2018 Mustang Automatic Dyno at JDM Engineering

NoVaGT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2016
Posts
4,447
Reaction score
2,929
Location
Northern Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2019 PP1 GT Kona
Engine 1 produces 460 HP, like advertised.

Engine 2 produces 485 HP, over advertised.

Engine 1's owner instantly files a lawsuit because Engine 2's owner paid the same price yet got 25 more HP. Ford now has to defend that in court.
No, it doesn't work that way.

As long as the engine produces at least what Ford advertises, there can be no legal action. Engine 1's owner could not file suit, on the grounds that Engine 2's owner got more HP. It wouldn't work in court.

Look at it another way;

You can't buy medium latte, and then sue because the Coffee Dude with the man bun gave someone else a free latte for whatever reason.





Advertisement

 

w3rkn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Posts
3,071
Reaction score
744
Location
Detroit
Vehicle(s)
bmw 135is(sold)
To the "underrated" believers crowd..explain this to me.

Why would Ford produce some engines that produce exactly the amount of power they say..(right about 460 HP) but *also* produce some engines that crank out 485-490 HP?

Warranty work and legal defense relies on repeatable results. Consistency in repair and support dictates that certain components always perform at the same level within reason. Also think of lawsuits..

You take two randomly sampled engines from 2018 Mustang GT's..pull them out, put them on a test dyno in full SAE trim (full exhaust, intake and accessory drives, etc).

Engine 1 produces 460 HP, like advertised.

Engine 2 produces 485 HP, over advertised.

Engine 1's owner instantly files a lawsuit because Engine 2's owner paid the same price yet got 25 more HP. Ford now has to defend that in court.

That's why SAE certifications exist and are important.

I am not even sure of your mental capacity, if you think that^ scenario matters.

Owner #1 got what he paid for.
Owner #2 got what he paid for.

Owner #1 didn't buy Owner#2's car... so, his personal "feelings" don't matter.
 

TomcatDriver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2017
Posts
1,162
Reaction score
469
Location
Mojave Desert
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT350 Magnetic w/black stripes
Because no one is saying that is whats happening except people that dont understand math.

Based on my own observations of all the dynos so far THIS is what I PERSONALLY find the most likely event.
SAE allows 1% variance.
465-1% is 460(the advertised number)
465+1% is 470 (closer to what most people are getting when you factor in the proper drivetrain loss of 10-12%)

No one has posted a reliable number hinting that the engine is making over 470 without taking into account the older weather/sea level, ect.

All dynos have been mostly in the 413.5-423.5 range which is in line with the 10-12% loss estimate for manual and auto.
Has Ford specifically stated that it produces 460 HP SAE J1349 certified?

I looked through the website and it just has * Specifications subject to change without notice, and 93 octane fuel used for the test, bla bla bla. If they don't say J1349, then the whole 1% argument is moot.

If they advertise J1349, then they should be posting the following -

All reported or advertised test data bearing the SAE J1349 notation shall include a minimum of the following parameter measurements and calculations at each test point:

Measurements
Engine Speed (may be obtained from engine controller)
Observed Brake Torque
Friction Torque
Air/Fuel Ratio
Spark Advance / Ignition Timing (may be obtained from the engine controller)
Ambient Temperature and Pressure
Inlet Air Temperature and Pressure
Inlet Air Water Vapor Pressure
Intake Manifold Air Temperature and Pressure (may be obtained from engine controller)
Temperature of Fuel at Fuel Flow Meter
Fuel Rail Temperature and Pressure
Engine Coolant Inlet and Outlet Temperature (water cooled engines only)
Oil Sump Temperature and Oil Gallery Pressure
Exhaust Gas Temperature at the manifold outlet (Left & Right)
Exhaust Pressure at the manifold outlet (Left & Right)
Smoke (optional—CI engines only)

Calculations
Corrected Torque (nearest whole number)
Observed BMEP
Corrected BMEP
Observed Brake Power
Corrected Brake Power (nearest whole number)
SAE J1349 Correction Factor (reported to four significant digits)
Mass Air flow (May be measured directly or calculated from fuel flow and A/F Ratio measurements)
Volumetric Fuel Flow
Mass Fuel Flow
Brake Specific Fuel Consumption

Boosted Engine Parameters
Boost Pressure
Intercooler Inlet and Outlet Air Temperature and Pressure
Compressor Inlet and Outlet Temperature and Pressure
Turbine Inlet and Outlet Temperature and Pressure
Charge Air Cooler Efficiency

Engine Controller Parameters (If Available)
Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) or Total Mass Airflow (as applicable)
Spark Advance/Ignition Timing
Injection timing (Diesel)
Desired/Commanded Air/Fuel Ratio
 

UAmach1

Bullitt Hopefull
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Posts
1,760
Reaction score
543
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
Ford/INFINITI
Has Ford specifically stated that it produces 460 HP SAE J1349 certified?

I looked through the website and it just has * Specifications subject to change without notice, and 93 octane fuel used for the test, bla bla bla. If they don't say J1349, then the whole 1% argument is moot.

