I'm assuming like last year, the max timing and fuel maps will be set for 91 octane, so you will not gain power from 93 octane stock Edit, actually...

Incorrect but the premise is close. Of course this is all else equal, not talking computer changes with octane like we have now. The argument was between 91 and 93 and like I said if it is tuned for 91 octane max power, so no more computer changes any higher, and it is not pulling anything out...

Yes refer to my edit. I think the max output was set for 91 octane last time, so no change from 91 to 93.

Unless the tune changes from 91 to 93, none. All other things equal, lower octane makes more horsepower. It is less stable. Thats way you need more stable or higher octane fuel for higher compression ratio motors, so it doesn't combust before it is supposed to (predetonation) Edit: They have...

It might not. Mach 1s power was under rated, look at the exact same engine from 2 years before (2001 cobra) it was rated at 320 HP. They are almost identical. And the dynos show it.

That quote lol. Power torque gearing and power to weight ratio wins races. I have a 92 Thunderbird super coupe with 315 ft. Lbs of torque and 210 horsepower. Roots blower and that torque curve was super flat and high all the way through the power band. Would get killed by cars with less torque...

Happened to 2010 owners. Boosted by 15 that year, then almost 100 the next. Sometimes it pays not to be an early adopter.

Not in the habit sure, but 2010 got a 15 HP increase, followed by about a 100 the following year in 2011 so....

Splitting hairs for sure, the torque won't matter as much after first gear, and it will be very close. I just wanted more of a domination vs very close to the last gen. Especially with the 2016 camaro around the corner.

Around a track, not in a straight line.

I wonder if anyone got a lap time

F-22 > F-35. Even the pilots say the F-35 loses in air superiority. I know it is supposed to fill multiple rolls, but I feel like it is a step backward. That being said, I still like the 35s, and any F-35 mustang I would love to own!