I don't like comparing a low number factory sc car's dyno to a mid number factory na car, especially when they have different transmissions, are more than 5 years apart(drivetrain technology has steadily improved, gotten lighter, robs less power to spin, etc).
That gt500 could have been heat sunk, still on the break in settings (like no boost), or other issues. The temps for the gt350 test were 100*, the 2010 gt500's weren't mentioned so I assume it's unknown.
In the real world, rhe gt350 won't feel soft even down low. The tr6060 has a tall spread with a 1:1 4th, and is decidedly more robust, but also mechanically heavier than a tr3160 (iirc that's the voodoos trans, probably have the name wrong.) all things told, you can't compare how real world torque or power will feel in a gt350 because of a low mustang dyno number from that 2010 gt500. I'd bet easy money that that particular gt500 could never trap as high as this gt350 in question, or run the same 1/4 mile. Weight difference is 200lbs, which is notable, but not a huge difference. The mechanical torque of the gt500 is effectively reduced a lot vs the gt350's which was intentionally geared shorter, and because of effective gearing, and general leverage, it will feel great. Think boss 302, not Mazda rx8. In short, the gt350 won't feel soft, less of being in 6th gear at 70 maybe, if even then. It's 6th is a .70, gt500's had .50's iirc.
The 350's trans has a much shorter gear spacing than the gt500's tr6060.
1:1 5th in the gt350 with very close spacing and iirc a 3.23 1st. 3.73 rear and 28" tires.
1:1 4th in the 2010 gt500 (and all really) with a 2.66 1st. 3.55 (iirc) rear and 28" tires. The 3.31 came later in the 2013's I believe.
Let's say the gt500 makes 500tq at 2000rpm and the gt350r makes 300tq there for easy math.
The effective gearing from those aforementioned numbers puts them within 15% of each other in real world calculations. There difference on paper is 66% net or 40% gross.
The voodoo will be plenty fun on the street, and will be much less prone to spinning on street tires.
Think of it like this. You can have 2000wtq, but if te wheel is 20ft tall (dump trucks), or the final drive ratio is a 2.75 and the transmission has a 2.5 1st then it's really nothing special.
Real world example, when I stepped down from 3.55's and a 26" tire to 3.08's and a 28" tire, my 920wtq (older 5.4 turbo combo) suddenly was more streetable and didn't blow the tires off at 70 anymore even in 2nd. Trap speed dropped but 1st wasn't a total spin fest (did have boost by gear as well).
When people talk about torque, they often don't realize that the entire system from transmission to drivetrain and wheels/tires themselves make a huge difference on effective torque.
Pick up some decidedly lighter rims for exams and you'll gain a small amount of power. It's not ricer math, its legitimacy physics. Same goes with lighter, stronger clutches and driveshafts. The engine is still producing the exact same hp, but less of it is lost to parasitic rotational costs.
This is in large part why ff cars routinely lose less hp to the ground than rwd, and especially awd.
Sincerely, Bill from D street.
That gt500 could have been heat sunk, still on the break in settings (like no boost), or other issues. The temps for the gt350 test were 100*, the 2010 gt500's weren't mentioned so I assume it's unknown.
In the real world, rhe gt350 won't feel soft even down low. The tr6060 has a tall spread with a 1:1 4th, and is decidedly more robust, but also mechanically heavier than a tr3160 (iirc that's the voodoos trans, probably have the name wrong.) all things told, you can't compare how real world torque or power will feel in a gt350 because of a low mustang dyno number from that 2010 gt500. I'd bet easy money that that particular gt500 could never trap as high as this gt350 in question, or run the same 1/4 mile. Weight difference is 200lbs, which is notable, but not a huge difference. The mechanical torque of the gt500 is effectively reduced a lot vs the gt350's which was intentionally geared shorter, and because of effective gearing, and general leverage, it will feel great. Think boss 302, not Mazda rx8. In short, the gt350 won't feel soft, less of being in 6th gear at 70 maybe, if even then. It's 6th is a .70, gt500's had .50's iirc.
The 350's trans has a much shorter gear spacing than the gt500's tr6060.
1:1 5th in the gt350 with very close spacing and iirc a 3.23 1st. 3.73 rear and 28" tires.
1:1 4th in the 2010 gt500 (and all really) with a 2.66 1st. 3.55 (iirc) rear and 28" tires. The 3.31 came later in the 2013's I believe.
Let's say the gt500 makes 500tq at 2000rpm and the gt350r makes 300tq there for easy math.
The effective gearing from those aforementioned numbers puts them within 15% of each other in real world calculations. There difference on paper is 66% net or 40% gross.
The voodoo will be plenty fun on the street, and will be much less prone to spinning on street tires.
Think of it like this. You can have 2000wtq, but if te wheel is 20ft tall (dump trucks), or the final drive ratio is a 2.75 and the transmission has a 2.5 1st then it's really nothing special.
Real world example, when I stepped down from 3.55's and a 26" tire to 3.08's and a 28" tire, my 920wtq (older 5.4 turbo combo) suddenly was more streetable and didn't blow the tires off at 70 anymore even in 2nd. Trap speed dropped but 1st wasn't a total spin fest (did have boost by gear as well).
When people talk about torque, they often don't realize that the entire system from transmission to drivetrain and wheels/tires themselves make a huge difference on effective torque.
Pick up some decidedly lighter rims for exams and you'll gain a small amount of power. It's not ricer math, its legitimacy physics. Same goes with lighter, stronger clutches and driveshafts. The engine is still producing the exact same hp, but less of it is lost to parasitic rotational costs.
This is in large part why ff cars routinely lose less hp to the ground than rwd, and especially awd.
Sincerely, Bill from D street.
Last edited:
