MOUNT-N-SLOT Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 http://www.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php/videos/view-59-700hp-stock-2014-shelby-gt500-on-the-dyno/ After reading reports of high and low dyno numbers for the 13-14 GT500's, I wanted to find out how many MUSTANGS were under my hood when I nailed it! So I did some research and found the most reputable dyno facility in the Front Range of CO. Located in Arvada, CO, DYNO-PRO, Inc. is Denver's original dyno shop, opening in 1997. Owned and operated by a guy named Bear, I took the GT500 in today for thier baseline run package. For $75.00, Bear sets the SHELBY up on the 2WD dyno and makes three pulls, with about 8 minutes between for cooling. The car inlet air temp was 94 on the first pull, with 91 octane from Shell in the tank. After the first pull, Bear's smile as he stepped from the car told the story. He was shocked to see a factory stock, sub $70K MSRP car pull over 600HP at the wheels. The next two pulls suffered from heat soak, but were consistent across the powerband. The Results: 604 WHP and 630 Ft Lb of Torque. Add the 16% - 18% for driveline loss and you've got 700+ HP at the flywheel. With 5/60 Warranty & Roadside Assistance! If you're looking for a higher HP / $$$ ratio, good luck. If your on the fence about buying one of these amazing MADE IN USA Muscle Cars... Pull the trigger now while they're out there! In Colorado... Stop by and see Bear and tell him Earl with the gorgeous SHELBY sent you! http://www.facebook.com/Dyno.Pro.inc MOUNT-N-SLOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopsgt500 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 That is sweet. I need to do the same and see what the stock hp/tq numbers are. Got to love the power :happy feet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DubbsFaris Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Awesome! As long as your happy with it! One of the big arguments you can get into is Dyno numbers though. Be prepared to hear the nay Sayers. And the truth is every dyno will give you a different number. And, there is a wide variance on our stock cars. Just curious- how many miles you got on your 500? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norton Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 So I did some research and found the most reputable dyno facility in the Front Range of CO. Located in Arvada, CO, DYNO-PRO, Inc. is Denver's original dyno shop, opening in 1997. Owned and operated by a guy named Bear, I took the GT500 in today for thier baseline run package. For $75.00, Bear sets the SHELBY up on the 2WD dyno and makes three pulls, with about 8 minutes between for cooling. The Results: 604 WHP and 630 Ft Lb of Torque. Add the 16% - 18% for driveline loss and you've got 700+ HP at the flywheel. With 5/60 Warranty & Roadside Assistance! If you're looking for a higher HP / $$$ ratio, good luck. If your on the fence about buying one of these amazing MADE IN USA Muscle Cars... Pull the trigger now while they're out there! In Colorado... Stop by and see Bear and tell him Earl with the gorgeous SHELBY sent you! http://www.facebook.com/Dyno.Pro.inc Nice! I may have pay them a visit too, to see what my 2013 puts down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 Alibi 2 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Nice #'s, consistent with what other are posting on other sites. As posted earlier, dyno #'s vary from unit to unit, but it would be safe to say that a stock 13/14 puts down 600rwhp. My tuner did a stock 13 in Feb. that put down 610.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Full chasis dynos are for tuning and not intended to provide a mathematical basis for the determination of actual flywheel production. These neighborhood dynos are notoriously variant. This fact is well known throughout the aftermarket performance industry. Artful operators of these devices have the ability to skew the results with a plethora of correction factors etc. These engines were accurately rated by the manufacturer at the crankshaft with SAE supervision under preset conditions @ 662. 700 is not reality for these engines in factory configuration. Extrapolating "dyno" numbers to actual engine power makes great internet chatter with 16-18% losses but is on the edge of being laughable to anyone who is truly conversant with these matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOUNT-N-SLOT Posted July 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I knew Dufus would take a shot at me, what a DUFUS! TROLL! Here's an article from Industry Experts, who tested driveline loss on two different engine / trans / rear end / mfg. combos, using a chassis dyno. Just like the one used at DYNO-PRO. Bottom line: there's a loss of power at the wheels. How much: they say 17%. http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_0311_drivetrain_power_loss/viewall.html DubbsFaris - I had 1,600 miles or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I knew Dufus would take a shot at me, what a DUFUS! TROLL! DubbsFaris - I had 1,600 or so... No reason to take any offense. Your claim of 700+ HP is simply wrong. Manufacturers no longer have the lattitude of "underrating" their engines when they are evaluated under the SAE certification process. Google that subject and you will learn that this is reputable, standardized, process. Creativity becomes a factor when the full chasis dyno numbers are delivered to overly enthusiastic owners. These cars are monsters on their own merrits, no reason to exagerate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperNC Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I'm definitely not an expert, but the article referenced is making assumptions and is somewhat subjective. 17% could be the average loss, but that seems high.... I would hope that is not the case. Nonetheless a performance driveshaft will help you regain some of that loss. That would be my first upgrade as I noticed a tremendous improvement in responsiveness and eliminated driveline chatter when I got rid of the clunky stock shaft. All that said, good numbers for your car! Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 The '13/'14 GT500s come with what most would consider a performance, lighter weight drive shaft. The SAE certification process is not fudgeable or open to manipulation of parameters to effect a final numerical result in either direction. "underrating" or anything close is negated when the engine is certified under SAE standard conditions and supervised. The belief that these motors actually produce far more than their rated output makes for great internet banter but is not reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakshow12 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 So, what you are saying then is that every Dyno shop in the country is just smoke and mirrors?? You sir are laughable. Most of the stuff I have read on the 13/14 for driveline loss is more like 10-14% but averages out around 12%. Taking those numbers of 604hp and play conservative with 10% driveline loss that looks like 668 to me! I could imagine the factory parameters on the testing have some variance. Some engines are a little better than others that is also a fact. I do not feel these Dyno numbers are outside of what others are seeing. I am just not sure what point dufus is trying to make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norton Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I am just not sure what point dufus is trying to make? There is never any point worth understanding when dealing with a TROLL. They simply want to agitate others by taking cheap shots from a position of anonymity. The worst thing we can do is feed him and his ilk. Doing do usually results in their multiplication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman5000 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 So, what you are saying then is that every Dyno shop in the country is just smoke and mirrors?? You sir are laughable. Most of the stuff I have read on the 13/14 for driveline loss is more like 10-14% but averages out around 12%. Taking those numbers of 604hp and play conservative with 10% driveline loss that looks like 668 to me! I could imagine the factory parameters on the testing have some variance. Some engines are a little better than others that is also a fact. I do not feel these Dyno numbers are outside of what others are seeing. I am just not sure what point dufus is trying to make? This is true. The '13/'14 Shelby have been proven time and again to have the lowest power train loss of any current vehicle. My buddy pulled his motor at 268 miles to "build" it up. He put it on an engine Dyno and got 665 HP at the crank. According to engineers I have spoke with at Ford, the single largest contributor to the very low driveline loss is the CF driveshaft. It takes very little HP to turn it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 This is true. The '13/'14 Shelby have been proven time and again to have the lowest power train loss of any current vehicle. My buddy pulled his motor at 268 miles to "build" it up. He put it on an engine Dyno and got 665 HP at the crank. According to engineers I have spoke with at Ford, the single largest contributor to the very low driveline loss is the CF driveshaft. It takes very little HP to turn it. The advent of the Electric Power Assist Steering (EPAS) is the biggest reason you see less parasitic loss on the newer GT500's. It takes a lot of horsepower to drive that hydraulic pump attached to the front of the engine. The alternator is right up there with it taking as much as 15HP to drive, under a high demand situation. Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 This is true. The '13/'14 Shelby have been proven time and again to have the lowest power train loss of any current vehicle. My buddy pulled his motor at 268 miles to "build" it up. He put it on an engine Dyno and got 665 HP at the crank. According to engineers I have spoke with at Ford, the single largest contributor to the very low driveline loss is the CF driveshaft. It takes very little HP to turn it. Thank You for validating my point Iceman. The engine dyno is less than 1% variance from the Factory SAE rating. This is reality and quite strong for a factory delivered passenger car indeed. 700+ that is claimed in this thread is fantasy land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Nice! I may have pay them a visit too, to see what my 2013 puts down... Norton, I'm looking to do the same thing, to get some baseline runs in to see what I have under the hood. I plan to use and highly recommend Rob Williams @ Rob Williams Racing (RWR) in Littleton though. https://www.facebook.com/RWRMotorSports?fref=ts Rob is highly regarded as "The Tuning Guru" in Colorado and he is one of the *few* people I'd trust to touch my car. He has been tuning and Mustangs and MAF based EFI for decades. For the people bashing "dufus": Obviously, he's saying things you don't like to hear but you might want listen to him because what he says is the truth. Just because you don't like what he says, doesn't make it any less truthful or accurate. The one issue I do take with him is the comment regarding the 700HP figure. 700HP (crankshaft HP) is accurate for the 5.8's. Ford rated the 5.8L mod motor at 662HP@6250rpm. The problem is, redline is at 7000rpm, not 6250. Hot Rod magazine reported seeing numbers right at or very near to 700HP when they were looking over the shoulder of the Ford Engineers prior to the public introduction of the new motor. With HP being calculated as a product of Torque & RPM (Torque X RPM/5250), the higher you spin the motor (rpm) the more HP you're going to produce provided the torque curve isn't falling off a cliff. But 700 is CRANKSHAFT HP, not RWHP. Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Norton, I'm looking to do the same thing, to get some baseline runs in to see what I have under the hood. I plan to use and highly recommend Rob Williams @ Rob Williams Racing (RWR) in Littleton though. https://www.facebook.com/RWRMotorSports?fref=ts Rob is highly regarded as "The Tuning Guru" in Colorado and he is one of the *few* people I'd trust to touch my car. He has been tuning and Mustangs and MAF based EFI for decades. For the people bashing "dufus": Obviously, he's saying things you don't like to hear but you might want listen to him because what he says is the truth. Just because you don't like what he says, doesn't make it any less truthful or accurate. The one issue I do take with him is the comment regarding the 700HP figure. 