2016 Shelby GT350 Tuning

[EditorTurner]

Under Your Spell
If you want to mod your GT350 right away, HP Tuners is ready with tuning
By Steve Turner
Photos courtesy of Ford Motor Company and HP Tuners

The TriCor PCM in the 2015 Mustang definitely took more time for the aftermarket to get a handle on than the Copperhead PCM in the 2011-2014 Mustang. However, now that tuners are familiar with the architecture, there’s good news for those chomping at the bit to mod their new Shelby GT350s. That’s right, HP Tuners has now added support for the 2016 Shelby GT350 in its VCM Suite software.
Continue reading →

 

[bpmurr]

It's cool tuning is ready to go, but I'll let Lund and the other tuners play guinea pig. It will take a bold owner to join this club for a while.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

I'd think that higher octane fuel may be necessary to get much more power out of the Voodoo. I was amazed that they could even RUN a 12:1 port injected engine on 93 octane, much less 91.

 

[GT Premi]

I'd think that higher octane fuel may be necessary to get much more power out of the Voodoo. I was amazed that they could even RUN a 12:1 port injected engine on 93 octane, much less 91.

That's what happens when you have actual engineers (with full access to programming code) tinkering around with engine tuning versus Wizards of Oz doing nothing but messing around with timing curves. How do you think Bugatti and Koenigsegg are able to produce 1,000+HP monsters that run on 91 octane but aftermarket tuners can't accomplish the same feat on 91 octane? It's not because they're using magical engine components and metallergy that Ford can't get their hands on. It's because they have the engineering know-how and corporate resources to bear.

Don't get me wrong, there are some tuners out there that can get the job done on normal pump gas, but it seems they're few and far between.

 

[Voltwings]

I'd think that higher octane fuel may be necessary to get much more power out of the Voodoo. I was amazed that they could even RUN a 12:1 port injected engine on 93 octane, much less 91.

I know the cams have a lot of lift, but it will also depend on the duration. You can bleed off a lot of static compression depending on how you allow the cams to overlap (perks of VVT). That being said, i agree with you, there likely isn't much free horsepower sitting on the table from just a tune. I remember we were fairly certain this was going to be a DI motor, i wonder if they considered it at all.

That's what happens when you have actual engineers (with full access to programming code) tinkering around with engine tuning versus Wizards of Oz doing nothing but messing around with timing curves. How do you think Bugatti and Koenigsegg are able to produce 1,000+HP monsters that run on 91 octane but aftermarket tuners can't accomplish the same feat on 91 octane? It's not because they're using magical engine components and metallergy that Ford can't get their hands on. It's because they have the engineering know-how and corporate resources to bear.

Don't get me wrong, there are some tuners out there that can get the job done on normal pump gas, but it seems they're few and far between.

Hard parts account for a lot of the power, and tuners tend to be limited to whatever folks bring them. I have seen no shortage of turbo 2.0L 4 cylinders that can make 500 whp on 91 pump, takes a damn good cylinder head and turbo combo (with lots of revs) but it'll do it.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

One of the engineers said that there were too many drawbacks to DI versus the benefits in an NA motor. He said FI engines are a no brainier for DI, but NA with DI has its share of give and take. I think that they could've gone DI and bumped the compression up to 13 or 14:1, but I'm sure cost was a huge reason for passing on the DI also.

Bugatti and Koenigsegg use DI with turbos, so that's a totally different ball game. 12:1 on 91 octane with port injection is borderline. Like Voltwings said, I'm sure they're bleeding off static compression with VCT to make that possible.

 

[EditorTurner]

DSG2003SVT is correct. I asked one of the powertrain engineers about DI, and he said that in naturally aspirated applications the combustion is actually more efficient with port injection.

 

[Voltwings]

One of the engineers said that there were too many drawbacks to DI versus the benefits in an NA motor. He said FI engines are a no brainier for DI, but NA with DI has its share give and take. I think that they could've gone DI and bumped the compression up to 13 or 14:1, but I'm sure cost was a huge reason for passing on the DI also.

Very interesting ... i want to dig up some more on that 458 motor now and see why they decided to go DI.

Edit: so far all i'm seeing is that it was for emissions, though its just coming from generic articles.

 

[derklug]

With the different problems I have seen with DI, mainly in German applications, I am willing to give up a few HP to keep it simple.

Now if someone told me when I started in this business that I would call a four cam, 32 valve, variable timed, multi-port fuel injected engine simple, I would have laughed.