[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

The LT1 is a very good engine, obviously, with modern tech. The Gen 3 Coyote is also a very good engine and pretty strong across the midrange up to 7500 rpm. The power band is surprisingly wide - I'd say from 3500 to 7500 rpm. Especially 4k and above.

High rpm is a hallmark of exotic engines. Think Lamborghini, Ferrari, and up to the extreme like Indy cars, F1, etc. A Coyote approaching 7500 rpm sounds pretty great, and is fun to take up there. It was also kind of cool to know that at 5000 rpm I was only 2/3 of the way to redline.

The Gen 3 Coyote has much more midrange torque than earlier Coyotes. With the A10 and 3.55s it was quite fun.

• The Coyote revs 900 rpm higher than the LT1.
• The LT1 produces 325 lb-ft torque off idle. The Coyote doesn't reach that until almost 3000 rpm and never does catch up.
• The LT1's power rise is ~500-750 rpm earlier than the Coyote.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the Coyote, or the thrill of going 900 rpm higher. Just saying the LT1 offers more performance ...in a different rpm range.

The LT1 is a high performance feat of engineering and it has consistently beaten the Coyote in every test.

[Rayvan]

Originally Posted by s346k

they could've put the engine in the moon rover first and it would still be a truck engine. even the ls family has distinctive truck heads and cams that never appeared in cars. lots of low end tq, low rpm ceiling and no past peak power is not a "high performance" car engine. it is historically a recipe found in truck and van stuff.

the term "truck motor" goes far beyond the lt and ls families. it extends to all makes that followed the same model for a truck engine. it's not news.

LOL! Must suck to have to tell everyone that your gigantic, advanced, high revving Mustang engine just got beat by a truck engine again.


I love that I don't have to rev the shit out of my car like a jackass when I want a little more power.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by hotlap

• The Coyote revs 900 rpm higher than the LT1.
• The LT1 produces 325 lb-ft torque off idle. The Coyote doesn't reach that until almost 3000 rpm and never does catch up.
• The LT1's power rise is ~500-750 rpm earlier than the Coyote.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the Coyote, or the thrill of going 900 rpm higher. Just saying the LT1 offers more performance ...in a different rpm range.

The LT1 is a high performance feat of engineering and it has consistently beaten the Coyote in every test.

Well, yes, the LT1 makes more torque. It's a larger displacement pushrod engine. The Gen 3 Coyote makes 345 ft-lbs at 7k rpm. Just as the LT1 isn't designed to rev. and make that much torque at 7k rpm, the DOHC Gen 3 Coyote isn't designed to be a low rpm torque monster. And who races at 2k rpm anyway? Torque there only matters for daily driving and the Coyote is plenty for that.

But, the Gen 3 Coyote doesn't need to make as much torque because it has more rpms which yields similar power results with less torque. That said, given the displacement (307 c.i.) and DOHC config., 420 ft-lbs at 4600 rpm is pretty dang good.

The LT1 and Gen 3 torque curves are pretty close to the same shape about 1000 rpm apart with the Coyote making less torque, but since it is shifted up the rpm band, makes about the same amount of power. The LT1 is slightly flatter in the low rpm range, with the Coyote flatter at the high rpm range - which is why the A10+Gen 3 Coyote is such a good match. It is able to utilize optimal gearing and rpms to send torque to the rear wheels.

Both engines are very effective and there's more than one way to skin a cat.

[5.M0NSTER]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Well, yes, the LT1 makes more torque. It's a larger displacement pushrod engine. The Gen 3 Coyote makes 345 ft-lbs at 7k rpm. Just as the LT1 isn't designed to rev. and make that much torque at 7k rpm, the DOHC Gen 3 Coyote isn't designed to be a low rpm torque monster. And who races at 2k rpm anyway? Torque there only matters for daily driving and the Coyote is plenty for that.

But, the Gen 3 Coyote doesn't need to make as much torque because it has more rpms which yields similar power results with less torque. That said, given the displacement (307 c.i.) and DOHC config., 420 ft-lbs at 4600 rpm is pretty dang good.

The LT1 and Gen 3 torque curves are pretty close to the same shape about 1000 rpm apart with the Coyote making less torque, but since it is shifted up the rpm band, makes about the same amount of power. The LT1 is slightly flatter in the low rpm range, with the Coyote flatter at the high rpm range - which is why the A10+Gen 3 Coyote is such a good match. It is able to utilize optimal gearing and rpms to send torque to the rear wheels.

Both engines are very effective and there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Well said.

I had the first gen Cotote in my 2014 Mustang GT. Car revved quicker, and sounded good. I enjoyed ripping through the gears (though the MT-82 was weak compared to the Tremec).

