[JamesNoBrakes]

Originally Posted by oldman

yawn, you go with that. drag racing is the most HP per package size, weight and cost. That is clearly OHV. Please find me something like the pump gas shoot out any DOHC. I followed the Supra guy for a while with the 2JZ, lots of promises lots of problems, and as far as I know he never once actually finished the pump gas drags despite the claims 1000 HP dyno runs.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-...ump-gas-drags/
Nutshell, simple rules: drivable, on gas, who wins? OHV.

If I was not a big DOHC, I would not have followed the Supra to see if he could bring it, he can't.

Will the new 5.0 with crazy mods be at the 2018 pump gas shoot out, I hope so. Will DOHC dominate say in 10 years? dunno I doubt it. Why do I doubt it? The engine has 4 inch bore centers, meaning that there is all kinds of heat and sealing issues. Why does it have 4.0 bore centers? simple cause DOHC engines are so friggen huge externally, if the engine had 4.4 bore centers Ford could only put it in a large truck. Also there is crankshaft whip issue with a small bore center engine at high RPM as the harmonics creep up and down the shaft vs less bearing area (mains are seated between bore centers). So there ya go. Reasonable cost performance favors the bigger short block with more cooling and sealing, with more main bearing surface and less need for RPM to make HP.

From Honda racing there is a max of 9500 PEAK RPM for shot durations like an autocross on a 86mm stroke engine (27.233 meters / second). Any further increase in RPM results in the breakdown of the oil film of the piston and bore. Ford is pushing 93 mm with the Voodoo, looks like the at 8250 RPM (25.575 m/s), quick number crunch 8800 RPM PEAK for shot durations (27.1 m/s) is the limit, Ford is really close to oil film breakdown stock. So a really crazy NA build that could incease peak HP and RPM would be limited to oil film to 8500 RPM with a fuel cut at 8800 would wield a build of 526 HP x 1.13 increase in engine speed breather = 600 HP. Sure this is a ball park figure, but you can see there is a limit to a 4.0 bore spaced engine.

For grins the LS7 has a 101.6 stroke so give the same max piston speed: 8500 rpm for 27.s m/s, clearly the LS7 even in its most wild configuration is not going to hit a piston speed issue. As an aside the limit to a OHV engine without cam in cam technology or some sort of rocker arm VTEC would be the ability to idle, given a 7 liter LT1 engine and maintain some drivability say 700 to 750 HP, depending on one's definition of idle and drivability. Pray is already pushing 600 WHP on what would appear to be a daily driver, Katch is at 707 STP engine HP on a 7.0, so I'm probably pretty close. Maybe with the Victory JR head and kooks headers could get a little more. Basically take the intake flow number x2 = engine HP.


Take away the limit is not the breathing it is the stroke and it is going to get really hard to get more HP. Hence Ford has hit two dead ends: can't bore, and can't stroke. The OHV engine is just fine. Hence just about any discussion about the 5.0 has to turn into but if you add a supercharger.. cause they (5.0 buffs) have no other option.

http://www.chevyhardcore.com/tech-st...the-winner-is/

So for a drivable engine on a $10,000 build the Coyote is about 520 HP, say 550 HP on the new direct inject. A 7 liter texas speed crate engine is about 700 HP. Torque of course follows, at no time will the Coyote put out more peak torque vs the minimum torque of a 7.0 over its applied band, which is really important in an autoX. huge bucks 5.2 DOHC build I'm saying 600 HP is a nearly impossible wall to climb due to oil film issues, no matter what the dyno says. For the LT1 OHV, it is idle and driveability at 700 to 750 HP, maybe a little more with E85 and Victor JR heads, and way way way way cheaper. That is an impossible gulf to swim.

Sans FI, on the street it is going to be HARD to beat a LT1, Ford engine too weak, Dodge is too heavy.




Like I stated a while back there was a REALLY quick Mustang at the drags I went over to see what was under the hood, thinking 351C or 460, something, nope LS engine.

Actually I would absolutely love to see a NA, 9000 or 10,000 rpm DOHC V8 drag engine. Note due to the stoke and oil film AFAIK you won't see a 5.0 or 5.2 doing the same RPM on the AutoX, unless it is trailered in and engine toss every once in a while.

How is the 5.0 engine both 460 and 430 SAE hp?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Deakins

You know the best thing about threads like this...at least all of us real car guys know that all the wannabes will be in here arguing while we are at the track. All the mustang I've raced against were driven by cool people that loved cars and racing...Not some fanboy that just wants to run his mouth. Of course most of them had GT350's that were paid for so maybe it's a class thing with the cheap mustang bringing in the bottom feeders...?

Well most of the ones in here arguing don't even have a "cheap" Mustang...they don't have one at all. I doubt they even have A car.

Originally Posted by metros11

That's not nice.

The truth isn't always...

[Nabush]

Originally Posted by oldman

And that still does not make HP per liter a design parameter. Never doubted your personal qualifications.





HP per liter is not an engineering or design parameter you ask for nonsensical data to prove a fictional parameter. I can play too: Find me a DOHC engine that makes 500 HP per intake valve?

An OHV makes more power per external size, more power per weight, a lower center of gravity (unless we are talking ME 109), more power per cost, is rebuildable, has a much broader and significantly higher torque per external size. All of these details are engineering elements.




Never once said that you can't. Since there is no design criteria as HP per liter, who cares? It is canard dreamed up. You keep tossing that straw man out there. I don't know why? I could easily argue the usefulness of DOHC engines and not once bring up a calculated and meaningless parameter.







Basically you claiming an engine designed per an unknow to me set of rules is superior... to XYZ Clearly a 1200 HP V8 OHV could also be built for the "rules". The discussion is on drag racing and 1/4 mile. Please let me know when 900 HP million dollar V10 DOHC become dominant at local drags.

Rules unlimited, that why I brought up top fuel... it is all large displacement OHV. Basically most drag racing from run what your brung to top fuel is large displacement OHV because of the design and engineering parameters list above. Cost, rebuild, easy to work on, less exotic material, dependability, more HP per size and weight, more torque per size and weight.

But always interested in F1, Austin has F1 and these engines are all hybrid based with hybrid forced induction systems. I will conceded right now that electro magnetic technology will replace DOHC with actuated valves
http://www.launchpnt.com/portfolio/t...valve-actuator

Or even individual runner electric turbos controlling everything no throttle body, no spark, a compression ignition gas engine via IR electric boost.



There are others here that might be interested, I did not mean to imply that you did not know all there is to know.

Add in fuel injection, variable speed supercharger, meth injection. Then on the Kurt Tank Ta-152 you get N2O injection and 2 cannons in the wing and 1 huge cannon in the nose. Many people think it has a radial engine, but it was a inverted V12.

But anybody that really cares knows it not DOHC engines that won the war (sorry P-51) it was the old OHV, cause it was just plain BIG internally per external size, yes a design criteria :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright...Duplex-Cyclone

So no rules, need to win a war, biggest engine that fits the chassis wins.




Sorry, you clearly listed adjustable lift as one of the superior adjustments in favor of DOHC, I merely pointed out that the LT1 had adjustable lift (in fact the MOST adjustable lift of any engine) and the Coyote had Nada, must have hit a nerve



AFAIK that is true, you have to admit it looks pretty simple to gain 20% increase in HP for the Viper (with supporting mods). Which really put is HUGE.


Note if you are NOT interested in what DOHC is used for in a modern engine skip:

I'm familiar with many DOHC engines, Honda, Toyota, Volvo most of their engines use variable overlap for either cold start up emissions or in the case of Toyota to implement Miller / Atkinson cycles. Volvo for instance has variable overlap only on the exhaust via cam phaser and that is only to dump raw fuel down the exhaust to light the cat so the engine can pass CA ULEV2 standards. Honda AFAIK only uses I-VTEC in only one engine the K20z with about 500 cars to date sold for actual increase in HP. The K20z in the average Civic uses I-VTEC which does vary one cam in both phase (the I) and the lift: VTEC, only to induce swirl into the chamber for smog by shutting of 1 or the 2 intake valves. Once again it is a smog issue. The exact same technology is use world wide to implement lean burn, but alas not in the US cause of smog.

I absolutely agree that a DOHC engine is better to dump huge quantities of raw fuel down the exhaust port to make the engine just a smiggen clean, and if that is done to every car in California ULEV2 or ZPV, and with that smiggen decrease it would equal the toxins emitted by a very small village in Nepal's mopeds. Once gain the technology is being used for smog.

