Ford power pack 3

[2016GTM6]

Any 1/4 times on the Ford Power Pack 3 for a manual transmission. Normally I mod my cars from the day I get them but Im getting rid of my heads cam 2015 Camaro due to warranty headaches and I would like to keep the warranty on my Mustang and just wondering what some of the 1/4 mile times have been compared to stock with this setup

Sponsored

 

[TheLion]

Any 1/4 times on the Ford Power Pack 3 for a manual transmission. Normally I mod my cars from the day I get them but Im getting rid of my heads cam 2015 Camaro due to warranty headaches and I would like to keep the warranty on my Mustang and just wondering what some of the 1/4 mile times have been compared to stock with this setup

Take a look at what Braski did with Project Midnight over in the projects section. He ran an 11.86 on a PP GT 6M with just a PP2, complete IRS re-work, lowering springs and DR's. PP2 is only worth about 21 hp or roughly 2/10th's of a second. So most of that is coming from suspension and tires, which a stock GT is woefully out gunned by the Camaro SS and Charger R/T Scat Packs.

PP2 makes about 6~8% more total power over the rev range than stock. PP3 makes about 13~14% more total power over the rev range. I have not yet integrated the power curve of a PP2 dyno so I'm only estimating it's total power gains, but I did do it for the bone stock 5.0, the LS 6.2 in the Camaro / Vett and a PP3 5.0 from MotoIQ's dyno graphs (they used the same car, on the same day to get all their data, very comparable).

PP3 absolutely makes more power, it has a more linear as the torque curve which is very flat, making it easier to get the power down, which is the biggest issue the first get S550's have. The stock IRS is far to compliant and has very substantial oscillations (aka wheel hop). PP2 is packing the power in a shorter but peakier torque curve = not good for going fast on a car that's already geared super low. PP2 may actually feel faster than a PP3, peaky torque curves give you a sensation of more power because your peak acceleration is greater, but the total acceleration is less. It's that sudden burst of acceleration that people perceive as the faster car.

Case in point, take two engines for example, one engine makes 150 hp from 2000 rpm to 4000 rpm and 200 hp from 4000 rpm to 6000 rpm. Another engine makes a constant 175 hp from 2000 RPM to 6000 RPM. Which engine is making more power? Well if you just quote peak numbers, the engine making two different power levels has a higher peak, so you'd think it makes more power (aka the LS 6.2 that makes 455 hp vs. the 5.0 that makes 435 hp))....yet both engines make the exact same total power over their rev range. Power is work being done, period. Total power (how much makes from RPM A to RPM B) is the total work it can do and that equals acceleration. It is the SUM of the area UNDER the power curve that matters and of course how well can you get that power to the ground (which is where the GT lags behind both it's competitors, it's IRS just isn't tuned very well for power down as it's set up more as a grand tourer with a smooth and quiet ride).

You can compress the work into a lower rev range by using big displacement blocks like the LS or Hemi 6.4 or you can stretch it out over a longer rev range like the 5.0 and many European V8's and inline 6's.

However the 5.0 has an ace up its' sleeve that the LS doesn't. The LS can't rev beyond 6500 RPM, its fixed valve train (limits your optimal flow to a narrower RPM range) and valve spring rates (valve float at high RPM), tension and compression forces on the rods and bearings don't permit a higher rev range without a re-build of the rotating assembly.

The 5.0 on the other hand uses the Road Runner valve springs, valve lift, cams, rods and crank. Headroom for another 500 of extended operation was built right into the rotating assembly. Not only that, but it makes more peak power in that rev range, so the total power gain is very substantial with a PP3. So I'd estimate the PP3 to be another 2/10th's quicker than a PP2 car, everything else the same.

Higher rev range means you can make power in lower gears longer = better acceleration. More total power = more work being done = better acceleration. The 5.0 was meant to rev out and Ford built right into the Gen 2 5.0's all the goodies of the Road Runner variant used in the previous Boss 302 that would run 12.3's down to 12.0's bone stock with just 444 HP, 11 HP less than the latest Camaro SS.

But the 1SS runs .3~.4 seconds faster when comped to a GT bone stock to bone stock. MarkMc26 had a GT PP Premium (401 group), best he could do was 12.56, bone stock on stock Pirellie tires.