700HP (crankshaft HP) is accurate for the 5.8's. Ford rated the 5.8L mod motor at 662HP@6250rpm. The problem is, redline is at 7000rpm, not 6250. Hot Rod magazine reported seeing numbers right at or very near to 700HP when they were looking over the shoulder of the Ford Engineers prior to the public introduction of the new motor. With HP being calculated as a product of Torque & RPM (Torque X RPM/5250), the higher you spin the motor (rpm) the more HP you're going to produce provided the torque curve isn't falling off a cliff. But 700 is CRANKSHAFT HP, not RWHP. Phill Take a look at his video which ends in the graph. The HP flatlines @ 6 grand to where they signed off at 6,600rpm as the TQ curve is falling as expected. It is unlikely that the HP would hold around 600 from 6K rpms to 6,600 and then make a northward turn from 6,600 to 7,000. I did read the article about the engine dyno out to 7 grand interesting but not demonstrated here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twobjshelbys Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Can anyone comment on driveline losses with modern transmissions? When I had the gt done they said now good manual transmissions are more like 10% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frydguy79 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 ok i will state again... the GUY running the engine dyno for Ford when these engines...were in develpoment told me the flywheel hp was RUNNING 715-735 ..... so you can guess all the f*** you want and come up with all theories in the world.... but these engines are over 700hp.. plain FACTS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 '13/'14 peak rwhp numbers seem to be around the 600 mark which would support the 10% factor. Keep in mind that the frictional, parasitic, loss percentage discussed here is not linear. We are talking about the loss at the rpm where maximum HP #s are obtained. The loss percentage would be higher in the lower rpm ranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOUNT-N-SLOT Posted July 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 The debate on 700+Hp centers on driveline loss %. Does anyone know the percentage for sure? Because I'm not pulling my engine to find out. My baby put down 604/630, and I'm very happy with those numbers. Here's the data in MPH, showing 618 WHP and a continuing upward trend 2010KonaBlueGT discusses. http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af110/mount-n-slot/MPHDYNOGRAPH_zps04967c40.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 ok i will state again... the GUY running the engine dyno for Ford when these engines...were in develpoment told me the flywheel hp was RUNNING 715-735 ..... so you can guess all the f*** you want and come up with all theories in the world.... but these engines are over 700hp.. plain FACTS... Now that certainly puts an end to any possible debate here if some "GUY" told you that. Simply amazing stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frydguy79 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Now that certainly puts an end to any possible debate here if some "GUY" told you that. Simply amazing stuff! he aint some guy DUFASS he works for ford and does not want his name out there..DUFASS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twobjshelbys Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 ok i will state again... the GUY running the engine dyno for Ford when these engines...were in develpoment told me the flywheel hp was RUNNING 715-735 ..... so you can guess all the f*** you want and come up with all theories in the world.... but these engines are over 700hp.. plain FACTS... Since ford started stating HP they have been notorious for understating the numbers. I think it goes all the way back to the thunderbolt 427 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frydguy79 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Since ford started stating HP they have been notorious for understating the numbers. I think it goes all the way back to the thunderbolt 427 look at the current cobra jet race cars... THEN tell me they aint UNDERRATED.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dufus Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 look at the current cobra jet race cars... THEN tell me they aint UNDERRATED.... Typical clueless car salesman. You must be unable to comprehend the SAE certification protocol. Do some research and educate yourself before you shoot your mouth off. What else did the "GUY" tell you. hilarious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 look at the current cobra jet race cars... THEN tell me they aint UNDERRATED.... Huh? I'm not sure what your point is. The CJ's run a 4.0L Whipple supercharger, not a 2.3L TVS. Apples/Oranges. Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frydguy79 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Huh? I'm not sure what your point is. The CJ's run a 4.0L Whipple supercharger, not a 2.3L TVS. Apples/Oranges. Phill Phil not quite.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffJ Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Typical clueless car salesman. You must be unable to comprehend the SAE certification protocol. Do some research and educate yourself before you shoot your mouth off. What else did the "GUY" tell you. hilarious! Wow, dufus, you really have no clue what people you are talking to do you, or know our connections? Just keep playing on google, obviously you're much smarter than the rest of us because of it. You clearly are more connected and know way more than we do. Also, why are you here? You clearly do not own a Shelby. Is it just to cause trouble? The only positive comment you have had here was about a guy who bought a Corvette. Your colors are becoming clear. Reminds me of somebody that was recently banned. Your name calling and harassing have already gone beyond board rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frydguy79 Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Typical clueless car salesman. You must be unable to comprehend the SAE certification protocol. Do some research and educate yourself before you shoot your mouth off. What else did the "GUY" tell you. hilarious! DUFASS ... talk about cluess you must be a democrat also... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.