First 2010 GT on the dyno??

[stkjock]

"Strictly Performance out of Houston, Texas got their hands on a 2010 Ford Mustang GT coupe and hooked it up to a Dyno to see what kind of numbers it would throw down. The results were a little surprising to say the least. According to SP 2005-09 S197 Mustang GT's were dynoing around 255 bhp and the 2010 Mustang GT peaked at 280 bhp. Even though the new 2010 Mustang GT is rated for 315 horsepower it may be packing a little more punch given these dyno numbers. Not sure why Ford would under rate the Mustang GT but anything is possible these days. Thanks for the tip Adam."

 

[shatter]

Of course, I'd have to say that we have to ask if all these horsepower figures are corrected for atmospheric conditions so we can compare apples to apples. Also, assuming both cars had a manual transmission, the 255 rwhp for the 2005-2009 GT is a little low. I'd say 260-265 rwhp is closer to the standard. Assuming you go with the 265 number then going to 280 rwhp on the 2010 is exactly 15 hp more which is what is advertised by Ford. Mystery solved.

Ford motors have always underperformed advertised vs actual horsepower where GM is closer to advertising the actual rear wheel horsepower numbers, in my humble opinion.

 

[Steedman07]

Is there a graph? They raised it to 6,500 rpm this year, that might explain the 280 peak whp..

 

[08blackchrome]

I think the peak hp would have already fallen off at that point. But who know i guess a graph is the only way to tell.

 

[1Fast05Turbo]

The reason for the 280bhp is because the hood prop rod is in the driver side.

 

[Hawgman]

Who cares.. it's still ugly

 

[QWKSNKE]

Who cares.. it's still ugly

+1...

 

[Charlie Sheen]

Who cares.. it's still ugly

+ another

 

[duece05]

Who cares.. it's still ugly

yep, that boat tail looks like ass

 

[alloy6ix]

The reason for the 280bhp is because the hood prop rod is in the driver side.

Are you sure man?? I thought it was because of the R/C antenna on the back of the car...

 

[Dex]

ricer butt

 

[Vapour Trails]

Here we go again.

 

[alloy6ix]

Here we go again.

Whitesnake??

 

[Charlie Sheen]

Whitesnake??

Nope. OK Go.

 

[Chris B.]

My Silver 2008 GT dynoed at 275 HP on a Mustang dyno completely stock. It rolled over to 1500 miles when it was on the dyno. The candy apple red one I have now has the same PCM code. I'm getting it dynoed soon.

 

[ZmanM3]

Interesting.

 

[jp's performance]

My Silver 2008 GT dynoed at 275 HP on a Mustang dyno completely stock. It rolled over to 1500 miles when it was on the dyno. The candy apple red one I have now has the same PCM code. I'm getting it dynoed soon.

it was also in december in PA so i would say its going to read higher because of the cold weather.

 

[MrClean]

1) Mustang dynos are on the "optimistic" scale.
2) Richard at Strictly keep his dyno readout on "STD" correction factor versus SAE, which on my dynoruns equate to a 9 rwhp and 12.5 rwlbft difference....

Bottom line, without a graph of both to see the environmental/atmosperic conditions, and the correction factors used, it's all bullshit. In fact the use of the term "bhp" (an abbreviation for brake horsepower) in the initial post is also innacurate, as it refers to "the measure of an engine's horsepower without the loss in power caused by the gearbox, generator, differential, water pump, and other auxiliary components such as alternator, power steering pump, muffled exhaust system, etc." (see definitions HERE)

 

[*JZ*]

Not the first.

We here at BBR dynoed ours over a week ago.


We made 290 rwhp / 313 rwtq

 

[MrClean]

Not the first.

We here at BBR dynoed ours over a week ago.


We made 290 rwhp / 313 rwtq

Nice numbers. I wonder why the car mags haven't seen better 0-60 and ¼ mile (trap & speed) numbers than with the 1st gen S197 4.6?