Tech: Mustang GT vs. Shelby GT350 Dyno

0 Mustang GT vs Shelby GT350 Featured

Coyote vs. Voodoo

Comparing the power of a 2015 Mustang GT and a 2016 Shelby GT350

By Steve Turner

In recent weeks we visited VMP Performance to document the dyno testing and tuning of two brand new Mustangs. The company recently acquired a 2015 Mustang GT slated for all-out race car duty in the NMRA’s Coyote Modified class. The other new project is a 2016 Shelby GT350, which is destined to live the life of a jack-of-all-trades while maintaining its streetability. Since we were there to see the baseline testing of both cars, we thought it might be fun to compare the output of the two in stock form to see just how much difference there is between the everyman’s GT and the top dog GT350.

VMP Performance’s stock 2015 Mustang GT put down over 379 horsepower and 355 lb-ft of torque in stock form. Shortly after this testing it began a transformation into an NMRA Coyote Modified racer.
VMP Performance’s stock 2015 Mustang GT, known as Ruby, put down over 379 horsepower and 355 lb-ft of torque in stock form. Shortly after this testing it began a transformation into an NMRA Coyote Modified racer.

“People are going to want to compare this car to a GT, you can do that all day long, but it’s like comparing the first time you had sex to years of experience,” VMP Performance’s Justin Starkey enthused. “From the MagnaRide shocks to the enormous powerband and the close-ratio Tremec six-speed to the handling, the GT350 is so far beyond a regular GT it’s not even funny. I can‘t wait to open this car up on a road course and a standing-mile event.”

The plan for VMP’s new Shelby GT350 is destined to become an all-around performer, but in stock form it put down over 449 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque.
The plan for VMP’s new Shelby GT350 is destined to become an all-around performer, but in stock form it put down over 449 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque.

Indeed the GT and GT350 may share the same basic architecture, but the latter car takes the platform on a higher level, and that is no more clear than when you compare the power curve of the two cars.

Looking at the two baseline dyno pulls, the Mustang GT’s engine comes off as downright industrial pulling to only 6,300 rpm and topping out at just shy of 380 horsepower. Meanwhile, the Shelby GT350’s vaunted FPC Voodoo 5.2-liter engine lives up to is reputation, pulling past 8,000 rpm and putting down nearly 450 to the tire in stock form.

You can watch those two runs here…

Keep in mind that this wasn’t a same-day test, but both cars were run on the same dyno and both had few miles on the odometer, so both engines were probably a bit tight. However, for the purposes of our quick comparison, you can see that there’s definitely something to the improvements that Ford Performance engineers made to the Voodoo engine.

If you ever had a question how the Voodoo 5.2-liter engine differs from its Coyote 5.0-liter cousin, this graph tells the tale. The GT 5.0 stalls out at just over 6,000 rpm, while the GT350 5.2 just keeps on pulling into the stratosphere.
If you ever had a question how the Voodoo 5.2-liter engine differs from its Coyote 5.0-liter cousin, this graph tells the tale. The GT 5.0 stalls out at just over 6,000 rpm, while the GT350 5.2 just keeps on pulling into the stratosphere.
Regular readers know we like to look at a sampling of the dyno data when we can to highlight those under-the-curve differences. Up top you can’t really compare the two, as the GT350 5.2 is in a category all its own. However, down low the GT 5.0 shows that bottom-end superiority. This is one weakness of the GT350 that VMP is looking to improve with tuning and bolt-ons.
Regular readers know we like to look at a sampling of the dyno data when we can to highlight those under-the-curve differences. Up top you can’t really compare the two, as the GT350 5.2 is in a category all its own. However, down low the GT 5.0 shows that bottom-end superiority. This is one weakness of the GT350 that VMP is looking to improve with tuning and bolt-ons.

Comments

comments

Leave a Reply

11,559 views