Will the 2018 Mustang GT be as fast as a GT350

[newkidnik]

Care to explain your "work"

I don't. Does your experience differ from my comments on the powerband?

Sponsored

 

[Voodooo]

I don't. Does your experience differ from my comments on the powerband?

Thought so.
Because I'm afraid your lack of experience is showing. The 5.2 makes more tq than the 5.0. Even at lower rpm. Your confusing engine tq to gearing.

 

[newkidnik]

Thought so.
Because I'm afraid your lack of experience is showing. The 5.2 makes more tq than the 5.0. Even at lower rpm. Your confusing engine tq to gearing.

Hmm, I'll be a little clearer:

+The 5.2 makes a minimum of 90-92% of peak tq from ~3500-6500. Below 3500 it's a different story with a noticeable powerband dip one can feel when driving that's also evident on dyno plots. Tq to peak falls to ~75% at 3000. It's not a smooth transition. Again, this is for a stock car, not one with hardware changes such as headers.

This dip is best illustrated by the MT dyno:

Since you own one of these, is it your opinion that this 'dead zone' doesn't exist on stock tune/hardware? I could feel it most in DD situations (low rpm 2nd gear, 3rd gear, highway at low rpm). Rarely at the track but that plays to proper gear selection and complimentary gearing for the 5.2 powerband.


+I am not sure why anyone on here is comparing a stock Coyote and a Voodoo in terms of overall peak numbers. That makes no sense.

On my '16, my stock dyno indicates that I'm making 88-90% of peak tq at 34xx rpm, peak tq remains generally flat from 4200-5200, and at 6600 tq is still 88-90% of peak. What does that mean? Nothing really.

A better comparison to a stock Voodoo is my '14 5.0 at full bolt-ons. It made 460whp/404wtq. The MT Voodoo dyno shows similar whp, but wtq is far lower at 374wtq. In this form, the 5.0 pulled harder throughout the rev band than the Voodoo, and that results from higher tq all over the rpm range, even upper rpm. I felt the difference behind the wheel. The delta isn't a rounding error.

Here is an old dyno. It's a comparison of my car in full bolt-on form with an overlay of what it made with cams. Max rpm for both setups was 8000, but the operator on this dyno didn't take it that high (7500 & 7750):

At 3000 tq to peak is 86%, at 3500 it's 92%, and at 6600 is around 86%, so the overall size of the tq band, and overall powerband, is very similar to the Voodoo, but when comparing similar peak to peak whp numbers, the 5.0 has to more meat under the curve. It also never had any sort of low end 'dip'/'dead zone' like the Voodoo.

Again, what does this prove? Not too much other than a modded 5.0 at the same whp as a stock Voodoo has a fatter tq curve provided one does a Cobra Jet manifold and can extend the powerband up to 8000. Gearing is also somewhat similar though the GT350 seemed to have a taller first and second gear compared to 8000rpm+3.73s through an MT82.

Stock for stock, the comparison isn't worth making, and the '18 revision won't be as fast as the GT350.

My question for you is did the dip disappear with headers? I assume it didn't change with only a tune.

 

[TexArmageddon]

yea, but the car NEEDS a power bump. The 6th Gen SS dominates the car on the track and strip. 450hp+ is a must.

Why does it need a power bump? It's also a fairly affordable V8 .... Compete when necessary...

 

[Voodooo]

Hmm, I'll be a little clearer:

+The 5.2 makes a minimum of 90-92% of peak tq from ~3500-6500. Below 3500 it's a different story with a noticeable powerband dip one can feel when driving that's also evident on dyno plots. Tq to peak falls to ~75% at 3000. It's not a smooth transition. Again, this is for a stock car, not one with hardware changes such as headers.

This dip is best illustrated by the MT dyno:

Since you own one of these, is it your opinion that this 'dead zone' doesn't exist on stock tune/hardware? I could feel it most in DD situations (low rpm 2nd gear, 3rd gear, highway at low rpm). Rarely at the track but that plays to proper gear selection and complimentary gearing for the 5.2 powerband.


+I am not sure why anyone on here is comparing a stock Coyote and a Voodoo in terms of overall peak numbers. That makes no sense.

