Inside Line Dyno-Tests the 2011 Ford Mustang GT 5.0

Very nice. Now you guys have to do the same with the 2011 Mustang GT500!

Needs better exhaust sound.

either the dyno reads too high or the engine makes more power than the
claimed number.

395hp/412hp= 95.9% so only 4.1% loss?
noway a 412hp at the crank can make 395WHP.

even with 10% drive train loss, the 395whp means 440hp at the crank.

Greenpony,

The car may not sound great while on rollers, but listen to the new 5.0 actually go around a track (1st link below)!? Sounds just like the mustang v8 from the Bullitt chase scene.

http://bit.ly/9NTM6k
vs
http://bit.ly/9JN4an

I am glad my order is already in for the new 5.0!!

mr_nobody,

get ready for 395/0.87 = 450 hp crank
weighs 100lbs less than the v8 M3
more power
more torque
$20,000 cheaper
forged engine internals
designed from get go to be supercharged
Rouch, Ford Racing, and a slew of others will have blowers by Sema in the fall.

Very good numbers. Nice article.

I'd like to be the first to welcome the mustang to the 21st century. There's still a lot of chassis work that needs to be done but I'm extremely impressed by these numbers and I love how the peak horsepower comes in at an rpm that other mustangs can only dream of reaching. Ford is so close to that sweet 100hp/liter number, I really hope the next generation passes that mark.

Ummmm.....no wonder why the HP was higher than expected, you knuckleheads dynoed it in the wrong gear! As per Ford, 4th gear ratio is 1.32:1 Everyone who runs a dyno knows you should dyno with a 1:1 ratio, which in this case is FIFTH gear. Doh!!!

rrocket if your right then LOL

I'm right....because in this case it's a Dynojet. On a Dynojet, it uses a mathematical equation based on the known weight of the rollers and acceleration of said rollers. If you use a gear that accelerates faster (in this case 4th gear instead of 5th gear) the rollers will spin up quicker (accelerate) and skew the numbers in a positive way. The opposite would happen if you used 6th gear (.65:1)...you'd have lower numbers.

On other dynoes, like Dynapack and Mustang, they are less sensitive to gearing as they use a different method of calculating the HP. But the Dynojet is VERY sensitive and you must use a 1:1 ratio (or as close as possible) so as not to skew numbers.

Inside Line and Mr. Kavanagh dropped the ball on this one. Shame.

Now just replace the rear axle with independent suspension and this car will be the best bargain on the road.

The Dynojet itself doesn't care what gear the car's in. Remember, there's a final drive gear reduction after the transmission, which further alters the wheelspeed - engine speed relationship beyond what the transmission does, so there's nothing magical about 1:1.

In fact, dynoing in a gear that's 1:1 usually results in a hair less (yes, less) driveline loss as its a more (the most) efficient ratio in the gearbox. That's why a lot of dyno operators like the 1:1 ratio. Plus, when using an inertia dyno like a Dynojet, higher gear ratios have a lower rate of acceleration, so less power is soaked up in accelerating the rotating masses, which further props the numbers up.

Higher gears do tend to result in higher tire losses since the wheelspeed is higher... at this point all you're doing is trading off one loss mechanism for another. Generally, though, what I've seen come out in the wash is that on an inertia dyno, higher gears will result in higher numbers than lower gears.

Furthermore, higher gears also load the engine for a longer duration, requiring more cooldown, plus put more heat stress on driven tires. As the dyno operator, I don't like either of those things.

Placing a pre-order this week :D Nice job Ford!

Just an FYI, GREAT picture of the engine bay, it makes an amazing wallpaper.

rrocket and Jason K. - I'm not exactly sure what you two were talking about, but I'm glad you did. Good discussion.

Good lord what an engine. If this is true, why would Ford be low-balling so much? It looks like it is a solid 450 hp, so why not claim that?

It's cool to see that Ford leaves the engine mostly uncovered. A silly plastic shroud has no place on a muscle car.

fuhteng:

I think Ford is lowballing so they can say, "Hey Camaro we whooped your a$$ with 10 less HP", or if the Camaro still wins they can say, "Oh well it has 10 more HP". It is a pretty smart low risk way of spinning things.

Thats my thoughts on it anyway.

