Mach 1 Section This section is for discussions relating to the reincarnation of the Mach 1 trimline.

How underated are..

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-01-2008, 09:14 PM
  #1  
Stone629
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
Stone629's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
Default How underated are..

the Machs? I've been seeing and hearing of several Machs getting anywhere from 275-290+rwhp.Ford's claim of 310hp definetly doesn't add up, but nobody has ever really stated how off Ford's numbers are.
For comparison's sake, lots of Machs are running 13.3 or quicker bone stock. 2003-04 Cobras are good for a steady 12.8, so if Machs are 3-4 tenths slower, that would translate roughly into a 30-40hp difference. Cobras are also under-rated at 390 hp, so would'nt that put us at 350+ hp or so? Any one have any idea....
Stone629 is offline  
Old 01-01-2008, 09:49 PM
  #2  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: How underated are..

yeah.
cobras are rated 390hp but actually put down anwhere from 380-425hp and putting from 360rwhp- 380rwhp (on a freak one)
the machs are rated at 305hp but probably is closer to 310-315hp and puts us at 275-290rwhp....im pretty sure thats about right.
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 01-01-2008, 09:56 PM
  #3  
01snake
5th Gear Member
 
01snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,795
Default RE: How underated are..

no 290rwhp is kinda high

mine dyno'd 277 stock. usually i think you take off around 40 hp and that give's you your rwhp. or fly hp x .85 = rwhp

for 290 you would have to put around 340hp to the crank
01snake is offline  
Old 01-01-2008, 09:59 PM
  #4  
01snake
5th Gear Member
 
01snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,795
Default RE: How underated are..

ORIGINAL: Stone629

the Machs? I've been seeing and hearing of several Machs getting anywhere from 275-290+rwhp.Ford's claim of 310hp definetly doesn't add up, but nobody has ever really stated how off Ford's numbers are.
For comparison's sake, lots of Machs are running 13.3 or quicker bone stock. 2003-04 Cobras are good for a steady 12.8, so if Machs are 3-4 tenths slower, that would translate roughly into a 30-40hp difference. Cobras are also under-rated at 390 hp, so would'nt that put us at 350+ hp or so? Any one have any idea....
your also forgetting that the cobra's have irs

you can slap slick's on a mach and drop at 5k. (yes you are at very high risk of failure)

but if you did the same to a cobra, the irs may go farther then the car down the track
01snake is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 06:26 AM
  #5  
jrherald420
5th Gear Member
 
jrherald420's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Smyrna, TN
Posts: 4,524
Default RE: How underated are..

i think the parisatic loss is 15%
jrherald420 is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 07:41 AM
  #6  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: How underated are..

ORIGINAL: jrherald420

i think the parisatic loss is 15%
12-15%
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 08:31 AM
  #7  
DaMach04
4th Gear Member
 
DaMach04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 1,681
Default RE: How underated are..

on a dyno, i put down 291rwhp/311rwtq

with full exhaust, headers back...and CAI.



granted, i didnt get a base run before the bolt ons, but i dont know of many exhausts that add 30-40 bhp
DaMach04 is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 08:43 AM
  #8  
Stone629
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
Stone629's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
Default RE: How underated are..

ORIGINAL: 01snake

ORIGINAL: Stone629

the Machs? I've been seeing and hearing of several Machs getting anywhere from 275-290+rwhp.Ford's claim of 310hp definetly doesn't add up, but nobody has ever really stated how off Ford's numbers are.
For comparison's sake, lots of Machs are running 13.3 or quicker bone stock. 2003-04 Cobras are good for a steady 12.8, so if Machs are 3-4 tenths slower, that would translate roughly into a 30-40hp difference. Cobras are also under-rated at 390 hp, so would'nt that put us at 350+ hp or so? Any one have any idea....
your also forgetting that the cobra's have irs

you can slap slick's on a mach and drop at 5k. (yes you are at very high risk of failure)

but if you did the same to a cobra, the irs may go farther then the car down the track
That's true, but both cars can pulla2.0-2.160' in stock form pretty easily and run 12.8(SVT) and 13.1-13.3(Mach) with the same60'. The IRS doesn't become a problem for Cobras until they really want to launch it hard. The two cars are still within .4 tenths of one another. We know that the 310 hp rating is wrong. If we take the lower % of parasitic loss and said it was about 12%, that's a 37 hp loss to the wheels. The one Mach I saw dyno at 285rwhp would be a 322 crank HP car, according to a 12% loss and the 310hp factory rating.
Stone629 is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 09:04 AM
  #9  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: How underated are..

