Sponsored

MotoIQ TESTED: Ford Power Packs 1-3

BillyJRacing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Threads
8
Messages
226
Reaction score
786
Location
West Palm
Vehicle(s)
Mustang
Hey guys,

This is my first post on here and I thought you might be interested in the back-to-back test I conducted for MotoIQ, bench marking the Ford Mustang GT Power Packs 1-3 on the same dyno, on the same day.

"Ford Performance offers three different 50-state legal “Power Packs” for the 2015-2017 Mustang GT that increases horsepower without affecting the factory warranty*. We back-to-back test Power Packs 1, 2, & 3 on a stock Mustang GT to see if Ford’s claim of 13-37hp increases are legitimate. We then analyze the GT350 intake manifold’s effect on the torque curve to see if it really has less low-RPM torque than stock in favor of high-RPM power. Finally, we determine which packages would be best for street and track use through in-depth torque and gear ratio analysis."

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/ID/4650/TESTED-Ford-Mustang-GT-Power-Packs-1-3.aspx

i-fsvMmzK.jpg


In the article:

-Baseline Dyno
-K&N Air Filter Dyno
-Ford Power Pack 1 Dyno & Install
-Ford Power Pack 2 Dyno & Install
-Ford Power Pack 3 Dyno & Install
-Detailed Analysis of the GT350 Intake Manifold
-Thrust Analysis of PP3 vs PP2
-Bonus Dynos comparing PP3 to the GT350R and other cars
-Road Test Review and Overview


Thanks for reading!

-Billy
Sponsored

 

V8EATR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2015
Threads
34
Messages
338
Reaction score
94
Location
MIDWEST
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT PP
Very good article, well written and lots of good comparisons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A7X

stevnoof1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Threads
12
Messages
108
Reaction score
5
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
mustang
Sorry I don't have the attention span to read that but I would like a video of everything in those 10 pages.
 

Bluemustang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Threads
149
Messages
3,897
Reaction score
2,263
Location
Maryland
First Name
Ryan
Vehicle(s)
2015 Mustang Base GT
Very good article. I am so definitely getting a GT350 manifold now.
 

AlmostFamous

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Threads
15
Messages
575
Reaction score
293
Location
Austin
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Cliff Notes


Power Pack 1
12%20-%20Dyno%20Stock%202016%20Mustang%20GT%20vs%20KN%20vs%20Power%20Pack%201-X2.jpg

After turning the rollers, we were impressed to see a peak-to-peak gain of 11.75whp and 16.46lb-ft of torque over just the K&N air filter. This now puts us as at a 19.12whp & 23.74tq increase over stock, which is 6whp more than Ford’s advertised claims.

The more aggressive calibration tuned for 91+ octane picked up some significant torque in the mid-range and shifted the torque peak from 3,900rpm to 4,300rpm for incredible 30.07whp and 36.74lb-ft of torque maximum gain over stock. It’s interesting to see a prominent torque increase in the 4,000-5,400rpm range which used to be a dip in the car’s stock form. There’s also a nice 5whp and 11lb-ft of torque average increase from a very low rpm below 2,000 to 2,600rpm. Meanwhile, redline was also raised from an actual 6,800rpm stock rev limit to 7,100rpm to improve area under the curve.

For $599, Power Pack 1's 19.12whp increase is one heck of a value at $31 per horsepower which is significantly better than the commonly held rule of thumb that says it will cost $100 per naturally aspirated HP increase. As a (he won’t admit – humble) tuner himself, Ken from Palm Beach Dyno was impressed with the gains from Ford’s calibration and commended them for being able to achieve these numbers and close the gap to what most of the aftermarket is able to do, while remaining 50-state legal and under the factory warranty.
Power Pack 2
22%20-%20Dyno%20Stock%202016%20Mustang%20GT%20vs%20Power%20Pack%202-X2.jpg

Once again, we were pleasantly surprised to see such an impressive peak to peak gain of 26.07whp and 30.78lb/ft of torque over stock, which is 5whp more than Ford’s claims. At 5,300rpm there is a maximum gain of 42.26whp and 41.86lb-ft.