The only engine (outside of the Type R) that I know of and I that used overlap and lift for performance it the GM design (IVLC)in the Impala

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/n...takevalve.html




I race car production engines driven by Joe Average, never claimed to be the head of Ferrari.



Actually you use them probably because of a rule constraint. I'm sure a 7 liter OHV engine would perform just fine.



Yep bucks unlimited and a RULE CONSTRAINT. I'm quite sure a 7000 RPM 7 liter GM engine in either chassis would absolutely dominate by a wide margin and far less dollars and fit just fine in the chassis.

Every case you have brought up is because of a rule favoring engine displacement.... yet you can't see that. Oh well I tried.








Are you playing dumb ? I'm talking about after market support, not stock engines. I pretty know the Z06/ZL1 as I almost bought one before ordering a GS....

I guess I am more than playing dumb you claimed there was a warrantied supercharger HP for cheap on the 2018 GT, I was all set to buy. But alas it is some heavily qualified warranty, that you still have not supplied the link to. I merely point out that GM for the masses is supplying a relatively affordable supercharged solution on an OHV engine bumper to bumper even. This drastically undercuts your argument about warranty and forced induction being somehow favoring DOHC BTW.

Looks like for this topic affordable bumper to bumper supercharged performance is only available from GM on a OHV V8. I guess no link is coming for the affordable warranty supercharged 2018 GT. I was all set to get one.





As soon as you show me the SAE part. And as I pointed out there is a REAL SAE and they do certify the LS7, and the dyno racers are still trying to figure out why there is no magical way to get WHP, into engine SAE certified engine HP.

So no youtube does not equal a SAE certification. For me I'm 99.99% sure the new 5.0 makes 460 SAE HP, and care little about crayon charts.

But please, I'm actually interested in seeing an dynojet SAE corrected run of the new 5.0

I have no doubt that youtube has all sorts of STP, Hub, eddy current, crayon charts are easy to produce and as stated a Unicorn is a horse.

You list your qualifications, I've sent you a link to what a SAE certified engine is. Somehow you take youtube wheel or hub or who knows, call them caryon dynos as some sort of indication that that the new 5.0 is somehow making more HP? OK then.

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6066-M8627

670Hp supercharger kit for 15-17, CARB approved and 1 year 12 000 miles warranty (better than nothing)

As far SAE, it seems in US on the dyno you can have either "standard" correction or SAE correction for the wheel horsepower number, the latter showing obviously lower numbers

Here are some videos of dyno of the new coyote :

420.63whp SAE corrected with 6800rpm cut do to speed limiter on a Dynojet around 2 min 10 :



421whp on baseline, 469whp with CAI, E85 tune, not too bad...



Around 4min 30 and after (don't bother too much with the guy in the video )


And so on.

So either way Ford made very good transmissions and the transmission loss are less than 10% or the motor does make more power than 460HP...

[JamesNoBrakes]

Originally Posted by Nabush

So either way Ford made very good transmissions and the transmission loss are less than 10% or the motor does make more power than 460HP...

You are left with a few distinct logical choices, because the engine is SAE rated at 460hp.

1. It's not SAE rated at 460hp, in other words, they are lying. Ford is in fact saying it's SAE rated for 460hp. I don't see the same being claimed by BMW, who is notorious for advertising WHP and not crank HP numbers, so this would be a first for Ford. Sometimes the claims of being "underated" are simply due to not understanding some of the conditions of the test or some of the characteristics of the car, in some cases, it is true. Subaru had a marketing line a few years ago for their turbo cars which was, "don't compare HP, compare the 0-60 numbers!", what they didn't add was that the 0-60 numbers were a function of 5000 rpm clutch-drops with AWD, from a roll, the 0-60s were dismal, because they were down so far on the HP. People thought they were "underated" because of the standing 0-60 times. So either the Ford engine is SAE 460, or they are being dishonest.

2. Ford has magically found some cure for drivetrain losses and invented bearings with no drag and shafts that do not flex, etc.

3. The numbers of these dynos vary, just like all dynos do, because they are not standardized. The difference between saying it's SAE vs. seeing the documentation and certification.

