Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
GT 500 Details
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tt335ci03cobra" data-source="post: 16103335" data-attributes="member: 68944"><p>In two words, volumetric efficiency.</p><p></p><p>In a long ramble: Volumetric efficiency because more of the fuel is converted into motivation within the fords 5.2L than within the chevy’s 6.2L because of the closer accuracy of the 4 valve’s delivery of air and fuel as well as exhaust and compression (holding) vs the chevys 2v ibc design.</p><p></p><p>I should just look it up but because the Chevy ohv mill is 19% larger net or 16.5% larger gross, and I’m assuming the intake manifold design corresponds to that (no clue or desire to look up the actual volumetric capacity of the manifold since it’s SC and that opens an entire can of theoretical anomaly distortion worms from hot point turbulence to air density at testing, etc etc) and runs 15% more atmosphere compensation (2psi) than the Ford to create 755hp from 6.2+2.65L (8.85L) it likely has about 75-85% VE considering it is using about 25-33% more fuel than the gt500 (guessing based on similar modular packages ie sc coyote’s) to achieve that power point. I’m guessing the gt500 will be shy of the 115% (roughly) that the 460hp coyote mill has, but north of 100%. This difference of ~20% VE is why the gt500 mill can better utilize the air provided by 5.2L, and a 2.65L blower.</p><p></p><p>The LT5 is cammed for a very robust 3500-7000rpm. I’d guess gt500 is cammed for a very nice 3000-7500rpm from what I see so far. Dohc is easier to cover a wider power band with because it is more accurate at moving and delivering air and fuel.</p><p></p><p>I think gt500 will be about 750hp@7000 and 650tq@4500rpm (guesstimating) compared to 755hp@6400/715tq@4400 zr1.</p><p></p><p>What I’m going to be surprised to see is if the torque is above 650lb/ft. On my 5.3L modular with stage 3 ported gt500 heads and 9.3:1 compression, 15psi is about 980whp and 860wtq (120 gap) with twin 62’s. On 10psi, it’s a 815whp and 710wtq (105 gap).</p><p></p><p>I think ford will have done very very well if they can shrink the gap between hp and tq to under 100 for such a safe but high level factory effort running over 12psi. As boost goes up, torque doesn’t keep up wit hp in high rpm engines. On 30psi for example, I make 1200whp and only 970wtq for a difference of 230. </p><p></p><p>Also, keep in mind Ford will offer something like 5yr warranty on this engine. I’m replacing head gaskets and timing components every 10k miles on my 5.3 and zr1’s are catching fire/blowing up at a higher than expected rate. I think ford has some new tech in the head sealing on this gt500 that will come to be appreciated.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tt335ci03cobra, post: 16103335, member: 68944"] In two words, volumetric efficiency. In a long ramble: Volumetric efficiency because more of the fuel is converted into motivation within the fords 5.2L than within the chevy’s 6.2L because of the closer accuracy of the 4 valve’s delivery of air and fuel as well as exhaust and compression (holding) vs the chevys 2v ibc design. I should just look it up but because the Chevy ohv mill is 19% larger net or 16.5% larger gross, and I’m assuming the intake manifold design corresponds to that (no clue or desire to look up the actual volumetric capacity of the manifold since it’s SC and that opens an entire can of theoretical anomaly distortion worms from hot point turbulence to air density at testing, etc etc) and runs 15% more atmosphere compensation (2psi) than the Ford to create 755hp from 6.2+2.65L (8.85L) it likely has about 75-85% VE considering it is using about 25-33% more fuel than the gt500 (guessing based on similar modular packages ie sc coyote’s) to achieve that power point. I’m guessing the gt500 will be shy of the 115% (roughly) that the 460hp coyote mill has, but north of 100%. This difference of ~20% VE is why the gt500 mill can better utilize the air provided by 5.2L, and a 2.65L blower. The LT5 is cammed for a very robust 3500-7000rpm. I’d guess gt500 is cammed for a very nice 3000-7500rpm from what I see so far. Dohc is easier to cover a wider power band with because it is more accurate at moving and delivering air and fuel. I think gt500 will be about 750hp@7000 and 650tq@4500rpm (guesstimating) compared to 755hp@6400/715tq@4400 zr1. What I’m going to be surprised to see is if the torque is above 650lb/ft. On my 5.3L modular with stage 3 ported gt500 heads and 9.3:1 compression, 15psi is about 980whp and 860wtq (120 gap) with twin 62’s. On 10psi, it’s a 815whp and 710wtq (105 gap). I think ford will have done very very well if they can shrink the gap between hp and tq to under 100 for such a safe but high level factory effort running over 12psi. As boost goes up, torque doesn’t keep up wit hp in high rpm engines. On 30psi for example, I make 1200whp and only 970wtq for a difference of 230. Also, keep in mind Ford will offer something like 5yr warranty on this engine. I’m replacing head gaskets and timing components every 10k miles on my 5.3 and zr1’s are catching fire/blowing up at a higher than expected rate. I think ford has some new tech in the head sealing on this gt500 that will come to be appreciated. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
GT 500 Details
Top