Finally an American V8 that can breathe at high RPM! This should put a damper on those Camaro/Challenger push-rod supporters.

Is the 5.0 mustang supposed to run on regular fuel? Maybe the extra power is coming from the ability to adjust for premium fuel. If they advertise that it runs on regular fuel then the advertised power numbers would be derived from regular fuel.

Its still a cheap piece of junk!! Always has been,alwyas will be!!

Thumbs down again for Kalifornia's 2nd most expensive gas in the nation with the crappiest premium octane!

Gee, I was kinda thinkin' of gettin' the 6, but after this.....

Maybe the quoted hp figure is with 87 octane. I'd hope that with 93 octane, instead of that watered-down 91 you have out west, it would be able to make even more power.

mustang_fan: Maybe it's just me then, but I think the 4.6 sounds better. I'll have to reserve final judgment until I can hear the new 5.0 in person. I get to hear the 4.6 all the time.

The 2011 5.0 has what is called adaptive knock sensors (originally introduced on the s197 bullit), these basically poke around and add ignition timing when applicable, this means it can easily run on 87 or 93 octane and perform to its best potential on either, and yes there would be a power loss when using 87 octane fuel, in fact Ford rated power is on 91, but also claims a 12hp loss if using 87. I have found no claims using ethanol based fuel, but I am sure it may be a few more than that of 91o.

The consumer world needs to realize that a chassis dyno is only a tool and not the holy grail, there is no exact math to "calculate" drive train loss, all the above math is "fuzzy" to say the least. As a dyno owner and operator I can say that the info above is impressive and that the new 5.0 should perform very well, and I believe that Ford has left little on the table for aftermarket to improve on engine airflow (a.k.a. HP). This thing may be pretty rung out as it sits on the lot.

Mustangs are Cheap. I surely wouldn't disagree with that, but they are packed with value. I have been modding these cars for quite a long time as well as pawwing over many other domestic and import vehicles and can honestly say that they are not as "cheap" as the once were.
The fit and finish is great, the quality of materials chosen to manufacturer the components is even better. Anyone with a comment like that surely hasn't set foot in one, nor have they made an intelligent ASSumption.

Ford Mustang owners are loyal follows, most are perfectly happy with a live axle and very few have desire IRS.....................

For a fast track program of only 2 years, the new engine is amazing, and Ford as a company is really starting to shine.

Everyone needs to think less of themselves and a little more to the market that a particular car appeals to, any car as a whole is COMPROMISE (price, comfort, performance, durability)

"Its still a cheap piece of junk!! Always has been,alwyas will be!!"

I remember when I had my first beer.

Great story and photos. By the way please continue to leave the EXIF data in the photographs. I never would have guessed you used Aperture Priority to take the engine photo. I appreciate having that data as it allows me to see how the pros use their cameras in practice.

Long live the 5.0!

Great numbers but this is the same dyno that reported higher numbers for the 2010GT500. With our experience at Torq (www.gettorq.com on our dyno we would expect this car and all 2011's to make around 355rwhp

Straight from Ford's website...

"... With its innovative 32-valve, 5.0–liter V8, the 2011 Mustang 5.0 churns out 412 horses* and lays down 390 lb.–ft. of torque.
...

* Horsepower achieved using premium fuel."

http://www.fordvehicles.com/newsevents/news/newsdetail/index.asp?id=225

Which around here (Midwest), means 93 octane...

Congratulations magbarn for being the first troll on this article. Good work. I'm sure your parents are very proud.

Wow, 6850 rpm for the fuel cut sure is impressive next to the pushrod 427 (7L) in the Z06 with its 7100 governor. Troll.

To sharkking1120 I'm sure you can do better next time with your trolling. You just have to beat magbarn.

Also, spell check is your friend. I recommend it.

This is coming together nicely!

Thanks for the post.

@the grocer:

Most manufacturers don't list with 93 octane because it's not available everywhere. The recommended octane for the 2011 Mustang GT is 91 octane. Anything above 87 octane is considered premium fuel.

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

@fuhteng: Actually, I sympathize with @magbarn's lament about California's high fuel prices and low premium octane. And I'm no fan of push-rods, no matter who uses 'em. Trolls, as a species, don't usually express opinions about complex internal combustion engine architecture. More often, they hide under bridges and lob rocks.

