2016 Ford Shelby GT350 Mustang rated at 526 hp, 429 lb-ft

[Pushrod Pete]

oh man, i cant wait for motor trend's head 2 head with randy pobst behind the wheel. i have a feeling the z28 will not be dethroned so easily.

z28's little brother, the 1LE, already dealt the 2015 Mustang PP a killing blow. now, its time for z28 to follow suit.

[Drm2Reality]

I think ford already realized they made a huge mistake releasing the new gt pp that was outperformed by the old 1le. I don't think the 350 will go down so easily. I expect it to outperform the z28 with both r and non r versions.

I really hope GM had something cooking...based on cosmetic looks alone...the 350 has the 6th gen covered easily! Hopefully the roles will be reversed on performance.

[Bhobbs]

I highly doubt Ford didn't know the 1LE was faster than the GTPP. They know most people complain about the ride of the 1LE. They sell far more GTPPs than Chevy sells 1LEs so I don't think beating it was a concern.

Beating the Z/28 is a concern. You can bet they had a Z/28 to run against the GT350R.

[titanfan]

Originally Posted by Drm2Reality

I think ford already realized they made a huge mistake releasing the new gt pp that was outperformed by the old 1le. I don't think the 350 will go down so easily. I expect it to outperform the z28 with both r and non r versions.

I really hope GM had something cooking...based on cosmetic looks alone...the 350 has the 6th gen covered easily! Hopefully the roles will be reversed on performance.

Yeah, just look at the sales numbers for the Mustang. That SS/1LE beat down sure had an impact! Seriously, the 1LE packaged Camaro is a great performer, but it is also a very niche vehicle. How would it have benefited Ford to spend R&D time to engineer a package for the Mustang that would have allowed it to put up better numbers?

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

I highly doubt Ford didn't know the 1LE was faster than the GTPP. They know most people complain about the ride of the 1LE. They sell far more GTPPs than Chevy sells 1LEs so I don't think beating it was a concern.

Beating the Z/28 is a concern. You can bet they had a Z/28 to run against the GT350R.

This ^ I honestly don't think Ford was worried about if the PP could outperform the 1LE. Appears Ford just wanted to offer a bit more aggressive handling package then stock, where as GM offered a true track pack and props to them on that. but like Bhobbs said, Ford sells more PP than GM does 1LE.

Originally Posted by ztwentypoop

Yeah, just look at the sales numbers for the Mustang. That SS/1LE beat down sure had an impact! Seriously, the 1LE packaged Camaro is a great performer, but it is also a very niche vehicle. How would it have benefited Ford to spend R&D time to engineer a package for the Mustang that would have allowed it to put up better numbers?

This again. GM built one hell of a track pack for the Camaro, seems Ford didn't want to go as far as GM.

That GT350 sounds nasty. Cant wait to see some videos of that thing screaming to 8,000 RPM!!!!!!!!!!!

And I don't give a crap about ring times, the 1 time I care about is head 2 head on Laguna Seca with randy Probst doing the driving

[khell86]

GM did a great job with the LS7 no doubt, but the benefits of the FPC are perfect for its intended use. A flatter torque curve throughout the end of the range and the HP doesn't drop off. Plus the Vodoo will be lighter than the Coyote, thus being lighter than the LS7. It'll rev faster and be able to modulate better in the turns. Should lead to an interesting H2H.

[Aaron313]

Originally Posted by Thor142

The GT350R has a lap time of 7:32.19 posted on the rings official web site. That's only 5 sec faster than the outgoing Z28. The Camaro team should be able to catch it with a new Z. Probably not with the SS though.

Only 5 seconds? Lol you know the new Z06 beats the Z/28 by 5 seconds at most tracks. I don't think Chevy is going to bring back the z28 and expect whatever camaro to receive the LT4 to make up some ground but hell I think that camaro is going to be the best all around muscle car... Little less HP than the Hellcat but it'll weigh several hundred lbs less and can actually make turns


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VADER SS L99]

5 seconds would be a butt kicking but that Z28 time is in the rain and I don't think that GT350R time is official. Regardless I don't think anyone should put ANY stock in track times when trying to compare closely matched cars. There are way too many variables. Track conditions, Density Altitude, and most importantly driver make a monumental difference of how fast a car will be around the track. Only way to know what car is truely faster is run them head to head same day and same professional driver.

[xc_SS/RS]

Also don't compare ring times. Its a gigantic track and getting a clear run on a good day is difficult. Plus there's way too many other variables that could benefit one car or the other. Wait for the motor trend head2head or even the car and driver lightning lap.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

5 seconds would be a butt kicking but that Z28 time is in the rain and I don't think that GT350R time is official. Regardless I don't think anyone should put ANY stock in track times when trying to compare closely matched cars. There are way too many variables. Track conditions, Density Altitude, and most importantly driver make a monumental difference of how fast a car will be around the track. Only way to know what car is truely faster is run them head to head same day and same professional driver.

Randy Probst Laguna Seca nuff said!!!

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Randy Probst Laguna Seca nuff said!!!

Pobst

[Stingray]

Flat Out: An In-Depth Look at the Ford Shelby GT350 Mustang Engine

We Get the Deets on the World’s Largest Flat-Plane-Crank V-8

By Frank Markus | June 03, 2015

Read more: http://wot.motortrend.com/1506_flat_...ng_engine.html

It's all-new. Its 5,163 cubic centimeters produce 526 hp at 7,500 rpm and 429 lb-ft of torque at 4,750 rpm, and it revs to 8,250 rpm -- making this Ford's highest-revving V-8 and its highest-output naturally aspirated engine of any type. That's less power but more torque than Ferrari coaxes out of its 4.5-liter V-8 (562 hp at 9,000 rpm and 398 lb-ft at 6,000 rpm, though that includes ram-air effects at high speed). Of course, Ford wasn't trying to build a 458-fighter. It's building the ultimate track star Mustang, so it designed and engineered this engine from the ground up in Allen Park, Michigan, paying little attention to that prancing horse V-8.