On my '16, my stock dyno indicates that I'm making 88-90% of peak tq at 34xx rpm, peak tq remains generally flat from 4200-5200, and at 6600 tq is still 88-90% of peak. What does that mean? Nothing really.

A better comparison to a stock Voodoo is my '14 5.0 at full bolt-ons. It made 460whp/404wtq. The MT Voodoo dyno shows similar whp, but wtq is far lower at 374wtq. In this form, the 5.0 pulled harder throughout the rev band than the Voodoo, and that results from higher tq all over the rpm range, even upper rpm. I felt the difference behind the wheel. The delta isn't a rounding error.

Here is an old dyno. It's a comparison of my car in full bolt-on form with an overlay of what it made with cams. Max rpm for both setups was 8000, but the operator on this dyno didn't take it that high (7500 & 7750):

At 3000 tq to peak is 86%, at 3500 it's 92%, and at 6600 is around 86%, so the overall size of the tq band, and overall powerband, is very similar to the Voodoo, but when comparing similar peak to peak whp numbers, the 5.0 has to more meat under the curve. It also never had any sort of low end 'dip'/'dead zone' like the Voodoo.

Again, what does this prove? Not too much other than a modded 5.0 at the same whp as a stock Voodoo has a fatter tq curve provided one does a Cobra Jet manifold and can extend the powerband up to 8000. Gearing is also somewhat similar though the GT350 seemed to have a taller first and second gear compared to 8000rpm+3.73s through an MT82.

Stock for stock, the comparison isn't worth making, and the '18 revision won't be as fast as the GT350.

My question for you is did the dip disappear with headers? I assume it didn't change with only a tune.

The headers themselves leveled out a lot of that dip in torque. The tune and headers together really flattened the torque in the lower rpm range

 

[airfuel]

The dyno shows the clear difference.

One is a better track motor, one is the better street motor.

And comparing the much bigger Camaro motor to the smaller coyote is silly.
Displacement brings torque, rpm and better breathing brings hp.

 

[Voodooo]

The dyno shows the clear difference.

One is a better track motor, one is the better street motor.

And comparing the much bigger Camaro motor to the smaller coyote is silly.
Displacement brings torque, rpm and better breathing brings hp.

I agree with you!!
Stroke usually brings torque but Bore can also bring torque.

People over the "low torque" kill me.
I mean they point out a motortrend dyno sheet and in that same head to head comparssion the 7.0 GM 427 out torqued the mighty 5.2 voodoo and we all know the results. Both are track monsters and the GT350 won both the 1/4 and road course.

 

[PJR202]

yea, but the car NEEDS a power bump. The 6th Gen SS dominates the car on the track and strip. 450hp+ is a must.

I'm not saying the Camaro hasn't track tested a shade faster than the GT, but it's difficult to find video of the SS even beating a GT, much less 'dominating' one.

 

[Cardude99]

Why are you comparing a camaro at 3000 to a mustang at 3000? They aren't designed to be driven at the same rpm's. Add the PP3 kit to a coyote and it pulls hard to 7500+rpm. Try that in a camaro.

Regardless of your logic the camaro is murdering the gt around a track and the strip. Imo the torque curve is a huge part of it. Numbers don't lie

 

[Kpod]

Regardless of your logic the camaro is murdering the gt around a track and the strip. Imo the torque curve is a huge part of it. Numbers don't lie

I'd venture to say there are many reasons the camaro "murdering" the gt and they are wider tires (285 square vs 255/275?), magride suspension, and lower weight. If the 2018 mustang gets magride, a pp3 kit with 7500rpm redline w/ 3.73 gears, and tires to match, I bet it would be a drivers race even though the camaro would still have a lot more torque.

My dream 2018 GT would be:
GT PP w/ 3.73 gears and tremec 6speed
active exhaust
magride
DI w/ 15hp bump to 450hp

Add:
pp3 - bump to 492hp w/ 7500 rpm redline
aftermarket 22 lb wheels - drop 40 lbs rotational/sprung mass
305 fronts/325 rears
cf driveshaft - drop 20 lbs rotations mass

I won't be racing competitively so I won't know if the camaro is murdering me but I'll have a ton of fun with this setup and look better than the camaro doing it.