Dan

Although the Z06 engine may rev slightly higher, this is mostly due to cost cutting measures in the Ford's engine (such as connecting rods), which reflects the huge price gap between the two cars. Fact is, the engine in a 30,000 dollar mustang makes a horsepower at a higher RPM, and makes significantly more horsepower per liter and torque per liter (or cubic inch, if you will). That, to me, is the more embarrassing subject for the corvette owner. A 50k base corvette only has about 20 more (rated) horsepower than a 30K mustang, despite the fact that it has 1.2 more liters? This engine makes GM's performance motors look seriously outclassed. Just about the only argument you can make for the LS series is the good aftermarket support, but give the Ford some time, I mean the Mustang is the only single vehicle with a whole race series named after it (NMRA).

Every day the new Mustang gets more and more appealing. Today is no different.

When I have the time to build a Factory Five Racing Type 65, this new 5.0 is the engine I'll use.

This gets me more excited about the 2011 mustang GT.
Of course, full tests and comparos is what I really want.

actualsize says:

08:49 AM, 03/25/10

@fuhteng: "Actually, I sympathize with @magbarn's lament about California's high fuel prices and low premium octane. And I'm no fan of push-rods, no matter who uses 'em. Trolls, as a species, don't usually express opinions about complex internal combustion engine architecture. More often, they hide under bridges and lob rocks."

Dan

LOL Dan!!!
Anyway, please don`t allow such people here. Read their comments and when you notice one, please erase their accounts.
I don`t want IL to become a crappy site, it has to have some class and respect.
Have a nice day!

actualsize - I wasn't talking about the fuel octane (I sympathize since Kansas only has 91, but it doesn't make any difference to my car). I'm tired of the pro- and anti- pushrod yakking.

I think board trolling is anything designed to derail the discussion of what is at hand, in this case the new 5.0, with a semantic discussion (or even worse, start a flame war) of something different. For example magbarn's comment about pushrods is only to start a flame war.

Is it weird that Firefox accepts 'trolling' as a word, but not pushrod?

Nice! The new 5.0 Ford Mustang is a winner.

I do have a question - Will the new engine have DOD available? I wouldn't think this particular version does since I think there is some issue between DOD and manual trannys, but what about the automatic?

fuhteng says:
09:42 AM, 03/25/10
actualsize - I wasn't talking about the fuel octane (I sympathize since Kansas only has 91, but it doesn't make any difference to my car). I'm tired of the pro- and anti- pushrod yakking.

I think board trolling is anything designed to derail the discussion of what is at hand, in this case the new 5.0, with a semantic discussion (or even worse, start a flame war) of something different. For example magbarn's comment about pushrods is only to start a flame war.

Is it weird that Firefox accepts 'trolling' as a word, but not pushrod?

Sorry, I guess people have really sensitive skin for push-rod tech.

Look, Ford took a not so great engine, tweaked with a small budget in 2 years to easily beat it's peers. That's an accomplishment that I haven't seen with Chrysler/Government Motors. Notice I put the Mustang's competitors' engines on the line. Not a >$100,000 Corvette with a push-rod engine + exotic pieces.

Can't believe I'd bring this up, with all the engine-power-amazingness...but I can't get over how un-sucky the interior looks. How restrained, and un-gimmicky!

Oh, to be twenty again...

Where is 1487 in all of this.......he should be telling us how IRS is really better than the solid axle etc....

@ those who say the Vette engine is less powerful and embarrassing.

Those who don't understand a dyno, nor how to read it will always look at peak HP. But the truth is engines can have similar HP and not actually produce the same power or the speed of the power. The area under the curve and how fast it gets there is much more important than simple peak #s.

Edmunds did a great article on the 335/G37 where they dyno'd both and showed how the N54 engine of the BMW made more power faster than the G37 VQ which technically has 30 more HP. I have both a 335 and a G37 and you can feel the difference in how the engine makes power, and if you don't know how to read the graph or have both cars people make claims like "this car is faster"

Why is a GT40 so much faster than a GT500 when they made the same hp ;)...well now the Mustang makes more.