Compared to Power Pack 1, PP2 has a peak to peak increase of 6.95whp and 6.74lb-ft of torque. While PP2 gives a modest increase of 3-4lb-ft of torque down low from 2,250-4,000rpm; as soon as you cross 4,000rpm, the larger intake tube and throttle body create a consistent 6whp increase all the way to its slightly higher 7,150rpm redline.

On the dyno, the GT350 “Cold Air Intake” is significantly louder, with a high pitch induction wail above 5,000rpm. Needless to say, the two large resonance chambers on the stock intake system definitely does something.
For $969, this 26.07whp increase puts the Power Pack 2 at $37 per HP, continuing to beat the $100/HP standard for NA power increases and making this one heck of a value for a daily driver. Ken from PBD added that the improved flow from the larger throttle body and ‘cold air intake’ enabled Ford to add more fuel and timing to essentially shift the entire torque curve up. However, the power drop-off above 6,500rpm remains, due to the high rpm flow restriction of the stock intake manifold.
Power Pack 3

38%20-%20Dyno%20Stock%202016%20Mustang%20GT%20vs%20Power%20Pack%203-X2.jpg

At first glance, the PP3 is virtually identical to the stock curve up to 4,000rpm where the PP3 starts to notice a significant gain before annihilating the stock curve above 5,750rpm. PP3 results in a 37.3whp and 6.83lb-ft of torque increase over stock, which is right on Ford’s HP claims while being close to 2lb-ft of torque more with a redline of 7,450rpm.

A common internet misconception is that adding the GT350 Intake Manifold to a stock 5.0L Coyote will make it have WORSE low-end torque than the stock. The dyno above shows this to be false. From idle to 3,300rpm, Power Pack 3 actually makes more torque than stock with a maximum increase of 11.78lb-ft at 2,700rpm. There is a 6lb-ft loss between 3,300-4,000rpm but above that, the PP3 blows the stock car out of the water.

It’s interesting to see the GT350 manifold’s shorter runners shifted the HP peak from 6,500rpm to 7,150rpm while the torque peak had an even greater shift from 3,900rpm to 5,000rpm. The general trend is a flatter torque curve due to the increased bottom-end, flattened out mid-range, and a greatly improved top-end.
Power Pack 1 vs 2 vs 3
stang%20GT%20Power%20Pack%203%20vs%20Power%20Pack%202%20vs%20Power%20Pack%201%20vs%20Baseline-X2.jpg

Power Pack 1 - ( M-9603-M8 ) : $599
Claim: 13HP & 16lb-ft gains over stock
Measured: 19.12whp & 23.74lb-ft = +6hp & 7lb-ft more than advertised
$/HP = $31.33 per HP

Power Pack 2 - (M-9603-M8A ) : $969
Claim: 21hp & 24lb-ft peak gains over stock
Measured: 26.07whp & 30.78lb-ft = +5hp & 6lb-ft more than advertised
$/HP = $37.18 per HP

Power Pack 3 - (M-9452-M8 ) : $2,469
Claim: 37hp & 5lb-ft peak gains over stock
Measured: 37.3whp & 6.83lb-ft = +1.83lb-ft more than advertised
$/HP = $65.49 per HP
 

Sponsored

Labradog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Threads
12
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
890
Location
Santa Barbara, CA
First Name
Jeff
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT Guard Metallic
Thanks for the comprehensive write up Billy. Did you notice any significant increase in intake/cylinder head temps when using the GT350 intake vs the stock air box during normal street driving?
 

texasboy21

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Threads
14
Messages
482
Reaction score
157
Location
Houston
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT PP. 2005.5 Audi A4, 1983 Silverado
I dont understand the popularity of the 350 manifold. It makes less power than a tune + filter/intake nearly across the entire rev range. \

Also, interesting findings between the PP1 and PP2 dynos.. 6hp and 4 ft lbs. difference between a tune + filter in stock airbox, and tune + open element intake.
 
Last edited:

Ecoboosted

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Threads
39
Messages
1,690
Reaction score
716
Location
A state in the South East of the US
Vehicle(s)
18' Mustang GT, 19' Road Glide
Good read. Like the author said for those that do DD and don't stay near red line the PP2 is a good choice and I agree.
 

Freedom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Threads
28
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
317
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
'16 GT, '22 Tesla Model 3, '22 F-150 Lightning
Thanks for the nice write up!
 