ORIGINAL: Stone629

ORIGINAL: 01snake

ORIGINAL: Stone629

the Machs? I've been seeing and hearing of several Machs getting anywhere from 275-290+rwhp.Ford's claim of 310hp definetly doesn't add up, but nobody has ever really stated how off Ford's numbers are.
For comparison's sake, lots of Machs are running 13.3 or quicker bone stock. 2003-04 Cobras are good for a steady 12.8, so if Machs are 3-4 tenths slower, that would translate roughly into a 30-40hp difference. Cobras are also under-rated at 390 hp, so would'nt that put us at 350+ hp or so? Any one have any idea....
your also forgetting that the cobra's have irs

you can slap slick's on a mach and drop at 5k. (yes you are at very high risk of failure)

but if you did the same to a cobra, the irs may go farther then the car down the track
That's true, but both cars can pulla2.0-2.160' in stock form pretty easily and run 12.8(SVT) and 13.1-13.3(Mach) with the same60'. The IRS doesn't become a problem for Cobras until they really want to launch it hard. The two cars are still within .4 tenths of one another. We know that the 310 hp rating is wrong. If we take the lower % of parasitic loss and said it was about 12%, that's a 37 hp loss to the wheels. The one Mach I saw dyno at 285rwhp would be a 322 crank HP car, according to a 12% loss and the 310hp factory rating.
I would think that would be closer to the actual HP rating. i would put money on it. now i just to find a bone stock mach and test it! my personal guess is that the mach actually put down 320-330hp. everyone know theres gonna be that one freak that dyno's ungodly high so that one doesnt count nor should the one that dynos like a 4 cyl.
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 01-02-2008, 11:48 AM
  #10  
01snake
5th Gear Member
 
01snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,795
Default RE: How underated are..

ORIGINAL: USMCrebel

ORIGINAL: Stone629

ORIGINAL: 01snake

ORIGINAL: Stone629

the Machs? I've been seeing and hearing of several Machs getting anywhere from 275-290+rwhp.Ford's claim of 310hp definetly doesn't add up, but nobody has ever really stated how off Ford's numbers are.
For comparison's sake, lots of Machs are running 13.3 or quicker bone stock. 2003-04 Cobras are good for a steady 12.8, so if Machs are 3-4 tenths slower, that would translate roughly into a 30-40hp difference. Cobras are also under-rated at 390 hp, so would'nt that put us at 350+ hp or so? Any one have any idea....
your also forgetting that the cobra's have irs

you can slap slick's on a mach and drop at 5k. (yes you are at very high risk of failure)

but if you did the same to a cobra, the irs may go farther then the car down the track
That's true, but both cars can pulla2.0-2.160' in stock form pretty easily and run 12.8(SVT) and 13.1-13.3(Mach) with the same60'. The IRS doesn't become a problem for Cobras until they really want to launch it hard. The two cars are still within .4 tenths of one another. We know that the 310 hp rating is wrong. If we take the lower % of parasitic loss and said it was about 12%, that's a 37 hp loss to the wheels. The one Mach I saw dyno at 285rwhp would be a 322 crank HP car, according to a 12% loss and the 310hp factory rating.
I would think that would be closer to the actual HP rating. i would put money on it. now i just to find a bone stock mach and test it! my personal guess is that the mach actually put down 320-330hp. everyone know theres gonna be that one freak that dyno's ungodly high so that one doesnt count nor should the one that dynos like a 4 cyl.
people will argue that which you can, make a dyno read w/e you want.

and there was a big battle royal with the bullit v. gt. where some guy claimed he had a factory freak. and i believe it was 2000gt that said there are no such thing's due to the tolerance being so strict now a day's
01snake is offline  


Quick Reply: How underated are..



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 PM.