Gene K

368.6 rwhp on a Mustang Dyno on a green engine.


http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec.../photo_03.html

Hysteric

368.6*1.12=412.832

Sounds pretty close to Fords estimate of 412HP (the 12% is the most standard estimate i could find on google for the correction of a mustang dyno, since they read low)

Gene K

The 12% was just to get to Dynojet numbers not Flywheel Numbers.

That said Im very wary of Mustangs. They read lower if not messed with but are very easy to "Hotrod" by changing "roller mass" and "resistance" numbers. The Dynojet likely reads "Happy" but its a consistent happy.

PS Ford's actual number during certification was 416 bhp. They are allowed a +/- 1% varience.

2011CS

The way it was explained to me was the Mustang dyno was real numbers as in on the road and the Dyno jet was inflated due to no compensation for rolling resistance etc.

Either way 368 is within 60hp of a custom tune of a 2007 with no cats, borla long tubes and Rousch SC with small pulley that I did a few years ago.

Really good numbers for bone stock.

Can't wait to see what the tuners can do!

Jeff

Driver72

Except you don't add 12% to a removed number.
The engine is rated at 412 hp, if you then take away 12% for driveline losses you get 362 rwhp not 368.

If 12% is the known loss for a drivetrain, and the outcome at the rear wheels was 368.6 hp, the crank hp would be roughly 419 hp.
Pretty much in the 415-420 hp I estimated most 5.0's will really make, not the inflated and exaggerated 430-440 hp that some mags have reported based on Dynojet results.

SirKnightTG

If you assume a typical 15% DL loss, that's 432 bhp. Neat!

Driver72

But especially with a manual and a solid rear axle, you won't have 15% drivetrain loss these days, unless it's a very inefficient drivetrain.
My dyno experience:
10-12% for FWD
12-14% for RWD
18-20% for AWD

Add an automatic tranny and you can add 1-2% to that.

Lax07

You can't assume 15% drive train loss with the new mustang... it was an electronic steering pump so thats why most people are only using 10% or so... the engine is more efficient

Gene K

Considering Bypassing the Pump on a 2005-2010 showed 0 rwhp on the dyno I dont think thast relative. The power steering pump should only draw power when the wheel is turned. If you have good technique at the track it shoudlnt make a difference. On the street yes,
Some people did see track gains (Which I cant explain if they dont saw on the wheel) but on my car I could not tell the difference in ET between Short and Long Belts.

Gene K

I think everyone is glossing over my main point.

On a Mustang the roller mass and resistance settings (measured and set at the factory) are user adjustable. If you dont know what the factory setting on that individual dyno was and didnt check the files you have no way of knowing if its been molested. Im not talking about Car Mass that Mustang uses for simulated performance testing.

By simply changing the roller mass file on a Mustang Dyno you can make a car go from 250 rwhp to 300 rwhp with the customer none the wiser. Many Mustangs are "Hotrodded" to get them to read the same (or even higher) than a Dynojet.

For tuning I prefer a Mustang but you do have to be aware of the potential for a shop to sell you a 50 rwhp tune and prove it without even touching your Car.

PS Im seriously considering putting my car on a privately owned Mustang MD-250 that I know for a fact is still factory set and a Dynojet 224x and see what the difference between the two is on these cars (I have seen differences from 5-20% and its not always linear with power).