I learned to road race in that car. It was plenty fast, though LS and LT engine counterparts would always pull on me on the straights.

The LT is also sweet, but in a different way. Lots of torque down low, but still pulls hard between 4000 and 6200. It takes longer to get through that range, with a wall of torque behind it, which is also nice.

Bot engines are certainly fun though. Looking forward to track the SS 1LE in 2 weeks. Will have a better impression when I've had a chance to rev it out on track

The Camaro chassis is way better though. Car is so composed and puts down power well. No excess body motions. Loving it so far.

[UnknownJinX]

Fun fact: Coyote goes in F-150s. So yeah, truck engine as well. It's not like there are any cars other than the Mustang using it.

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Well, yes, the LT1 makes more torque. It's a larger displacement pushrod engine. The Gen 3 Coyote makes 345 ft-lbs at 7k rpm. Just as the LT1 isn't designed to rev. and make that much torque at 7k rpm, the DOHC Gen 3 Coyote isn't designed to be a low rpm torque monster. And who races at 2k rpm anyway? Torque there only matters for daily driving and the Coyote is plenty for that.

But, the Gen 3 Coyote doesn't need to make as much torque because it has more rpms which yields similar power results with less torque. That said, given the displacement (307 c.i.) and DOHC config., 420 ft-lbs at 4600 rpm is pretty dang good.

The LT1 and Gen 3 torque curves are pretty close to the same shape about 1000 rpm apart with the Coyote making less torque, but since it is shifted up the rpm band, makes about the same amount of power. The LT1 is slightly flatter in the low rpm range, with the Coyote flatter at the high rpm range - which is why the A10+Gen 3 Coyote is such a good match. It is able to utilize optimal gearing and rpms to send torque to the rear wheels.

Both engines are very effective and there's more than one way to skin a cat.

I have driven a friend's Mustang GT PP1 and I do like that engine as well, though it does take some getting used to after driving my Camaro for a while, as you gotta keep the revs high.

And while no one races around 2k RPM, if you drive a stick and you aren't paying attention to your RPM(or are just new to the track and trying to learn it), you could dip into lower RPM band and that could be a bit more troublesome with less low-end torque. With an LT1, you could just shake it off, no biggie, but with a Coyote, it will hurt a bit more. With something like S65... Welp, there goes your lap time. Engine torque characteristics will play a role in your tracking strategies. It was actually kind of nice that I could just keep my car in 3rd at the HPDE event I attended so I could focus more on line work, braking and cornering. It's not optimal, but again, also not horrible.

My main problem is with the fact that people seem to jizz over DOHC so much like it's some next-gen tech. It isn't. Real advanced engines don't need cams. I can understand people's fascination with Koenigsegg's Freevalve or FCA's Multiair, but I don't believe the former has been used in a production car and the latter still has a traditional exhaust cam. Still, Multiair is pretty cool from an engineering perspective. They were able to get rid of the throttle body with the intake valve lift, timing, and duration having so much freedom from being controlled by hydraulic pressure. And my RX-8 didn't even need valves, ha!

That, and the fact that "horsepower per litre" is such a stupid metric, and this is coming from a previous rotary owner that can pretty much laugh at any NA piston engines when it comes to that. Horsepower per weight makes a lot more sense. Not perfect, but at least not as stupid as horsepower per litre.

[Bosse'sBoss]

Camaro SS1LE VS Mustang GT PP2, both on similar tires, this should give an idea VS the Mach1



https://youtu.be/ifaWMxS1O10

[shaffe]

I am very anxious to see what kind of performance the C8 Z06 can put out.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Fun fact: Coyote goes in F-150s. So yeah, truck engine as well. It's not like there are any cars other than the Mustang using it.



I have driven a friend's Mustang GT PP1 and I do like that engine as well, though it does take some getting used to after driving my Camaro for a while, as you gotta keep the revs high.

And while no one races around 2k RPM, if you drive a stick and you aren't paying attention to your RPM(or are just new to the track and trying to learn it), you could dip into lower RPM band and that could be a bit more troublesome with less low-end torque. With an LT1, you could just shake it off, no biggie, but with a Coyote, it will hurt a bit more. With something like S65... Welp, there goes your lap time. Engine torque characteristics will play a role in your tracking strategies. It was actually kind of nice that I could just keep my car in 3rd at the HPDE event I attended so I could focus more on line work, braking and cornering. It's not optimal, but again, also not horrible.