Eritas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
935
Reaction score
404
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Wow, this is GOLD! Thanks for the detailed analysis. I'm definitely going with the GT350 manifold now!

I dont understand the popularity of the 350 manifold. It makes less power than a tune + filter/intake nearly across the entire rev range. \

Also, interesting findings between the PP1 and PP2 dynos.. 6hp and 4 ft lbs. difference between a tune + filter in stock airbox, and tune + open element intake.
Did you read the whole thing? He said that PP2 would be better for a DD and guys like you, while PP3 changes how the motor feels, makes the power delivery more like my old M3, and makes it faster than PP2.
 

Sponsored

EFI

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 19, 2015
Threads
62
Messages
4,792
Reaction score
4,051
Location
Masshole central
Vehicle(s)
5.Br0
Nicely written as always by the MotoIQ guys, and very informative.

I'm personally not convinced the PP3 is faster, if any, than the PP2 unless you are revving it to the moon well over 7500rpm. To me, the increase in power from 6500-7500 is pretty much offset by an equal loss is power from 5500-6500 when the upshift occurs. So unless you're able to keep it above 6500rpm the entire time (which is hard to do since a 7500rpm shift drops you to 5200rpm in 2-3 for example) you're going to experience some loss in power which I'm not sure is made up up top.
 

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
Nicely written as always by the MotoIQ guys, and very informative.

I'm personally not convinced the PP3 is faster, if any, than the PP2 unless you are revving it to the moon well over 7500rpm. To me, the increase in power from 6500-7500 is pretty much offset by an equal loss is power from 5500-6500 when the upshift occurs. So unless you're able to keep it above 6500rpm the entire time (which is hard to do since a 7500rpm shift drops you to 5200rpm in 2-3 for example) you're going to experience some loss in power which I'm not sure is made up up top.
The PP3 absolutely would be faster. The area under the curve gained from the extra RPM and HP more than make up for the differences in the lower power-band.

Like anything else, if you never rev to red-line....the PP2 "could" be faster, but let's not get into an argument about part throttle or short shifting acceleration.
 

ForYourOwnGood

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Threads
41
Messages
1,397
Reaction score
622
Location
Central MA
Vehicle(s)
2017 Grabber Blue 5.0
The PP3 absolutely would be faster. The area under the curve gained from the extra RPM and HP more than make up for the differences in the lower power-band.

Like anything else, if you never rev to red-line....the PP2 "could" be faster, but let's not get into an argument about part throttle or short shifting acceleration.
The PP2 makes more power until 6800 and more torque, period. This means more under the curve, or the opposite of what you just said. You're transposing "peak" with "under the curve" here. PP3 makes significantly less under the curve almost across the board. Pretty universally the area under the curve is defined as the non-race condition, most people usually mean before the HP and torque cross at 5252RPM so low end and midrange.

Seems like the PP3 would work well on the track where going that extra few hundred RPM can be a real benefit, especially for PP cars with 3.73's. Not sure the cost is worth it over say a custom tune and a CJ though unless you really really want that warranty. Interesting to see that it makes the car feel significantly different to drive though.
 

UAmach1

Bullitt Hopefull
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Threads
58
Messages
1,757
Reaction score
546
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
Ford/INFINITI
Really good work. Thank you!

It seems that, if LMR's dynos are accurate, that a 2018 GT is about the same WHP as a PP3 , and 20TQ more than the PP2.

This will be really useful for people that want to compare the two cars.
 

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
The PP2 makes more power until 6800 and more torque, period. This means more under the curve, or the opposite of what you just said. You're transposing "peak" with "under the curve" here. PP3 makes significantly less under the curve almost across the board.

Seems like the PP3 would work well on the track where going that extra few hundred RPM can be a real benefit, especially for PP cars with 3.73's. Not sure the cost is worth it over say a custom tune and a CJ though unless you really really want that warranty. Interesting to see that it makes the car feel significantly different to drive though.
Total area under the curve doesn’t matter in regards to full on acceleration. The only thing that matters here (for full on acceleration) is the area under the curve from red-line to where the next gear engages, where PP3 is clearly superior.
Sponsored

 
 




Top