Even the crankshaft is different. Yes, it's flat, but did you know there are three different flat-plane crank designs? Looking at the crank lying on a table with the front on the left, the connecting-rod throws can be up-down-down-up (like Ferrari's, and like most four-cylinder engine cranks), up-up-down-down, or up-down-up-down. Ford modeled all three designs extensively in the computer and prototyped at least two of them before determining that the UDUD concept was the one that breathed the best with its layout. Maximizing airflow through the engine is a primary driver of the flat-plane crank design, which inherently delivers improved exhaust airflow, because you never have two cylinders on the same bank firing within 90 degrees of crank rotation. That causes a traffic jam in the exhaust header unless you connect the header pipes a long way away from the engine, which makes it impossible to light off a catalyst. (Tell your friends: The flat-plane crank is a green development!) Anyway, Ferrari treats each bank like a separate I-4 engine with its own intake plenum, so UDDU works better; Ford has one big intake plenum for the whole engine, which the UDUD crank serves better in terms of airflow.

Maximizing airflow was a prime directive for the team developing the Ford Shelby GT350 Mustang's engine, so let's follow an air molecule. It enters through a giant open air cleaner element and flows through a gaping 87-mm throttle body (Ford's largest). It then enters the scroll-type intake manifold, which features runners as long as those in the 5.0-liter V-8 but much bigger in cross-section. (They also incorporate flaps to increase swirl for higher efficiency at light-load cruising speeds.) Next, it's into the combustion chamber through valves that are considerably larger in diameter and that lift an impressive 14 mm. That's super high for an engine designed to safely over-rev to 9,000 rpm using hydraulic lifters. "Soft-landing" cam profiles prevent excessive noise, harshness, or wear, and the slight "loft" (where the cam throws the valve farther open at high speed) actually improves breathing a bit more at redline. These cylinder heads, by the way, feature fully machined combustion chambers and ports, with additional machining performed just to reduce weight. (They're lighter than the 5.0's by 6 percent.)

Let's pause here for a word about the block. To accommodate those big, free-breathing valves while preserving the 100-mm cylinder-bore spacing that allows this all-new block to be machined alongside the 5.0-liter in Windsor, Ontario, Canada (the deck height is also the same), the bore was increased to 94 mm by eschewing iron liners in favor of a plasma-transferred wire-arc cylinder liner technology. The crankshaft is also "gun drilled," with big holes in the counterweights to allow air to flow more freely between the front two and back two chambers to reduce pumping forces. This also further lightens the crank so that its rotational inertia is about 15 percent less than the 5.0-liter's cross-plane crank, making it freer to rev. The cylinders are deck-plane honed to further reduce friction. That involves torqueing down a plate that simulates the cylinder head to distort the cylinders the way they will be when fully assembled before honing. This results in a much more perfectly cylindrical shape that in turn permits lower-tension piston rings, reducing their friction by an undisclosed amount. (It typically accounts for 20 percent of overall engine friction.) A novel composite oil pan includes a composite insert that incorporates the oil baffle, pickup tube, and windage tray while increasing oil capacity by 2.0 quarts and slashing weight by 20 percent relative to the 5.0L.

Back to our air molecule. By now it's been mixed with port-injected fuel, squished at 12:1 compression (up from the 5.0-liter's 11:1), and ignited by a fairly advanced spark for a slowish burn rate. (Knock resistance is exceptional with this chamber design.) Then it exits via similarly huge exhaust valves (also opening fully 14 mm). It flows into a header manifold that is TIG-welded by hand with a four-into-three-into-one design. (Four-two-one is ideal, but packaging around power steering forced this design.) Flowing aft, the molecules from each bank are mixed well in an X-shaped crossover pipe (this sounds better than the 5.0-liter's H-shaped crossover) before exiting through a two-stage muffler that automatically opens under high loads and can be opened at will via the user interface. This is Ford's lowest back pressure on a road-legal Mustang exhaust system to date.

It's worth noting that computer-aided engineering tools allowed this engine to be developed in just three years, the very first physical prototype producing 500 hp inside a week of its assembly. Naturally, the engine enjoys Ford's normal five-year/60,000-mile warranty. During the Q&A we asked why it doesn't include direct injection. Intake-combustion-exhaust specialist Adam Christian explained that although DI is vital to turbocharged engines, it does add cost, weight, noise, and complexity. Increasing the compression ratio further to take full advantage of the technology's cylinder-cooling effects would force too many other compromises, and with the current setup delivering 14-bar peak cylinder pressures and 526 hp and 429 lb-ft, it just wasn't deemed worth the cost and effort. Having been sold on the merits of the flat-plane crank, we asked if it might find its way into pickup trucks, to which Adam replied that it's not as strong down in the 1,000-2,000-rpm range where those workhorses spend much of their lives. And when asked what the magic bullet was that enabled this engine to surpass the historical max size for flat-plane-crank V-8s, Christian explained that it wasn't any one thing but a holistic approach to the entire engine design. He also speculated that Ferrari just isn't into big V-8s the way Ford is. Maybe if Enzo had sold out to Hank the Deuce back in 1963 …

See all 54 photos: http://wot.motortrend.com/1506_flat_...take-manifold/

[BaylorCamaro]

Because I was curious I added the LT1 to the graph..

[xc_SS/RS]

I wonder if the GT350 will respond well to any bolt on mods? That will be interesting to see