I am going to buy one of these. The only question is whether I can restrain myself until the budget allows. What a horrible dilemma.

Who cares how much more horsepower it makes. The chassis is unable to put it to the ground and I predict its 0-60mph times are still slower even though it weighs less and has more power than the SS Camaro.

good for Ford.

for some reason I cant help but to compare it to my 02 e39m5 4.9L V8.

@beermagazine....

First of all, the reason the Ford GT is faster than a comparatively powerful GT500 is because the GT is a lot lighter, more aerodynamic, and has much better traction due to it's mid engine configuration. It was also 3+ times more expensive....

I think as far as "how fast an engine builds torque".....there is something to be said for "transient response", a subject that has become studied in highly specialized naturally aspirated categories such as NHRA Pro Stock. That being said, it's clear the new 5.0 engine is making over 200 psi of BMEP, which is absolutely fantastic for a factory NA engine. BMEP is a measure of specific torque output, which is the best measure of an engine's efficiency, much more so than the over-hyped specific horsepower output. For example, the 5.0 engine in the Mustang makes more torque per liter than the 4.8 liter V10 in the Lexus LFA....it's just the engine in the LFA was designed from a camshaft, bottom end geometry, and pressure wave control standpoint (intake/exhaust size and length) to rev higher, thus producing more horsepower. The engine in the Mustang is superior to the Corvette's engine, and for reference I own a Dynapack 4000 chassis dyno.....so I've some experience with dyno testing.

magbarn - Now I'm intrigued. Is this using the crappy 4.6L in the current GT, but modified with VVT and God knows what else? If so, how does Ford do this? I think I remember that the current EcoBoost V6 is the crappy V6 from the base Mustang but with turbos and DI etc.

In that case, you make a very good point asking why GM and Chrysler can't do this with their old engines. Like that V6 thing in the Challenger. However, the new LS series of aluminum block V8s (like the LS3 in the base Vette, LS7 in the Z06 and LS9 in the ZR1, and even the L76 in my G8 GT) aren't obsolete. Just different strokes.

I really can't wait to drive this though. If this car had been around a year ago when I bought my G8 GT, it might very well have made me buy a Mustang (even if I wanted 4 doors, I think I could have lived with this).

@loganmotor

The GT40 is really only ~300 pounds lighter, but yields much better acceleration #s, we're discussing the same thing really. Some don't understand that engine Peak Power really means little to performance, which you can see in that the GT500 with 540HP doesn't perform like other cars which are even heavier and less powerful.

If I remember correctly when the new Mustang came out some people got 0-60 in 4.9-5.0 seconds with 100 less HP. But really 0-60 is all about traction.

fuhteng - it's an entirely new engine. Dubbed internally as the 'Coyote' V8.

Bottom line the 2011 5.0 is the 1st all in house built Ford 5.0 V8 (last gen 5.0 was a derivative of existing engine) and it is F'ing awesome! However you look at it. Price, liters, weight, mpg, redline, whatever. it is awesomeness!

Whether it is 412 or 450 crank hp, or 365 vs 395 wheel hp, whatever. it is still awesomeness at a base price of $29,xxx.

If you want to read about the engine development and specs go to: http://bit.ly/cbC42F.

This new 5.0 Coyote engine is the baseline engine Ford will now be using to replace the current 5.4L. so in a few yrs when they bore out the next gt500 or svt monster, it will be based on this 5.0L.

In a few yrs, what happens if they include Direct fuel injection + blower + Tivct.

@beermagazine

I think possibly we are, but actually measuring transient response cannot be done on a traditional dyno, at least not in really meaningful ways. The Ford GT that I had on my Dyno made 516 rwhp, and the screw type blower on it allowed it to rev meaningfully higher than the GT500 engine. Even 2010 GT500's won't make over 500 rwhp on my dyno (usually 480-490). Also, the Ford GT we had weighed just under 3500 lbs (3490 if I'm not mistaken), and I've never weighed a GT500 of any year that was under 3925...with the newer ones being very close to 4000 lbs. The rearward weight bias is one thing, but the Ford GT also used much larger, softer compound tires, aiding traction.

