GT350 performance at higher elevation

[WyoGT350]

I am considering a GT350 as a daily driver/pleasure vehicle but am concerned about observations regarding the lack of low end torque. The car would be driven primarily at an elevation of 6500 ft. I would ask owners to give me your opinion of your GT350's performance on the street if your car had 20% less HP and torque, assuming you live fairly close to sea level. Do you think the high end power delivery would simply become too much of a disadvantage to enjoy the car? There isn't a GT350 anywhere close to my location to test drive, therefore I look forward to your feedback.

Sponsored

 

[TRS7139]

There is not any practical lack of power at low RPM , in particular for normal street applications, the car simply has a power band in the mid-upper level in the rev range, which is why your best modulation device is your gear box.
Most of these observations are well above normal street applications and on the street you will feel zero lack of practical power. The car is one of the more tractable street performance cars.
That said I doubt you'd suffer anything like 20% power decline and most modern engine management systems should compinsate adequately .
About the only thing I'd be troubled by is that about 1/2 the roads in Wyoming are dirt.

 

[scannon]

Where in Wyoming are you? I live 25 miles north of Denver and if you want to make the trek I will let you test drive my GT350 as long as the streets are clean and dry. I live at 5,300' and normal driving is very pleasurable. The real fun starts at about 3,500 RPM.

 

[SVTinAR]

I don't think any of the Coyote or Voodoo motors have a reputation for low end grunt. But I haven't noticed the GT350 being any weaker down low than my 2012 GT. My GT had 3.31 gears so that probably hurt it a bit but with the transmission gearing I doubt much so in first. I would say my GT350 is slightly stronger and certainly smoother/more responsive at low speed than my old GT.

 

[Zombo]

That said I doubt you'd suffer anything like 20% power decline and most modern engine management systems should compinsate adequately .

The GT350 engine management system can't compensate for reduced air density due to increased elevation above sea level, other than to insure the proper air/fuel mixture is maintained. Less air, due to lower air density means less power.

 

[AirBusPilot]

20% loss of power is about right

 

[Tank]

Tooele Utah is a bit over 5,000 feet. Subjectively comparing to where I live, 900-1000 ft, I didn't experience notable differences.

 

[69mach1-395]

If the OP wants his 20% back, FI will get twice that ;)
That being said, my GT has plenty at 5000'

 

[Wriggly]

About the only thing I'd be troubled by is that about 1/2 the roads in Wyoming are dirt.

Wyoming has some wonderful roads with mountain vistas and glorious canyons. But then those NY potholes provide some real excitement don't they.

 

[Spacebird]

Where in Wyoming are you? I live 25 miles north of Denver and if you want to make the trek I will let you test drive my GT350 as long as the streets are clean and dry. I live at 5,300' and normal driving is very pleasurable. The real fun starts at about 3,500 RPM.

I’ll second that. I’m in Superior, CO. You’re welcome to drive my R.

I moved here from the south coast and I definitely feel the difference. Never does the GT350R feel anything short of ballistic, however.

 

[GTthree50]

I am considering a GT350 as a daily driver/pleasure vehicle but am concerned about observations regarding the lack of low end torque, a healthy portion of it just exists higher in the rpm range. The car would be driven primarily at an elevation of 6500 ft. I would ask owners to give me your opinion of your GT350's performance on the street if your car had 20% less HP and torque, assuming you live fairly close to sea level. Do you think the high end power delivery would simply become too much of a disadvantage to enjoy the car? There isn't a GT350 anywhere close to my location to test drive, therefore I look forward to your feedback.

The way I see this is that it is a matter of perspective. For those used to typical domestic performance V8's yes the Shelby has a softer low end but that is not to say it lacks torque. I DD mine and do not in any way think it has a lack of low end torque but I have generally had performance cars that were not V8 engined and did not have an abundance of low end anyway. I do find that the nature of the Voodoo makes it quite easy to drive around town. I'm sure others may disagree but just one persons POV.

 

[MustangGT350]

Car has less low end torque in consideration to high performance racing, as far as a daily driving goes, it's more than enough.

 

[strikes2k]

Have no issues with the power output in Denver (5280). However, my other sports car is an S2000 so I'm kind of used to compensating for lack of torque at low RPM's.

 

[WyoGT350]

I appreciate the input from you owners. The consensus seems to be that I should be able to enjoy the GT350 at my elevation. I have also been considering a Challenger Hellcat, but I am partial to NA engines, especially the high revvers, and the Hellcat has a completely different purpose. So, I will focus my search for a new '17 or '18 GT350. I look forward to joining you all as an owner!

 

[jvandy50]

i came from a 16GTPP full bolt on E85 car and when i test drove the 350 i was like wtf...it did seem to lack a little down low.

idk the exact numbers on the tranny, but the rear end gears being the same in both cars, 1st gear is totally different in this one. no way I could’ve reached 55mph in 1st in the GT. once you get used to winding it out, its pretty fawkin addicting. just took some getting used to for me. by no means is she a slouch, but she does need to be driven the way she was intended:cheers:

Sponsored