2013 Ford Shelby GT500 certified at 662 hp and 630 pound-feet
- Thread starter FordGTGuy
- Start date
short answer: yes
long answer: well, if you listen to all the jackass europeans, "**** not it's not a lowly american ford V8 engine, it's a koenigsegg engine!!!"
it kinda depends on your idea of a manufacturer's engine though. i think most people are referring to the engine architecture when they say "ford mod motor" or "small block chevy", considering that you can literally build an entirely aftermarket ford/cheby/mopar/etc engine. it may have a world products block, AFR heads, kellogg crank, manley rods, JE pistons, etc but it's still a "ford windsor V8", right?
in that sense, the koengisegg 5.0l V8 is a koenigsegg designed block, koenigsegg designed heads(IIRC), koenigsegg designed crank, etc ALL using the original 4.6l ford modular architecture. physical dimensions and locations are the same for all major features and the cooling and oiling system are similar(improved i'm sure).
but if you're a european snob douchebag(or an american wannabe european snob douchebag keyboard warrior in your moms basement), then you use the "it's not made by ford" loophole to take any credit away from a 1,000+HP production american engine.
(sorry for the rant, LOL)
if you read ford's press release again, there is a VERY important key word that they snuck in there - "series". ford calls it the most powerful "series production engine" in the world, considering the koenigsegg, SSC ultimate aero, et al are all made to order cars. sneaky stuff from the PR team!
i don't know the messy details about the SAE certification process, but it's been mentioned(i think in the press release) that the '13 GT500 is rated at 663HP @ 6500RPM which it holds all the way to 7000RPM. we can assume that "holds all the way to"(or whatever the hell they said) really means "drops slightly" since it would be rated at a higher RPM otherwise, seeing as how the 6500RPM mark is already into the 'over rev' thing. that's assuming that the "base rev limit"(so to speak) is still 6250RPM, right?
i was reading that press release like "blah blah blah, boring, typical press release...", then i got to that part and was like...
...followed by...
talk about a ****in bitch slap:kaboom:
:lol:
I was talking to Dave about this and he said that manufacturers do not even have to release the sae cert data which surprised me. Do they just test one motor, or a few then ave the results. Is the testing done on an engine dyno or chasis dyno?
Either way the rwhp numbers that I heard will create more crank hp than the cert number even with a calculated 12% loss. This leads me to believe the test the motor/s then adjust for allowable variances of 2 or 3%.
I thought the overboost was not a way to create more power but a way to go from 0-60 mph without a shift. Could be wrong though?
Last edited:
Does anyone think Ford made a mistake with this engine and should have run a blown 5.0 in the GT500?
no, because I think they needed something to separate the two cars, anyone can buy a 5.0 and put a blower on it...just my .02
I agree. If they took a 5.0 and put a blower on it, what would separate it from Roush or any of the other specialty GT's?
I honestly had to look up the SAE certification stuff because I don't quite understand the discrepancy between the ZL1 and GT500 numbers. It's clearly voluntary, and the only time you have to disclose it is when you are advertising your numbers as "sae certified". I don't see anything that says you have to adhere to maximums if you do it, i.e, if your engine makes a little more you can't say it's SAE certified.
If the ZL1 makes roughly 500-515 rwhp and the GT500 makes roughly 590-605 rwhp, the numbers seem a little off. Don't know what would account for the seeming disparity in loss getting to the tires.
If the ZL1 makes roughly 500-515 rwhp and the GT500 makes roughly 590-605 rwhp, the numbers seem a little off. Don't know what would account for the seeming disparity in loss getting to the tires.
IRS vs SRA
An IRS absorbs more hp than a solid axle. Basically, there are more moving parts, which creates more friction.
An IRS absorbs more hp than a solid axle. Basically, there are more moving parts, which creates more friction.
That might have something to do with it, although my '03 Cora dyno'ed on a DJ at 383 stock, well with a drop in K&N element in the factory housing with silencer in place :dancenana:
Well, the Cobras, like the Lightnings, were known to be underrated. They were not SAE certified.
The neat thing about certification, is it mainly applies to lower numbers. Meaning, lets say you show your lowest number engine, with most of them making more.
Fun times.
The neat thing about certification, is it mainly applies to lower numbers. Meaning, lets say you show your lowest number engine, with most of them making more.
Fun times.
Mine said "OMG I bet the Camaro guys are gonna jump off a cliff now." LOL. I bout pissed my pants laughing.
I do see your point, but just let me vent here....
....the new Viper has 295's IN THE FRONT and all that Ford gives us is skinny-vaganized 285's on all four corners?
oke:Sorry Ford, take that extra step and stop giving us cars-on-stilts and skinny wheels...:nonono:
.......but I'd still buy the GT500 if I had the money.:beer:
Ford gives us is skinny-vaganized 285's on all four corners?
... actually, it has 265s on the front. Nonetheless, while I'm a proponent of wider rear wheels/tires, here’s an explanation of why they chose to go w/the rear 285s (to minimize under-steering):
SVTPerformance.com : Why the 2013 GT500 has 285 Rear Tires - YouTube
I do see your point, but just let me vent here....
....the new Viper has 295's IN THE FRONT and all that Ford gives us is skinny-vaganized 285's on all four corners?
Sorry Ford, take that extra step and stop giving us cars-on-stilts and skinny wheels...:nonono:
.......but I'd still buy the GT500 if I had the money.:beer:
You're calling 285's skinny?
They mainly did this to help handling on road courses for the stock car, a long with less torque in first, taller gearing, better traction control and a launch system I would say the car can most likely handle itself.
This car is going to be a real killer, seriously the new GT500 is going to kill more old men than prostate cancer!
:lol::lol::beer:
Bingo. 305+ on the rear would result in every auto mag crying about the car's handling balance. Better off avoiding that, considering serious drag strip and stoplight warriors are going to replace the tires anyway.
Hopefully the next generation Mustang will be designed such that they can get away with wider rears (more rear weight bias?).
Last edited:
A stock C6Z comes with a 275/35 ZR 18 (F); 325/30 ZR 19 (R) and a stock viper comes with a 275/35 ZR 18 (F); 345/30 ZR 19 (R). I don't remember hearing any mags crying about the car's handling balance.
Users who are viewing this thread