[Deakins]

Let's face it, Nabush doesn't understand that there are vast differences in a manufacturer like Ford achieving an SAE rating for its engine and what he sees on the internet. Furthermore, he doesn't understand that the whole SAE process exists due to the inaccuracy of dyno's, and the manipulations that can easily be done by the operator/company. A tightly controlled dyno that is maintained well can be very useful in measuring output and gauging increases or decreases in said gains; while a cheap dyno that isn't well maintained and not tightly controlled will be all over the place.

If Ford went through the process and is stating the SAE number you can bet that if you pulled the engine out of a brand new car, and ran it as required on the dyno per the SAE testing standard you would get that SAE number. That's the whole point of the process!

All of these rediculous posts stem from well intentioned people that truly have no idea how a dyno works and the software calculations that are involved. If you lined up 3 different dyno's in a parking lot I could make any or all of them output just about whatever HP and TQ you wanted to see. Sorry, but that's the truth of it and why the SAE stepped in and gave us the process that manufacturers now use.

[Koldunic]

The low RPM torque is supposed to be higher with the 2018 Mustang. I am happy for Mustang owner.
The low low RPM torque is one of the thing I hate about my GT. The engine comes alive only over 3500 RPM.

It’s also the reason why I didn’t order a 2018 GT350R. Glad I changed for a ZL1.

But it’s mainly a matter of taste for me as I love all cars.

[Nabush]

Originally Posted by Deakins

Let's face it, Nabush doesn't understand that there are vast differences in a manufacturer like Ford achieving an SAE rating for its engine and what he sees on the internet. Furthermore, he doesn't understand that the whole SAE process exists due to the inaccuracy of dyno's, and the manipulations that can easily be done by the operator/company. A tightly controlled dyno that is maintained well can be very useful in measuring output and gauging increases or decreases in said gains; while a cheap dyno that isn't well maintained and not tightly controlled will be all over the place.

If Ford went through the process and is stating the SAE number you can bet that if you pulled the engine out of a brand new car, and ran it as required on the dyno per the SAE testing standard you would get that SAE number. That's the whole point of the process!

All of these rediculous posts stem from well intentioned people that truly have no idea how a dyno works and the software calculations that are involved. If you lined up 3 different dyno's in a parking lot I could make any or all of them output just about whatever HP and TQ you wanted to see. Sorry, but that's the truth of it and why the SAE stepped in and gave us the process that manufacturers now use.

LOL

I know perfectly how a dyno works buddy and what an SAE number means (DIN in my case since I'm European). Are you a mechanical engineer ?
Do you know a lot of European manufacturer used to under rate their motor ? VW was famous for that, it is nothing uncommon...

It is notorious dynos are unaccurate, we even don't know if the yearly calibration is done every year as recommended by the manufacturer in each shops, depending of the brand the precision is more or less, but by giving several numbers from different dyno brand it gives you a baseline

Yes everyones knows that Dyno can only make a more or less an estimation of the engine power because it's difficult to determine precisely the drivetrain losses....

But since LT1 gives between 400-410Whp and the Coyote 420 to 430Whp average in stock form....

And since the transmission losses should be close, (Ford doesn't use straight cut gears ) ....it is likely one is more powerful than the other

[Nabush]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

You are left with a few distinct logical choices, because the engine is SAE rated at 460hp.

1. It's not SAE rated at 460hp, in other words, they are lying. Ford is in fact saying it's SAE rated for 460hp. I don't see the same being claimed by BMW, who is notorious for advertising WHP and not crank HP numbers, so this would be a first for Ford. Sometimes the claims of being "underated" are simply due to not understanding some of the conditions of the test or some of the characteristics of the car, in some cases, it is true. Subaru had a marketing line a few years ago for their turbo cars which was, "don't compare HP, compare the 0-60 numbers!", what they didn't add was that the 0-60 numbers were a function of 5000 rpm clutch-drops with AWD, from a roll, the 0-60s were dismal, because they were down so far on the HP. People thought they were "underated" because of the standing 0-60 times. So either the Ford engine is SAE 460, or they are being dishonest.

2. Ford has magically found some cure for drivetrain losses and invented bearings with no drag and shafts that do not flex, etc.

3. The numbers of these dynos vary, just like all dynos do, because they are not standardized. The difference between saying it's SAE vs. seeing the documentation and certification.

My example about transmission losses what to point in the other direction...

