Official 2018 gt owners thread, if you bought 1 check in here!

[FirstGT]

man these cars are getting faster and more HP by the day

:ford:

Sponsored

 

[Dominant1]

man these cars are getting faster and more HP by the day

:ford:

but the mpg's haven't changed either....

 

[R 350 gt Donson]

How the hell were you able to order at invoice?

I bought a couple of F250 trucks from them They offered me a 2017 NEW Shelby Grey w/Nav for 500 over invoice if anyone is interested let me know

 

[R 350 gt Donson]

0-60 in 3.6s? Maybe down hill..

Don't kill the messenger !!...I heard it from the Ford Rep...we will see

 

[l'Ingegnere]

Don't kill the messenger !!...I heard it from the Ford Rep...we will see

You mean the sales person? There is nothing to be known about PPL2 at this time. Ford tightly guards internal performance test results. This "rep" likely knows absolutely nothing.

 

[Freedom]

Don't kill the messenger !!...I heard it from the Ford Rep...we will see

I don’t doubt you, I’m just shocked that a Ford rep will say such a thing.

but the mpg's haven't changed either....

That’s because efficiency is up. Higher compression, new transmission, direct injection, slightly better aero. I’m more shocked that mpg is the same!

 

[l'Ingegnere]

A youtuber has a video up with dyno of 437 to the rear wheels x .15 (drivetrain loss) = 65.5 + 437 = 502 Hps.

I keep seeing all sorts of weird calculations for getting back to crank numbers on here. When talking about drivetrain loss, you multiply crank numbers by the percentage remaining after the drivetrain, which means to take a wheel number back to the crank you have to divide. In other words...

437/0.85 = ~514

There is literally no way this engine is making that much power, sorry. Way hot reading dyno.

 

[FirstGT]

I keep seeing all sorts of weird calculations for getting back to crank numbers on here. When talking about drivetrain loss, you multiply by the percentage remaining after the drivetrain, which means to take a wheel number back to the crank you have to divide. In other words...

437/0.85 = ~514

There is literally no way this engine is making that much power, sorry. Way hot reading dyno.

Exactly my point. Every thread seems to increase what new stang is putting out. Pretty soon we'll be seeing 600 posted in threads. Tune will be 675

 

[Dominant1]

Its 12% for manuals and 15% for autos. So your calc should be 437x12% = 52.44, then add that to the 437 rwhp and you got your crank hp 489.44 crank hp!

 

[l'Ingegnere]

Its 12% for manuals and 15% for autos. So your calc should be 437x12% = 52.44, then add that to the 437 rwhp and you got your crank hp 489.44 crank hp!

That's not how this math works. You have to take the percentage from the whole, the crank number. Unless you are artificially lowering your loss percentage because you are multiplying it times the wheel number. In which case the loss percentage no longer accurately reflects the total powertrain loss.

 

[l'Ingegnere]

Exactly my point. Every thread seems to increase what new stang is putting out. Pretty soon we'll be seeing 600 posted in threads. Tune will be 675

It's hilarious to me how badly people on here want this car to be underrated.

 

[Dominant1]

It's hilarious to me how badly people on here want this car to be underrated.

I see your point on the math. I disagree that there’s an agenda to want our cars to be underrated! The real world performance # is the trap speed in the 1/4 mile! Rwhp is a tool we use to get in the ballpark of where we are. The car’s full weight resistance is reduced significantly on the rollers compared to rolling on the street.

 

[l'Ingegnere]

I see your point on the math. I disagree that there’s an agenda to want our cars to be underrated! The real world performance # is the trap speed in the 1/4 mile! Rwhp is a tool we use to get in the ballpark of where we are. The car’s full weight resistance is reduced significantly on the rollers compared to rolling on the street.

I wasn't insinuating that there's an agenda. It just seems to me like there are a lot of members making posts claiming the new car is underrated.

 

[Dominant1]

Found this calculator dont know how accurate it is, try it:

https://www.mk5cortinaestate.co.uk/calculator4.php

 

[l'Ingegnere]

https://www.nap.edu/read/21744/chapter/7#187

Quite an extensive read, but seems to support the idea that modern powertrain loss has been significantly improved upon.

Sponsored