HP GT vs MACH 1

[Performance nut]

The Ford tune/throttle body/CAI requires 91 octane, the Mach 1 does not. I believe most of the 20HP comes from marketing.

You forget that the GT can run on 87 octane as well but it doesn't make 460HP on 87 octane. Mach1 can run on 87 but doesn't make 480HP when you do. Folks who tune don't usually care about 87 octane, they just want a bump in power. So the tune is geared towards someone who is only going to run 91+. Same with other tuners. Mine is 91 octane or E85. Didn't bother with 87 octane.

Sponsored

 

[shogun32]

Didn't bother with 87 octane.

aside from whatever swill the dealer put in the tank at delivery, my car has run 93 or E30'ish after the first week of ownership. Am I chasing HP? No. I can afford 93 so I burn it.

 

[Zelek]

I wish Ford could have at least bumped the redline to 7800 on the Mach 1 to really take advantage of the GT350 manifold. Guess I'll just have to fix it with a tune later.

 

[shogun32]

I wish Ford could have at least bumped the redline to 7800 on the Mach 1 to really take advantage of the GT350 manifold.

given the downward trajectory of the torque curve past 6000 and that the intake doesn't help, I don't see the point. I mean it'll still be "cool" but it unlikely to have any useful effect.

 

[theruleslawyer]

I wish Ford could have at least bumped the redline to 7800 on the Mach 1 to really take advantage of the GT350 manifold. Guess I'll just have to fix it with a tune later.

It would have made the car a little more special.

 

[Strokerswild]

It would have made the car a little more special.

No, a NA, high compression version of the GT500 would have clinched that.

 

[joe603]

So what I'm hearing is that the 480 vs 460 HP is really BS and on the top end of the RPM range. May have to see some real-world dynos of both a stock 18+GT and Mach 1. Looks like it's the FP intake/tune for best gains on my 21....or a supercharger if I can ever get that passed by the finance minister.

 

[Schwerin]

So what I'm hearing is that the 480 vs 460 HP is really BS and on the top end of the RPM range. May have to see some real-world dynos of both a stock 18+GT and Mach 1. Looks like it's the FP intake/tune for best gains on my 21....or a supercharger if I can ever get that passed by the finance minister.

I mean look at the 18+ vs Bullitt dynos, the engine been around for like 3yrs now.

The FP intake/tune IS the Mach1/Bullitt intake with a tune that's 91+ only.

 

[theruleslawyer]

No, a NA, high compression version of the GT500 would have clinched that.

That would have been another bespoke engine and a much more expensive car. Interesting, sure. Just not what the mach 1 is. A few hundred extra rpm would have easier fit in the existing design spec.

 

[Schwerin]

That would have been another bespoke engine and a much more expensive car. Interesting, sure. Just not what the mach 1 is. A few hundred extra rpm would have easier fit in the existing design spec.

Not really, didn't cost the 2003 Mach1 much more to have engine based on the Terminator. Also the Mach1 is about the price of the GT350 which DOES have a bespoke engine.

 

[Dave2013M3]

The GT350 IM in the Mach and Bullitt to be frank is a marketing ploy. The GT350 IM has 0 to little gains up until the 7400rpm redline for the GT/Mach/Bullitt. Its when you push the car above those rpm's will you see a difference.

 

[Coastal-Mach]

Not really, didn't cost the 2003 Mach1 much more to have engine based on the Terminator. Also the Mach1 is about the price of the GT350 which DOES have a bespoke engine.

The 03-04 Mach's did have 4v engines, but not fully forged like the terminator. The manual cars had a forged crank. I do see your point though, with the price point of a GT350

 

[Schwerin]

The 03-04 Mach's did have 4v engines, but not fully forged like the terminator. The manual cars had a forged crank. I do see your point though, with the price point of a GT350

Yeah but I think that was the original point. A 5.2L based on the GT500 engine doesn't have to be Forged. They likely could have used mostly off the shelf parts to make a 5.2L that revs to 7800-8000 RPM, and made 500HP/440TQ.

I partly suspect they didn't want to step on the GT350's toes to much though. If the Mach1 is already doing well against it on track having a bit more power than it already does would have made the GT350 feel even less special.

 

[Coastal-Mach]

Yeah but I think that was the original point. A 5.2L based on the GT500 engine doesn't have to be Forged. They likely could have used mostly off the shelf parts to make a 5.2L that revs to 7800-8000 RPM, and made 500HP/440TQ.

I partly suspect they didn't want to step on the GT350's toes to much though. If the Mach1 is already doing well against it on track having a bit more power than it already does would have made the GT350 feel even less special.

I agree with you, its a shame that the Mach 1 always follows in the shadow of another car. I originally wanted a 350, and still do, but the Mach fits my needs right now. When it first came out in 69, it was the top of food chain.

 

[Vlad Soare]

I partly suspect they didn't want to step on the GT350's toes to much though. If the Mach1 is already doing well against it on track having a bit more power than it already does would have made the GT350 feel even less special.

Yes, but they discontinued the GT350 at the same time as they launched the Mach 1. So there were no more toes to step on.

Sponsored