My main problem is with the fact that people seem to jizz over DOHC so much like it's some next-gen tech. It isn't. Real advanced engines don't need cams. I can understand people's fascination with Koenigsegg's Freevalve or FCA's Multiair, but I don't believe the former has been used in a production car and the latter still has a traditional exhaust cam. Still, Multiair is pretty cool from an engineering perspective. They were able to get rid of the throttle body with the intake valve lift, timing, and duration having so much freedom from being controlled by hydraulic pressure. And my RX-8 didn't even need valves, ha!

That, and the fact that "horsepower per litre" is such a stupid metric, and this is coming from a previous rotary owner that can pretty much laugh at any NA piston engines when it comes to that. Horsepower per weight makes a lot more sense. Not perfect, but at least not as stupid as horsepower per litre.

Hp/liter is an applicable comparison if comparing similar configured engines, i.e., pushrod vs pushrod, DOHC vs DOHC. Otherwise, yeah, DOHC of course is going to outperform pushrod on that metric. But as already discussed, hp/physical engine volume or pound (total weight of the engine) might be a more fair indicator since the Chevy small block is a fairly compact engine relative to its c.i. displacement, and it gets more displacement in the same physical volume as DOHC.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Hp/liter is an applicable comparison if comparing similar configured engines, i.e., pushrod vs pushrod, DOHC vs DOHC. Otherwise, yeah, DOHC of course is going to outperform pushrod on that metric. But as already discussed, hp/physical engine volume or pound (total weight of the engine) might be a more fair indicator since the Chevy small block is a fairly compact engine relative to its c.i. displacement, and it gets more displacement in the same physical volume as DOHC.

This is why this forum needs a “like” button.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

This is why this forum needs a “like” button.

Ha, Thanks. Yeah, M6G has C6 beat in the forum features and usability.

[s346k]

Originally Posted by Rayvan

LOL! Must suck to have to tell everyone that your gigantic, advanced, high revving Mustang engine just got beat by a truck engine again.


I love that I don't have to rev the shit out of my car like a jackass when I want a little more power.

1) i can tell you don't get out much. repeatedly placing ones car in direct comparison with another will shed a new light on engines and what they do with each transmission, etc. coyotes are no joke. even though they apparently have a peak tq value of -300 ft lb and don't make power until 7900 rpm, chances are good that if you race one with similar mods, you will lose.

2) i guess you need to tell gm to ditch the 5.5L motor for a cummins swap. they make no tq and rev to the moon. what junk.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I am very anxious to see what kind of performance the C8 Z06 can put out.

It is going to obliterate everything in it's path that is not a legit "Supercar". And even half of those will either be matched or beaten.

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Hp/liter is an applicable comparison if comparing similar configured engines, i.e., pushrod vs pushrod, DOHC vs DOHC. Otherwise, yeah, DOHC of course is going to outperform pushrod on that metric. But as already discussed, hp/physical engine volume or pound (total weight of the engine) might be a more fair indicator since the Chevy small block is a fairly compact engine relative to its c.i. displacement, and it gets more displacement in the same physical volume as DOHC.

Well in some cases...look at it like this...a Chevy Big Block engine might have the worst HP per liter...but it still might have way more HP than a smaller engine can ever hope to have. Or it might have way more potential for much more HP. And let's not forget the all important torque.

In the debate of high revs vs more TQ, sure a higher revving engine is a lot of fun on the highway. I love my GT for that reason. But still, nothing beats that neck snapping monster torque that my HC has. Which do I prefer? Let's just say I'm lucky to be able to have and enjoy both. Sometimes I want the torque and so I drive the HC. Other times I want to high revs so I drive the GT. Other times I want the best of everything in the best all around package so I drive the ZL1.

[Bosse'sBoss]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

Just wait for Sam Strano's results, he just bought a Mach 1 and had 2 SS1LEs.

Price wise absolutely the 1LE wins and I think it still has the performance covered too, but if it doesn't just take your saved money and throw on some 19s with those same 305/315 tires as the Mach 1 and it will be back in front again.

Are there any published results of Sam Strano's SS1LE VS his new Mach 1 or comments made by him comparing both cars performance?

[Bosse'sBoss]

I visited the Mustang6g forum, and was very pleased to find that the majority spoke very highly about the Performance for the $ of the Camaro SS1LE VS the Mustang Mach l, except for the zombie brand loyalist that we also have on this side.


What surprise me the most was the comments from Sam Strano for whom I have my strongest respect as both a professional sport car competitor driver and a very honest performance Parts seller whom he tries his own products at the track. He mentions that the performance of both of his cars, at the track: Mach l and SS1LE are very similar, but he didn't not trust the brakes of the Camaro consider them dangerous under track conditions.
Is the first time that I hear this type of comments about the 6th gen Camaro's Brakes. I was surprised


https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/thr....161487/page-2