If they advertise J1349, then they should be posting the following -

All reported or advertised test data bearing the SAE J1349 notation shall include a minimum of the following parameter measurements and calculations at each test point:

Measurements
Engine Speed (may be obtained from engine controller)
Observed Brake Torque
Friction Torque
Air/Fuel Ratio
Spark Advance / Ignition Timing (may be obtained from the engine controller)
Ambient Temperature and Pressure
Inlet Air Temperature and Pressure
Inlet Air Water Vapor Pressure
Intake Manifold Air Temperature and Pressure (may be obtained from engine controller)
Temperature of Fuel at Fuel Flow Meter
Fuel Rail Temperature and Pressure
Engine Coolant Inlet and Outlet Temperature (water cooled engines only)
Oil Sump Temperature and Oil Gallery Pressure
Exhaust Gas Temperature at the manifold outlet (Left & Right)
Exhaust Pressure at the manifold outlet (Left & Right)
Smoke (optional—CI engines only)

Calculations
Corrected Torque (nearest whole number)
Observed BMEP
Corrected BMEP
Observed Brake Power
Corrected Brake Power (nearest whole number)
SAE J1349 Correction Factor (reported to four significant digits)
Mass Air flow (May be measured directly or calculated from fuel flow and A/F Ratio measurements)
Volumetric Fuel Flow
Mass Fuel Flow
Brake Specific Fuel Consumption

Boosted Engine Parameters
Boost Pressure
Intercooler Inlet and Outlet Air Temperature and Pressure
Compressor Inlet and Outlet Temperature and Pressure
Turbine Inlet and Outlet Temperature and Pressure
Charge Air Cooler Efficiency

Engine Controller Parameters (If Available)
Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) or Total Mass Airflow (as applicable)
Spark Advance/Ignition Timing
Injection timing (Diesel)
Desired/Commanded Air/Fuel Ratio

Screenshot from their site.
Capture.PNG
 

sigintel

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2015
Posts
1,837
Reaction score
856
Location
Republic of Texas
Vehicle(s)
2018 GT
Because no one is saying that is whats happening except people that dont understand math.
Based on my own observations of all the dynos so far THIS is what I PERSONALLY find the most likely event.
SAE allows 1% variance.
465-1% is 460(the advertised number)
465+1% is 470 (closer to what most people are getting when you factor in the proper drivetrain loss of 10-12%)
No one has posted a reliable number hinting that the engine is making over 470 without taking into account the older weather/sea level, ect.
All dynos have been mostly in the 413.5-423.5 range which is in line with the 10-12% loss estimate for manual and auto.
Screenshot from their site.
attachment.png
467-482 93 oct on Fords dyno prior to January 2017.
Likely a couple more hp during dev after Jan 2017.
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1692739&highlight=Ford#post1692739

...:ninja: and there there will be a diff cooler on a non 5.2L S550...:bolt:
Figure out where the Ford dynos are, elevation, humidity, fuels used, DA range for Fall 2016 and work it backwards with those numbers?
Then assume some improvement prior to production?
Assume maybe 91,91E15, 93, 93E15?
The 460 rating really just looks dead nuts honest allowing for some production variables.
 

Laztug

Wanna run dyno slips bro?
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Posts
1,075
Reaction score
233
Location
COTUS
Vehicle(s)
Calling out OKC #1 spot after axle back install.
Are you callling me out, don’t forget I have the unicorn :lol:
Get the right wheels on the unicorn, and lets see what it does against a bolt on auto.:clap2:
 

UAmach1

Bullitt Hopefull
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Posts
1,760
Reaction score
543
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
Ford/INFINITI
Speaking of engine specs, why does it say 302 Cu. in. When it is actually a 307 now? Ford get your shit together.
BOSS 307 doesnt sound as cool, or retro.
 

flaps

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Posts
226
Reaction score
80
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
2019 WRX
1%

So its either:
8% loss
470HP engine, which is out of SAE spec
Or they advertise on the lowside of the SAE rating(465-1%) and this car is just on the upper 1%(465+1%)

Another option is the rating is on 87oct, and 93oct allows more timing???
They haven't put it up yet it usually takes a little while.

http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/data/
 

TomcatDriver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2017
Posts
1,162
Reaction score
469
Location
Mojave Desert
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT350 Magnetic w/black stripes
They must not show all years/models. Searching the table, there is no entry for the 2015-2017 5.0L Mustang. Only shows the 2015 2.3L Ecboost 4-cylinder.
It is voluntary. There are a lot of engines not on that list. From the SAE website

Manufacturers who advertise their engine power and torque ratings as Certified to SAE J1349® or SAE J1995® shall follow this procedure. Certification of engine power and torque to SAE J1349® or SAE J1995® is voluntary, however, this power certification process is mandatory for those advertising power ratings as "Certified to SAE J1349®".

So as I read that if it does not specifically say "Certified to SAE J1349®" then it probably isn't and all the discussion of +/- 1% is moot. There is a difference between stating SAE net HP and stating "certified J1349".
 

Zeke.Malvo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Posts
93
Reaction score
22
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
1969 Mach1
BOSS 307 doesnt sound as cool, or retro.
Chevy did the same thing with their LS7 when it was a 428 instead of the 427 they advertised it as.
 

Advertisement





 
200 - Redline360 - 2


Advertisement
Top