Almost all gears/gearbox are made by the same manufacturers, they use same type of gears design, same type of oil with same type of viscosity. Bearings are standardized, friction loss are equivalent for all of them for similar applications.

The only way to reduce significantly transmission losses is to use straight cut gears, which is done is racing, but only there because of the noise it generates...

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Nabush

LOL

I know perfectly how a dyno works buddy and what an SAE number means (DIN in my case since I'm European). Are you a mechanical engineer ?
Do you know a lot of European manufacturer used to under rate their motor ? VW was famous for that, it is nothing uncommon...

It is notorious dynos are unaccurate, we even don't know if the yearly calibration is done every year as recommended by the manufacturer in each shops, depending of the brand the precision is more or less, but by giving several numbers from different dyno brand it gives you a baseline

Yes everyones knows that Dyno can only make a more or less an estimation of the engine power because it's difficult to determine precisely the drivetrain losses....

But since LT1 gives between 400-410Whp and the Coyote 420 to 430Whp average in stock form....

And since the transmission losses should be close, (Ford doesn't use straight cut gears ) ....it is likely one is more powerful than the other

Originally Posted by Nabush

My example about transmission losses what to point in the other direction...

Almost all gears/gearbox are made by the same manufacturers, they use same type of gears design, same type of oil with same type of viscosity. Bearings are standardized, friction loss are equivalent for all of them for similar applications.

The only way to reduce significantly transmission losses is to use straight cut gears, which is done is racing, but only there because of the noise it generates...

So you go on to say how inaccurate dyno results are but then use a couple of Mustang dynos to prove they are underrated? Have you ever bothered to look at the history of claims of X car being underrated? Let's take a look at a few among the big 3:

"Proof" Camaro is:
http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=466517
http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=432140
https://jalopnik.com/holy-shit-dyno-...-po-1747436409
http://www.gm-efi.com/tech/jdp-2-ss-...rforce-intake/

"Proof" the Hellcat is (there are lots of these, I just picked one):
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/2015-...cat-dyno-test/

"Proof" the Dodge 392 is:
http://www.hellcat.org/threads/2015-...392-dyno.8183/

"Proof" the '13 GT500 is:
http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...s-at-609-rwhp/

"Proof" the GT350 is, or that the LS7 was:
http://www.motortrend.com/news/dyno-...nd-camaro-z28/


In summary you have only 2 choices. All the OEMs are lying about SAE (and conveniently they are all underrated by about the same percentage). Or chassis dynos are exactly what they are, inaccurate for comparison to SAE ratings.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by Nabush

LOL

I know perfectly how a dyno works buddy and what an SAE number means (DIN in my case since I'm European). Are you a mechanical engineer ?
Do you know a lot of European manufacturer used to under rate their motor ? VW was famous for that, it is nothing uncommon...

It is notorious dynos are unaccurate, we even don't know if the yearly calibration is done every year as recommended by the manufacturer in each shops, depending of the brand the precision is more or less, but by giving several numbers from different dyno brand it gives you a baseline

Yes everyones knows that Dyno can only make a more or less an estimation of the engine power because it's difficult to determine precisely the drivetrain losses....

But since LT1 gives between 400-410Whp and the Coyote 420 to 430Whp average in stock form....

And since the transmission losses should be close, (Ford doesn't use straight cut gears ) ....it is likely one is more powerful than the other

LT1s have been anywhere from 401 to 431 or higher depending on the dyno. As you mentioned dynos are laughably inaccurate. SAE certification is not. If Ford says 460 than that engine is 460. Give or take a percent. BMW used to test their cars completely heatsoaked and that led to many believing the engines were underrated. I don't think they do that anymore.

[JamesNoBrakes]

Originally Posted by Nabush

Do you know a lot of European manufacturer used to under rate their motor ? VW was famous for that, it is nothing uncommon...

I checked, BMW is not claiming on their spec list that their HP/TQ numbers are SAE.

[RagingHawk]

My God, it's been 200 years now and they still didn't release the video? Piss off Motortrend, I don't even care about the comparison anymore.

[vtirocz]

The video will be out this Wed, Jan 17 on MotorTrend On Demand. Two more days!

[EMTNLSS]

Looks like Jonny Lieberman isn't fond of the steering/handling of the 2018 Mustang.