He recently got an SS LT1 and went over to the camaro6 forum, bone stock he ran a 12.099. So a good solid .4 tenths faster on a car that doesn't make any more power. Audi's are a great example of using the power effectively, so is the latest 2018 GT 10A's. The 10A run's over a half second faster than the 6M GT with the same engine and more weight....0-60 for the first gen S550 GT is typically no faster than 4.3 to 4.4 seconds stock. But the SS runs 4.0 flat and MarkMc26 managed a 3.9 (obviously prepped surfaces help). The GT just can't get off the line due to it's poor suspension tuning. MarkMc26 was the same driver of both cars and topped both fast lists for bone stock 6M's on each forum.

Do an IRS make over and tap into the power that's already there that you can't use because of the suspension and tire setup from the factory. An IRS make over is cheaper than a PP3 and should get you same net results.

PP3 on a stock IRS, your mostly only putting the power down in the back half of the 1/4 mile, at launch your going to be hard pressed to run much faster than stock. Maybe a tad, but not much. You can have all the power int he world but if you can't get it to the ground what's the point?

I've read through a lot of reviews on differential bushings, when combined with an IRS cradle lock out, every one says the car feels like it gains 30~50 hp. Why? Because the IRS is wasting energy by absorbing it into the compliant bushings instead of putting it to the ground. You might be surprised at how much "faster" the car runs and feels if you re-work the suspension, a far safer and less risky modification than even a warrantied power pack. I had differential bushings and IRS lockout in my Ecoboost back when I had that and same thing, the car just felt like it launched far better. The power went down and the car moved instead of this "cushiony lag" that it had stock. The GT has the same feeling but even worse as it's making quite a bit more power but with the same suspension compliance.

Then go for the power pack once you get the suspension working and you've had time to break in an validate your engine is mechanically sound. Weight matters as well. Base weight for SS is 3685 lbs, base weight for a GT is 3705 lbs. But the GT gains a lot more weight due to the heavy PP wheels (38 lbs total just for the wheels!), so some lightweight wheels and an after market exhaust combined will put you back down to base weight or even less (if you already have a base model).

 

[TheLion]

BTW springs and struts also affect wheel hop and power down, another area GM did an excellent job in the Camaro SS vs. the GT PP. The stock PP spring and strut combination is very prone to oscillation and "bouncy". Springs alone with the stock struts reduce that significantly (what I did for a street auto x setup). Springs and struts combined will further improve that.

I'd suggest at least starting out with:
1. IRS Crade Lockout Kit (BMR's CB005 or CB010) adds almost no weight and achieves 90% lockout, more than good enough)
2. Red Poly diff bushings from Steeda, a good street setup that stiffens up the diff quite a bit but has a little compliance to preserve some ride quality)
3. BMR Performance Lowering Springs, their chrome silicon springs have a similar spring rate to stock so they won't over work your PP struts, but they are just a hair stiffer and have a more linear compression curve so they are quite a bit less prone to oscillation)
4. FP Toe Link Spherical Bearings (reducing toe deflection helps reduce wheel hop, especially on power down out of a corner)
5. Anything but the stock Pirellies, they are garbage! My all season Micheline Pilot Sport AS3+'s actually outperform the summer only Pirellies. Just not a good tire, do some burn outs and have fun, they won't last long ;-).

That's a great starting point on a otherwise stock car that should help you get the power down much better. Some sticky DR's will help as well, especially with a manual. All that is worth at least 2 to 3 tenth's with no power adders. The stock suspension is just that bad (from a performance standpoint)!

 

[El_Centenario]

Very good information in this thread! It's true about how the power comes in with the PP3. Feels pretty close to stock in lower rpms and during initial acceleration at the track and then it comes alive in the back half of the track. Have won many races like that, always pass them by before the finish line at about 5-7 mph faster

 

[1BlkS550]

Very good information in this thread! It's true about how the power comes in with the PP3. Feels pretty close to stock in lower rpms and during initial acceleration at the track and then it comes alive in the back half of the track. Have won many races like that, always pass them by before the finish line at about 5-7 mph faster

How do you like the PP3 paired with the 3.73s in the Performance Pack? Im thinking the extra power up top with the PP3 would really compliment 3.73s due to always being in that peak powerband with the 3.73s. I know with my PP, shifting at redline around 7500 rpm, my Rpms drop to around 5000 rpm each shift. Right in the powerband that a 350 manifold shines.
So 3.73s + gt350 manifold > 3.55 + gt350 manifold???

 

[El_Centenario]

I love my new setup! Car pulls really nice up top. Dropping down into 3rd gear at about 65-75 mph puts you right in the power band like you mentioned. I normally shift at about 7500-7800 and car feels fantastic.