 

[Voodooo]

I'd venture to say there are many reasons the camaro "murdering" the gt and they are wider tires (285 square vs 255/275?), magride suspension, and lower weight. If the 2018 mustang gets magride, a pp3 kit with 7500rpm redline w/ 3.73 gears, and tires to match, I bet it would be a drivers race even though the camaro would still have a lot more torque.

My dream 2018 GT would be:
GT PP w/ 3.73 gears and tremec 6speed
active exhaust
magride
DI w/ 15hp bump to 450hp

Add:
pp3 - bump to 492hp w/ 7500 rpm redline
aftermarket 22 lb wheels - drop 40 lbs rotational/sprung mass
305 fronts/325 rears
cf driveshaft - drop 20 lbs rotations mass

I won't be racing competitively so I won't know if the camaro is murdering me but I'll have a ton of fun with this setup and look better than the camaro doing it.

I agree but ditch the DI, and good luck with the 492hp

 

[Kpod]

I agree but ditch the DI, and good luck with the 492hp

My other thought is keep my current 15gtpp, not take the new car hit again, do the pp2 or 3, wheels, tires, exhaust, driveshaft and I'll be around 450 to 470hp, lighter weight, better traction, and have plenty of fun but I really want the active exhaust and magride. We'll see what happens in 18, then I'll be back in decision making mode.

 

[TexArmageddon]

Regardless of your logic the camaro is murdering the gt around a track and the strip. Imo the torque curve is a huge part of it. Numbers don't lie

Meh I don't care... Just buy a supercharger... Low end torque issue fixed

 

[PJR202]

Almost EVERYONE seems to be concerned with having something that outperforms an SS but the evidence of its superiority isn't out there, so what's there to be concerned with?

 

[newkidnik]

I'm not saying the Camaro hasn't track tested a shade faster than the GT, but it's difficult to find video of the SS even beating a GT, much less 'dominating' one.

Almost EVERYONE seems to be concerned with having something that outperforms an SS but the evidence of its superiority isn't out there, so what's there to be concerned with?

I mean, what kind of evidence? Track comparison or 1/4mi times?

I suppose the easiest thing is to reference the C&D Lightning Lap test where the V6 1LE beat a GT PP, and the SS 1LE was ~10 seconds ahead. I was disappointed when I read that result. That's a huge gap, regardless of all the arguments about 1LE vs. SS and track vs. track.

In terms of straight line speed, what I've seen is a noticeable real world advantage for the SS at the drag strip. Even in 2000+ DA, stock SS Camaros don't seem to have any issues trapping 114-116. I cannot say the same for Mustangs. In similar conditions, mine trapped 110-111. The mag tests seem to agree too. C&D did an instrumented test on an '16 SS and a '15 GTPP, and the SS went 12.3@116 to the GT's 13.0@112. More telling is the 0-150 time where the SS went 25.1 and the GT clocked 29 seconds. That's enough evidence for me.

The headers themselves leveled out a lot of that dip in torque. The tune and headers together really flattened the torque in the lower rpm range

I wonder what in the stock hardware caused the dip.

I agree with you!!
Stroke usually brings torque but Bore can also bring torque.

People over the "low torque" kill me.
I mean they point out a motortrend dyno sheet and in that same head to head comparssion the 7.0 GM 427 out torqued the mighty 5.2 voodoo and we all know the results. Both are track monsters and the GT350 won both the 1/4 and road course.

With the old Z/28, I'd argue there are more factors at play than just the output of the motor. Yes, the GT350R is superior in that match up, but would the gap be smaller, or non-existent with the regular GT350?

Take away the R's weight advantage, rotational mass advantage, aero advantage, and stickier tires, and it may get closer. The R was slower than the Z/28's time in Lightning Lap '16, but I'd still agree it's a better overall track car, and a better execution of the concept. I don't have enough data to come to an opinion I'm comfortable with on the GT350, but I suspect it doesn't match the Z/28.

Sponsored