I agree 0-60 is based highly on traction, gearing, and shift speed. Stock class NHRA drag cars do 0-60 in under 3 seconds with 1960's engine and chassis technology and 350 hp. Does that make them better than a Ford GT? They also run the quarter in 10 seconds....does that make them better? That isn't really aimed at you, just that I agree many don't understand what is really going on here.

I think that, from a tuning standpoint, this engine could generate torque curves never seen at this price level with some changes to the variable cam timing phasing. Using high overlap events at lower RPM will likely boost low end power significantly, much like installing a cam with a narrow lobe separation in an LS engine. This ability to adjust camshaft overlap through computer tuning will make compromise with larger cam lobes almost non existent, something that can't be said of an LS, or really any other domestic V8 for that matter. I imagine that these cam timing schemes weren't used from the factory for NVH and fuel mileage considerations.

@loganmotor.

Thank you for your informative post. I never even thought of the software tuning potential with the variable cam timing phasing inherent with the Tivct in there.

@mustang_fan

Thanks! Didn't know anyone was really reading my drivel, but it is an exciting time for the domestic tuning industry. Very large camshafts have been a part of the domestic performance aftermarket for a very, very long time. Finally, within reason, we won't have to make compromises normally associated with larger camshaft lobes. In reality valvespring longevity and valvetrain stability at the higher RPM ranges that large lobes allow will be the limiting factors as this technology is embraced in the aftermarket (again within reason). It will be interesting to see how the "cam torque activated" variable cam timing deals with the extra valvespring pressure needed with larger cam lobes. The (albeit much simpler) variable camshaft phasing on '05-'10 GTs did not cope well with increased valvespring pressure. I'm betting there will be trouble until it is figured out, although that's the price to pay for the valvetrain flexibility.

Question for Inside Line:

What octane fuel was used? In the article i reference above it states on page , these variances for claimed power at different octanes, crank figures. I am trying to gauge what 93 octane that we have on the east coast will do.

Horsepower Crank
412 hp @ 6,500 rpm, 91 octane
402 hp @ 6,500 rpm, 87 octane

Torque Crank
390 lb-ft @ 4,250 rpm, 91 octane
377 lb-ft @ 4,250 rpm, 87 octane

http://bit.ly/deg1Ek

Let's not forget Ford is also providing highly tuned tubular headers with this new 5.0 package.

http://bit.ly/bw31eS

"designed from get go to be supercharged"

It has an 11:1 compression ratio. For anything over a whisper of boost you're going to need to swap pistons. Anything over 9:1 with a supercharger is going to place limits on boost and require work-arounds to avoid detonation... and you're going to be the guinea pig for your own fixes.

What lotsa people don't know is that good factory pistons are often better than the "hi-performance" replacements. Not as strong, sometimes with the ring pack too high and too thin but they fit better: the piston's profile was designed so they work especially well in that particular engine. They can run tight clearances without scuffing, which means you don't get piston slap, piston rock or accelerate wear like you'll have with loose slugs. All that rattling around can give false signals to the knock sensor, not something you want with a 'charger. New pistons also have low friction coatings standard.

Yeah a piston supplier *could* develop low cr pistons for this engine designed for FI and tight clearances... but then you'll either have to get fractional sizes for your factory bore, OR hone to fit and somehow replace the factory iron coating on the aluminum cylinder.

They designed strong parts for hard use, but you'll have to do something about the CR to get the next 100hp.

@pegasuszz

I agree with all you are saying. I predict this yrs SEMA will feature 5.0 parts more than any other.

If Ford ever adds direct injection to this motor (which I think likely), they should be able to safely run a supercharger at moderate boost without dropping the compression ratio.

That would be sensational!

Found this on another site. As you can tell, this is from a Ford insider: Good new Ford Racing Has completed the install of first Supercharger delevopment kit.
For the 2011 5.0 GT Mustang, it features a Whipple blower with Gt500 TB.
Intake Manf.,CAK & intercooler system are from Roush PP.
All every OEM looking in Quility & Package clearances.
We are Targeting a 60 day after job 1 with the kits.
We installed the first S/C kit on a black car
__________________

Are you crazy tonkatoytruck? This Mustang handles much better than 2010 model Mustang which handled better than the 2010 craparo with the heavy IRS. Solid axle vs. IRS in this case will go with the solid axle, much lighter and performs better. The old adage, if its not broke dont fix it and ford has done wonderous things with their solid rears and the power will get to the ground!!! I predict the new mustang will beat the Craparo by .1-.2 0-60 and by .3-.4 in the 1/4 mile and probably 3-4 mph.

