JimC Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I thought the same thing about the difference in HP. Read the article and look at the numbers .It seems that in the SS{600hp} the torque comes on so quickly that the small amount of slip dialed into the stock traction control system is amplified causing excessive wheelspin. The car really needs a stickier tire. The stock tires really limit the full potential of the hp increase. This was in the 600 hp version think about what it would be with 700+hp. I think to really experience the hp advantage to its full potential a new set of rubber is necessary. Stock GT500 Super Snake 0-60=4.6sec 0-60=4.4sec Both tests were done by R&T 0-100=9.9sec 0-100=9.1sec 1/4 mile 12.8/113 1/4 mile 12.5 /119 I agree with the tire part, no doubt about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker45 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I thought the same thing about the difference in HP. Read the article and look at the numbers .It seems that in the SS{600hp} the torque comes on so quickly that the small amount of slip dialed into the stock traction control system is amplified causing excessive wheelspin. The car really needs a stickier tire. The stock tires really limit the full potential of the hp increase. This was in the 600 hp version think about what it would be with 700+hp. I think to really experience the hp advantage to its full potential a new set of rubber is necessary. Stock GT500 Super Snake 0-60=4.6sec 0-60=4.4sec Both tests were done by R&T 0-100=9.9sec 0-100=9.1sec 1/4 mile 12.8/113 1/4 mile 12.5 /119 Part of that test bugs me. The super snake went .8 faster 0-100 but only .3 faster in the 1/4 mile? How did it not beat it by more in the 1/4? Simple extrapolation of those number shows that it should have gone faster then they stated. Or did the SS fall on it's face at the end of the 1/4 mile? Does that make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Part of that test bugs me. The super snake went .8 faster 0-100 but only .3 faster in the 1/4 mile? How did it not beat it by more in the 1/4? Simple extrapolation of those number shows that it should have gone faster then they stated. Or did the SS fall on it's face at the end of the 1/4 mile? Does that make sense? Could it be a heat-soak issue? That is what I was referring to, in wanting the KB with a 600hp tune. Heat-soak is a performance killer. If may be they ran were playing around warming up the car, then ran one test. The engine could have been hot enought when they ran the second test. that it lost power due to heat-soak. Hence the veriance in stats. You are not alone in spotting that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carrera Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Part of that test bugs me. The super snake went .8 faster 0-100 but only .3 faster in the 1/4 mile? How did it not beat it by more in the 1/4? Simple extrapolation of those number shows that it should have gone faster then they stated. Or did the SS fall on it's face at the end of the 1/4 mile? Does that make sense? You bring up some very good points. Further examination of the tests reveals that the SS was tested sometime between aug 07 and nov07 and the GT500 tested in Jan 07 different day, different conditions and different drivers. These things surely can contribute to the statistical anomalies. Nevertheless ,I expected the performance differences to be greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 You bring up some very good points. Further examination of the tests reveals that the SS was tested sometime between aug 07 and nov07 and the GT500 tested in Jan 07 different day, different conditions and different drivers. These things surely can contribute to the statistical anomalies. Nevertheless ,I expected the performance differences to be greater. That were your point come into play tires and drivers. can have the best car built, with out the right tires and a good driver it SOL time.. Ha, got to go the family is getten mad. see ya around. jimC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker45 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 You bring up some very good points. Further examination of the tests reveals that the SS was tested sometime between aug 07 and nov07 and the GT500 tested in Jan 07 different day, different conditions and different drivers. These things surely can contribute to the statistical anomalies. Nevertheless ,I expected the performance differences to be greater. I was wondering how they got the 0-100 times. I would almost think that they would have gotten it during the 1/4 mile run. It would make sense to do them at the same exact time. Same location. Good traction etc. That would make sense to me but I have no idea how they test these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker45 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Could it be a heat-soak issue? That is what I was referring to, in wanting the KB with a 600hp tune. Heat-soak is a performance killer.If may be they ran were playing around warming up the car, then ran one test. The engine could have been hot enought when they ran the second test. that it lost power due to heat-soak. Hence the veriance in stats. You are not alone in spotting that issue. I wouldn't think that it would in this test. I would still like to see some temps on the TVS compaired to the KB. With all of this info out there, there is still alot lacking. I also thought SAI was going to share dyno numbers with us as I remember them saying along time ago that they were getting one installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carrera Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I wouldn't think that it would in this test. I would still like to see some temps on the TVS compaired to the KB. With all of this info out there, there is still alot lacking. I also thought SAI was going to share dyno numbers with us as I remember them saying along time ago that they were getting one installed. There are so many variables in these tests. The only true comparison would be both cars on the same dyno on the same day. I would think SAI would make those numbers available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT500-07 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Could it be a heat-soak issue? That is what I was referring to, in wanting the KB with a 600hp tune. Heat-soak is a performance killer.If may be they ran were playing around warming up the car, then ran one test. The engine could have been hot enought when they ran the second test. that it lost power due to heat-soak. Hence the veriance in stats. You are not alone in spotting that issue. Both packages are lacking a Heat exchanger upgrade and a oil catch can. More Hp more cooling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Snake Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Both packages are lacking a Heat exchanger upgrade and a oil catch can. More Hp more cooling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carrera Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Both packages are lacking a Heat exchanger upgrade and a oil catch can. More Hp more cooling Fully agree. First on my list after tires.......Where does it end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I wouldn't think that it would in this test. I would still like to see some temps on the TVS compaired to the KB. With all of this info out there, there is still alot lacking. I also thought SAI was going to share dyno numbers with us as I remember them saying along time ago that they were getting one installed. That would be nice, I may be wrong won't be the first time, but if you have a large charger (kb) with a 600 tune vs. the smaller FRPP charger with a 600 tune would the kb run cooler because it is not working as hard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker45 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 That would be nice, I may be wrong won't be the first time, but if you have a large charger (kb) with a 600 tune vs. the smaller FRPP charger with a 600 tune would the kb run cooler because it is not working as hard? It should run cooler but that depends on the individual s/c's efficency rating as I understand. I asked Justin about the TVS and efficency in a post and he already replied. http://forum.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=24069 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vipereatr Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 As per another thread - the power train warranty is voided by the non-Ford blower. If that is indeed the case, a non-Ford fuel pump could void the power train warranty. My initial thought (and selection) was to go with the 600 hp, but 4 years from when now will anyone care whether S SNAKE had a warranty? Heck no, they (and myself included) will only care what's under the hood. So if SAI will allow --- 725 polished! Besides, if you can't afford a new clutch or to fix some other power train problem - where did that SS package money come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 As per another thread - the power train warranty is voided by the non-Ford blower. If that is indeed the case, a non-Ford fuel pump could void the power train warranty. My initial thought (and selection) was to go with the 600 hp, but 4 years from when now will anyone care whether S SNAKE had a warranty? Heck no, they (and myself included) will only care what's under the hood. So if SAI will allow --- 725 polished! Besides, if you can't afford a new clutch or to fix some other power train problem - where did that SS package money come from? Well put. If you wannta play sometimes you gotta pay. ANd a clutch here and a belt there is all part of playing. As I say the warranty is only as good as the dealer you bring your car to. Don't know about the rest of world but in my area dealers wont even warranty a ford air filter and can't even find a KNOWN FORD FACTORY RECALL!!! Not to say all dealers are bad but I travel 107 miles one way to the only good dealer in town. Go for the gusto you only live once. You a 100% correct no one will care about a warranty 4 plus years down the line. PS Im getting the 600 package because I have a vert. JimC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.