How do you like the PP3 paired with the 3.73s in the Performance Pack? Im thinking the extra power up top with the PP3 would really compliment 3.73s due to always being in that peak powerband with the 3.73s. I know with my PP, shifting at redline around 7500 rpm, my Rpms drop to around 5000 rpm each shift. Right in the powerband that a 350 manifold shines.
So 3.73s + gt350 manifold > 3.55 + gt350 manifold???

 

[TheLion]

Next Gear Start RPM PP3
2nd: 4900
3rd: 5100
4th: 5750
5th: 5600

That's for a drag and what RPM you would start the next higher gear revving it out in each gear.

Next Gear Start RPM PP2
2nd: 4700
3rd: 4900
4th: 5500
5th: 5350

Both PP2 and PP3 work well with 3.73 gearing, but PP3 can make the most effective use of it. You could also run slightly lower profile 285/35R19's to keep it a bit higher up in the rev range as well where the bulk of the power is made.

Ford Performance track GT's run 285/35R19 tire sizes, little more cornering capability and slight reduction in un-sprung mass. Pilot Sport 4S tires in that size are 3 lbs lighter per a tire than the stock profile 275/40R19, but no they aren't a true track tire. Would best be used for auto x.

I think PP2 is better suited to auto x and street where PP2 is better suited to actual circuit track and roll racing. That meaty top end is going to pull on any of the current competitors unless they are full bolt on or FI.

The 5.0's design inherently is a high RPM motor. Trying to push power at a lower rev range like an GM LT1 6.2 or Dodge 392 is just not going to work. It has to rev out to make it's power. Just two different ways of getting there. You can either use a big meaty lower RPM pushrod motor with tall gearing or you can use a smaller displacement high reving motor like the 5.0 and gear it lower.

I forget who, it was either motor trend or car and driver that tested the 2018 GT vs. the 2018 SS. In a 1 mile drag race, the 2018 GT beat the 2018 SS by over 4 car lengths 30 times in a row. But the GT's suspension tuning just wasn't up to the task when compared to the SS, which we know Ford doesn't set these cars up like track cars, but GM does with the SS. Two different goals, but it shows that when the 5.0 is at it's full potential, combining it's 7500 RPM rev range, Direct Injection and Variable Valve timing, it makes more usable power than a pushrod design like in the LT1. Both the LT1 and 5.0 are within about 20 lbs of each other weight wise and similar overall size.

The LT1 6.2 is a great engine, but you can't add DOHC to it without increasing it's size and weight substantially. So it is what it is at this point and there's not a lot of head room in either the LT1 or the third generation 5.0 on pump gas. Both are close to being tapped out from the factory without using more exotic modifications like E85, Nitro, Super chargers etc.

The Second generation 5.0 however that is in the 2015-2017 Mustang GT's is set up very conservatively from the factory. There's a huge amount of power left in that generation that's just not being used. The rotating assembly is capable of reliable operation up to 7,500 RPM. The intake manifold wasn't even set up to flow well past 7,100 RPM...the factory rev limit is only 6,800 RPM even though the factory manifold does just fine up to 7,100 RPM...it's a seriously neutered variant of the 5.0 unlike the first and third generation 5.0's which don't have a whole lot of head room left on pump gas.

PP2 taps into the potential with more or less a tune and intake. PP3 swaps out the whole intake manifold and is why PP3 costs 3x as much. The intake manifold alone is about $1k...

 

[mustangGTlegend]

Take a look at what Braski did with Project Midnight over in the projects section. He ran an 11.86 on a PP GT 6M with just a PP2, complete IRS re-work, lowering springs and DR's. PP2 is only worth about 21 hp or roughly 2/10th's of a second. So most of that is coming from suspension and tires, which a stock GT is woefully out gunned by the Camaro SS and Charger R/T Scat Packs.

PP2 makes about 6~8% more total power over the rev range than stock. PP3 makes about 13~14% more total power over the rev range. I have not yet integrated the power curve of a PP2 dyno so I'm only estimating it's total power gains, but I did do it for the bone stock 5.0, the LS 6.2 in the Camaro / Vett and a PP3 5.0 from MotoIQ's dyno graphs (they used the same car, on the same day to get all their data, very comparable).

PP3 absolutely makes more power, it has a more linear as the torque curve which is very flat, making it easier to get the power down, which is the biggest issue the first get S550's have. The stock IRS is far to compliant and has very substantial oscillations (aka wheel hop). PP2 is packing the power in a shorter but peakier torque curve = not good for going fast on a car that's already geared super low. PP2 may actually feel faster than a PP3, peaky torque curves give you a sensation of more power because your peak acceleration is greater, but the total acceleration is less. It's that sudden burst of acceleration that people perceive as the faster car.

Case in point, take two engines for example, one engine makes 150 hp from 2000 rpm to 4000 rpm and 200 hp from 4000 rpm to 6000 rpm. Another engine makes a constant 175 hp from 2000 RPM to 6000 RPM. Which engine is making more power? Well if you just quote peak numbers, the engine making two different power levels has a higher peak, so you'd think it makes more power (aka the LS 6.2 that makes 455 hp vs. the 5.0 that makes 435 hp))....yet both engines make the exact same total power over their rev range. Power is work being done, period. Total power (how much makes from RPM A to RPM B) is the total work it can do and that equals acceleration. It is the SUM of the area UNDER the power curve that matters and of course how well can you get that power to the ground (which is where the GT lags behind both it's competitors, it's IRS just isn't tuned very well for power down as it's set up more as a grand tourer with a smooth and quiet ride).

You can compress the work into a lower rev range by using big displacement blocks like the LS or Hemi 6.4 or you can stretch it out over a longer rev range like the 5.0 and many European V8's and inline 6's.

However the 5.0 has an ace up its' sleeve that the LS doesn't. The LS can't rev beyond 6500 RPM, its fixed valve train (limits your optimal flow to a narrower RPM range) and valve spring rates (valve float at high RPM), tension and compression forces on the rods and bearings don't permit a higher rev range without a re-build of the rotating assembly.

The 5.0 on the other hand uses the Road Runner valve springs, valve lift, cams, rods and crank. Headroom for another 500 of extended operation was built right into the rotating assembly. Not only that, but it makes more peak power in that rev range, so the total power gain is very substantial with a PP3. So I'd estimate the PP3 to be another 2/10th's quicker than a PP2 car, everything else the same.

Higher rev range means you can make power in lower gears longer = better acceleration. More total power = more work being done = better acceleration. The 5.0 was meant to rev out and Ford built right into the Gen 2 5.0's all the goodies of the Road Runner variant used in the previous Boss 302 that would run 12.3's down to 12.0's bone stock with just 444 HP, 11 HP less than the latest Camaro SS.

But the 1SS runs .3~.4 seconds faster when comped to a GT bone stock to bone stock. MarkMc26 had a GT PP Premium (401 group), best he could do was 12.56, bone stock on stock Pirellie tires.

He recently got an SS LT1 and went over to the camaro6 forum, bone stock he ran a 12.099. So a good solid .4 tenths faster on a car that doesn't make any more power. Audi's are a great example of using the power effectively, so is the latest 2018 GT 10A's. The 10A run's over a half second faster than the 6M GT with the same engine and more weight....0-60 for the first gen S550 GT is typically no faster than 4.3 to 4.4 seconds stock. But the SS runs 4.0 flat and MarkMc26 managed a 3.9 (obviously prepped surfaces help). The GT just can't get off the line due to it's poor suspension tuning. MarkMc26 was the same driver of both cars and topped both fast lists for bone stock 6M's on each forum.

Do an IRS make over and tap into the power that's already there that you can't use because of the suspension and tire setup from the factory. An IRS make over is cheaper than a PP3 and should get you same net results.

PP3 on a stock IRS, your mostly only putting the power down in the back half of the 1/4 mile, at launch your going to be hard pressed to run much faster than stock. Maybe a tad, but not much. You can have all the power int he world but if you can't get it to the ground what's the point?

I've read through a lot of reviews on differential bushings, when combined with an IRS cradle lock out, every one says the car feels like it gains 30~50 hp. Why? Because the IRS is wasting energy by absorbing it into the compliant bushings instead of putting it to the ground. You might be surprised at how much "faster" the car runs and feels if you re-work the suspension, a far safer and less risky modification than even a warrantied power pack. I had differential bushings and IRS lockout in my Ecoboost back when I had that and same thing, the car just felt like it launched far better. The power went down and the car moved instead of this "cushiony lag" that it had stock. The GT has the same feeling but even worse as it's making quite a bit more power but with the same suspension compliance.

Then go for the power pack once you get the suspension working and you've had time to break in an validate your engine is mechanically sound. Weight matters as well. Base weight for SS is 3685 lbs, base weight for a GT is 3705 lbs. But the GT gains a lot more weight due to the heavy PP wheels (38 lbs total just for the wheels!), so some lightweight wheels and an after market exhaust combined will put you back down to base weight or even less (if you already have a base model).

Great info !!!! I have a 17 gt automatic . Will the pp2 push me past a stock 18 challenger scatty ? ... My buddy has one and I'm really trying to bust his azz

Sponsored