@mustang_fan

This new 5.0 Coyote engine is the baseline engine Ford will now be using to replace the current 5.4L.

I can't wait! My previous F-150 5.4L was a severely overworked motor with piss poor gas mileage. This will definately give the competition a run for the money. I'd like to see a unintended accelerating Tundra get smoked by a F-150 powered by a derivative of this motor.

And to follow up on my post, here is the entire 14 minute youtube video of the 2009 Motortrend "Best Driver's car" competition.

http://bit.ly/2mrSi2

^^^my above post is referencing the fact a live rear axle gt500 came in 5th. not too bad! and guess who came in last? camaro.

The truck axle mustang beat:

#10 Chevy Camaro SS
#09 BMW 135i
#08 Jaguar XFR
#07 Nissan 370Z Nismo
#06 Chevy Corvette ZR1

@pegasuszz

They weren't referencing piston design, more block rigidity and cylinder head design. Bottem end stiffness is a big deal on a forced induction engine.

Also, a generic term like "anything over 9:1" is too much is very antiquated in reference to modern technology. I defy you to go to any domestic drag race event and find a competitive forced induction car that is running under 10:1....with huge boost levels. Dynamic compression is what matters, and with the power to control overlap a savvy tuner could just bleed off some cylinder pressure in detonation prone areas to avoid it. Also, modern combustion and inlet design allows significantly higher dynamic compression than was previously thought possible for a given octane. Do a little research on the Honda aftermarket, they very commonly run 13:1+ compression on 91 octane gas while getting 150+ hp liter from a naturally aspirated engine.

As for lower quality aftermarket designs...this is true of many domestic companies, but now that world class manufacturers like Mahle are making pistons for domestic engines, this is no longer true. The Mahle pistons for the 4.6 series of engines are lighter, can run tighter tolerances, and are stronger than any factory pieces. Mahle is the exclusive supplier of pistons for Porsche. They are even cheaper than any domestic companies too, due to much better forgings that require a lot less machining.

@mustang_fan:

From what has been said by Ford, they will not bore the 5.0 out for later useage. From what it looks like, it's been provisioned for Direct Injection at some point in the future, but at this point it was too expensive. As for using larger engines in later editions or the GT500, there is a supercharged 5.0 already in test mule phases, as well as a modified version of the new 6.2L Hurricane motor currently found in the Raptor. There are already shops running around with 700hp NA 6.2L motors, and 900+hp supercharged versions, and that motor can be bored/stroked to over 8L apparently.

@loganmotor

Thanks for the updates. I'm not really current on the latest developments. The part about running boost and high CR on a V8 really intrigues me - I don't doubt for a minute that it's being done but I don't understand how it can work. I had a Mazdaspeed, turbo 2.3, 9.5 static CR and over 15psi of boost. But that's a different animal than a pushrod V8 or even the DOHC in the new Mustang. The Mazda has small bores, 4 valves-central plug location, direct injection and of course a knock sensor. It needs a steady diet of 93 and depends on the knock sensor to keep it in one piece after a heat soak, bad tank of gas etc.
..............................................................................................................I'm trying to guess how one can boost a 2-valve V8 with 10:1 or over - I can only think of i) a cam that bleeds off lots of cyl pressure at low rpm ... can you do that on a late model street driven car? Won't that confuse the ECU and blow fumes out the exhaust (fails smog check)? ii) Some new, advanced combustion chamber design? iii) Somehow, the charge is burned so fast it doesn't detonate even though the pressures are too high for the fuel octane? ..........................................................................................................................I understand that the Mustang isn't the same animal as an LSx or any pushrod engine - it does have a small bore, 4 valve heads, modern combustion chamber and maybe some other tricks. But everything I've read says that you just can't supercharge an 11:1 engine on pump gas and drive it as regular transportation. It sounds like that is no longer true --which is amazing progress.
................................................................................................................................. I'm also glad to hear that one doesn't have to do custom one-off pistons and be a test case. BUT, how do you get pistons to exactly fit the slightly varying factory bores? You don't want to hone through the anti-wear layer onto bare aluminum, but the factory bores are going to be different sizes by a few .001 due to machine tool wear.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you have a supercharged project or three in the works. Good luck with them!

