Notices
GT S197 General Discussion This section is for technical discussions pertaining specifically to the V8 variation of the 2005 and newer Ford Mustang.

2013 Mustang GT - Slower times

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-17-2015, 03:52 PM
  #11  
scottmach
3rd Gear Member
 
scottmach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 558
Default

Originally Posted by Slowbra302
Not to thread jack, but Scott, can you elaborate on the clutch protection/torque management please? Thanks!
In the stock tune Ford has it set up so that if the computer senses any clutch slippage torque management kicks in by pulling timing to protect the clutch from doing any damage. The problem is it kicks in when you basically sneeze. This can be tuned out by some of the good tuners. Bama did not have that ability in the past with their "team" of so called tuners. Maybe they can now that they have another new tuner writing tunes but I doubt it. This is one of the reasons you will never see one of their customers cars running a good time.
scottmach is offline  
Old 03-17-2015, 04:13 PM
  #12  
JonnyW
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
JonnyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 72
Default

Originally Posted by Dino Dino Bambino
There's your problem. The Boss manifold requires a custom tune and if you're using a canned tune, it may not be dialed in correctly.
So if I get a custom dyno tune, I'll be back running 4.3 0-60 times?


Originally Posted by scottmach
In the stock tune Ford has it set up so that if the computer senses any clutch slippage torque management kicks in by pulling timing to protect the clutch from doing any damage. The problem is it kicks in when you basically sneeze. This can be tuned out by some of the good tuners. Bama did not have that ability in the past with their "team" of so called tuners. Maybe they can now that they have another new tuner writing tunes but I doubt it. This is one of the reasons you will never see one of their customers cars running a good time.
Wouldn't you feel the clutch management though? I don't feel my car bog down at all. It keeps pulling and doesn't stop, I just think that I lost enough power down low for worse times. At a roll in my power band at 5500 I probably gained a lot.. but from a dig not so much.
JonnyW is offline  
Old 03-17-2015, 05:13 PM
  #13  
scottmach
3rd Gear Member
 
scottmach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 558
Default

I'm not sure if you would necessarilly feel it but this is a question for Bama and they're tunes. My car is an auto so I wouldn't know for sure. The Boss Intake works providing you have the correct corresponding mods. I have it and my best is 11.2. But with the autos it needs a pretty loose converter to be effective. Lots of guys with autos install the intake and run slower times and can't figure out why.

And a dyno tune is not necessary on these new cars because of the widebands. Just proper data logging on the street is all that's required.
scottmach is offline  
Old 03-17-2015, 09:07 PM
  #14  
UPRSharad
Former Sponsor
 
UPRSharad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 2,570
Default

The tune is certainly critical, but an easy way to test your theory would be to install the original rims and try again.
UPRSharad is offline  
Old 03-17-2015, 11:26 PM
  #15  
JonnyW
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
JonnyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 72
Default

Originally Posted by UPRSharad
The tune is certainly critical, but an easy way to test your theory would be to install the original rims and try again.
I'd install the stock wheels if I had tires to go with them.. I could also find out by installing the stock manifold. One of the two.

I just came up with a theory. With the review on the Boss manifold, most rave about the power gains and that they can feel it pull harder. Well if low end power is lost and a small addition is added up top, the margin between the low and high is much greater than the steady increase of the stock manifold. This would give the impression of a large increase in power, even though drag times are higher.

Last edited by JonnyW; 03-18-2015 at 01:05 AM.
JonnyW is offline  
Old 03-18-2015, 06:06 AM
  #16  
Dino Dino Bambino
4th Gear Member
 
Dino Dino Bambino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Cyprus (EU)
Posts: 1,572
Default

Originally Posted by JonnyW
So if I get a custom dyno tune, I'll be back running 4.3 0-60 times?
It'll certainly help and the Ford Racing 90mm throttle body would also allow the Boss 302 manifold to strut its stuff.
The Boss manifold essentially lops away the midrange torque bulge of the 5.0 GT between ~3000-5500rpm, flattens the curve, and adds more torque from ~5500+rpm but the difference is only noticeable above 6000rpm. Below ~3000rpm the torque is roughly the same as with the GT manifold. The end result is a higher peak HP number and a lower peak TQ number so to enjoy the benefit of the Boss manifold, you have to keep the engine spinning near the top of the rpm range.

Last edited by Dino Dino Bambino; 03-18-2015 at 06:13 AM.
Dino Dino Bambino is offline  
Old 03-23-2015, 05:40 PM
  #17  
JonnyW
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
JonnyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 72
Default

I figured out that my overall tire diameter is slightly larger than stock. I did the translation and my gear ratio would need to be 3.75 to properly correct the change. Its too cold to do any work on the car today and wouldn't be able to test it anyways because it of the cold. I'll get around to installing the stock manifold later this week to see the difference in performance. After that I'll be ordering headers and a mid pipe and will again do some baseline tests and before bolting on the boss manifold.
JonnyW is offline  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:31 PM
  #18  
kirk35
1st Gear Member
 
kirk35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Ocean Springs, Mississippi
Posts: 87
Default

Originally Posted by JonnyW
I figured out that my overall tire diameter is slightly larger than stock. I did the translation and my gear ratio would need to be 3.75 to properly correct the change. Its too cold to do any work on the car today and wouldn't be able to test it anyways because it of the cold. I'll get around to installing the stock manifold later this week to see the difference in performance. After that I'll be ordering headers and a mid pipe and will again do some baseline tests and before bolting on the boss manifold.
Did you modify your tune for the correct tire diameter? If the new tires are taller then your speedo is off. Taller tires than stock means you're going faster than what the speedo reads, which would explain the slower times.
kirk35 is offline  
Old 04-04-2015, 05:46 PM
  #19  
Callinectes
1st Gear Member
 
Callinectes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 51
Default

Just throwing this out there, but you're talking about losing at most a half-second off your 0-60 time, right? And your mod list says you're running 10-30 oil in Minnesota in the winter? I can only go by my experiences with my bike. The book says 20-50, I thought I was running hot so I change it to straight 60 weight, which I've been running in bikes for 35 years. Its summer in Florida(in the 90s), and the bike was now hard to start and the gas mileage sucked, and it still ran hot. I went back to 20-50, bike still runs hot(but I found out its in normal range)and everything is normal. I don't know how this theory translates to a car putting out over 400HP, but it might be something to think about.
Callinectes is offline  
Old 04-05-2015, 05:35 AM
  #20  
JonnyW
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
JonnyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 72
Default

Update:
I did out down the correct tire specs when filling out the form. As for the oil, I won't run anything less than a 30 weight. The only time I'll use a higher weight is if I'm road racing. Otherwise my car has seen RP XPR 5w30 and currently has Amsoil SS 10w30. I did a lot of research from UnleashedBeast on SVT forums and follow some of his findings.

However, I've recently been playing around with my tires.. I don't know how, but my NT05s were unequal and overfilled, so my times could have come from the lack of a good launch. I'll report back after I do some more experimenting. My clutch could also be slipping at high RPM. I plan on throwing down some serious coin to correct and improve my driveline with a new clutch (leaning towards McLeod RXT or Exedy Mach 500 w/ aluminum flywheel) and a DDS carbon fiber driveshaft.

Before I do more mods though I'm going to get to the bottom of this. I still haven't touched my manifold.
JonnyW is offline  


Quick Reply: 2013 Mustang GT - Slower times



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05 AM.