Mahle will sell you pistons in .002 increments....at least I have been able to get them that way for the 4.6, not too sure about Mahle's more traditional pushrod applications, although they do make pistons for pretty much everything.

Even in pushrod 2-valve engines the combustion chamber designs have gotten much better. Modern Pro Stock engines run under 20 degrees of timing at 10,000 RPM (at least the ones I've come into contact with), and that's with VERY large bores (relatively speaking). The general philosophy isn't even to get the fastest burn anymore, delayed maximum cylinder pressure seems to be the trend, although the peak cylinder pressure goes down, it is delayed to a much more advantageous crank angle from a mechanical leverage standpoint. If you try to push on a piston at TDC it won't move, but move it to maybe 25 degrees after TDC and it's much easier to push down. I think you get the idea.

Also, you're right about camshaft choice, you can retard the intake valve closing point to reduce dynamic compression, although this is more of a bandaid and will kill low end torque. The variable valve timing with this new 5.0 does make this more of a realistic proposition however. Other factors, some that many don't consider, make a considerable difference compared to even 10 years ago, such as the vastly improved cooling passages in cylinder heads, resulting in less hot spots that cause detonation.

Also, having a "custom tune" or the ability to modify the actual factory ECU code means that engines can now be tuned much more accurately, or if you're speaking of aftermarket standalone ECU's, the refresh rate, and resolution rate of control (the # of cells in a fuel table, for example), have gotten considerably better. I'd be willing to bet that many domestic race teams are using knock control, or at least datalog it (I know I do).

Although his name has both good and bad connotations, Larry Widmer built a 1.6L Honda D-series engine (hardly honda's crowning motor) that had 11:1 compression and ran 27psi of boost on pump gas. It made over 400whp if I recall right. It was in Hot Rod magazine awhile back, you should be able to find it if you search.

Motortrend just released their own dyno results!

2011 Mustang 5.0 (4th gear pull, 15% powertrain loss)
Claimed horsepower: 412 hp @ 6500 rpm
Claimed torque: 390 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm
Actual horsepower: 435 hp 6500 rpm
Actual torque: 404 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm

2011 Mustang V-6 (3rd gear pull, 15% powertrain loss)
Claimed horsepower: 305 hp @ 6500 rpm
Claimed torque: 280 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm
Actual horsepower: 308 hp @ 6700 rpm
Actual torque: 287 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm

"The Mustang 5.0 is certainly the most impressive with 435 horsepower - if you can believe it, that figure put its well over the top of both the Camaro SS and Challenger SRT-8. Even though the difference between Ford's claim and what we discovered is not as great, the Mustang V-6's output is no less impressive - especially when you consider its claimed 31 mpg on the highway.

Of course, the best news we discovered on Friday we can only hint at. We believe those dyno figures just have to be accurate, given the outrageous numbers these two 'Stangs threw down at our test track. But you'll have to check back with us bright and early Monday morning to find those out... " http://bit.ly/c64rK1

Fellas, lets also keep in mind the numbers we will see out on Monday, 0-60, 0-100, 0-120, 1/4 etc, will all be on the stock gear set. Prob not the very popular 3.73 Ford Racing gears mostly everyone is ordering, as I did.

Lighter than V8 M3 and any other muscle car
Highest HP rating in muscle car class
26 mpg
Ford sync
500 Shaker audio system
suspension upgrades over the 2010 model
Huge upcoming aftermarket blower support

One unforgettable summer coming up!

As a former 5.0 owner and a future 5.0 owner I am amazed at the technology milestones this new engine has achieved. I did a quick Google search found several gas stations in the San Jose area that sell 93 pump gas.

There are a lot smart tuners out there, keep spreading the knowledge!

Great article/videos can't wait to see the new pony strut down the 1320' catwalk!

Stock tip: Pirelli Tires

New Mustang 5.0 beats Camaro on the strip.
http://bit.ly/cxJKP9

The stories are slowly leaking out going into tomorrow :)