• Mar 25, 2010
2011 Ford Mustang GT 5.0 hits the dyno - Click above to watch the video after the jump

Ford says that the 2011 Mustang GT makes 412 horsepower and 390 pound-feet of torque, thanks to its new, advanced 5.0-liter V8. Well, Ford may just be full of crap. Autojournos have descended upon California this week to to kick the snot out of the 2011 Mustangs at the Blue Oval's invitation, and Inside Line took one of the new 5.0 GT models and strapped it to a Dynojet to see what the real numbers were. Thankfully, they do not disappoint.

It's like this: after seven pulls, Inside Line's tester reliably belted out 395 horsepower at 6,600 RPM and 365 pound-feet of torque at 4,350 rpm. That's at the wheel, natch, and since IL estimates the 'Stang sees only an 11 driveline loss thanks to its stick axle, the car is likely making somewhere between 438 and 446 horsepower at the crank – far more than the advertised 412.

This should come as no surprise to anyone, especially Inside Line. After all, last year they did the same thing with a 2010 GT500 only to learn that - surprise! - it was underrated. (Their tester put down 511 horsepower at the wheel. The guys figured the number at the crank to be around 570 horses, not the 540 advertised).

Is it possible that the 2011 Ford Mustang GT media launch testers are juiced? Sure it is, but we think it's unlikely. Reason number one is that Ford would be exposed the moment customer cars started getting delivered and dynoed, which would then look really foolish. Reason number two is the 1999 SVT Cobra. Upon its release, that particular car became infamous for not making its advertised 320 horsepower. While Ford eventually made things right via a recall, the incident was clearly embarrassing and likely left Dearborn with a "never again" mentality that sticks to this day. Hence, we're inclined to think Inside Line's numbers are no fluke. The 2011 Ford Mustang GT, with its new engine, is designed to punch the Chevrolet Camaro in the teeth and make it taste blood. By underrating the 5.0, Ford's just, you know, making sure.

Stay tuned for our man Lieberman's first drive impressions next week. In the meantime, follow the jump for video of one of Inside Line's dyno pulls and visit them to watch a few more and read their full analysis. Thanks to everyone for the tips!




[Source: Inside Line]



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 78 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      I think that they are way overestimating drivetrain drag losses.
        • 4 Years Ago
        a very efficient fwd setup will loose only 12%

        rwd is almost always over 15% loss especially with the relatively large wheel/tire/brake combo on modern street cars

        the only way that the mustang in the video is making less than 430 flywheel hp is if the dyno is not calibrated correctly

        would be nice to have air pressure/temp/humidity info as that can play a part as well
        • 4 Years Ago
        So wait, Ford can build an awesome engine, but can't make a good drivetrain?
      • 4 Years Ago
      One word: Muhahahhahahhahaha!

      Two words: Awesome Sounds!

      Three words: I Want One!!!
      • 4 Years Ago
      It will be nice to see what people can extract from maxing it out natch-urally....
      e.g. higher compression, performance tuning, intake, exhaust, cams, pulleys, etc...500hp probably...

      It will also be great to see what supercharger and turbo options are released...

      The Kenne Bell stage 1 on the current 4.6L 3V engine makes 620hp at 6500rpm



        • 4 Years Ago
        Just remember if you Boost this new 5.0 that you need to upgrade the Rods!!!

      • 4 Years Ago
      Very impressive numbers.

      Good job Ford.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Ford did a damn good job on that engine. Heck, it basically has tubular tri-y headers straight from the factory! Sure, there's still some room for improvement, but not nearly as much as back in the day.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Nice.
      • 4 Years Ago
      The press gets ringers from press fleets all the time on all sorts of cars.

      It's one reason I don't really read "first-drives" or "previews" as they read more like press releases from cars carefully groomed by the manufacturer than anything else.

      GM's response will be upgrading the LSX architecture very soon. Chrysler's will be offering the formerly crate-only 392 HEMI as a production engine replacing the 6.1L.
      • 4 Years Ago
      More power is a good thing.
      • 4 Years Ago
      henry- it still weighs more than an LS3. Mass is important, not hp/L.
      But yes, the SS is in trouble.

      Ashley- and what import offers the same number for the same price?
        • 4 Years Ago
        Yeah, but only about 12-15lbs difference from what I gather.
        • 4 Years Ago
        HP/L stat is something that Honda used to use to sell their rice rockets back in the day. But without any torque, the engine's gonna feel slow as crap, so i agree.

        I am also all about MPG/L, because if the displacement is large, you know it's got good torque somewhere in the power band.

        And even if you're not a fan of American cars, you at least have to give Ford credit. Their powertrain engineering is tops right now. Almost up there with BMW.
      • 4 Years Ago
      You, sir, are the one who still isn't reading posts.

      There have been several people already here that have tried to show you that what you are doing for a "guesstimate" isn't even what you SAY you are doing. It does not equal "15% parasitic drivetrain loss for all dynoed vehicles" at all.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Can we stop using the word "natch". Maybe its just me but its freaking annoying. Just say "naturally".
        • 4 Years Ago
        Same here! :)) I never knew what it meant, either.
        • 4 Years Ago
        I agree 100%. "Natch" sounds stupid, and honestly, I didn't even know what it meant till I saw your comment, lol
      • 4 Years Ago
      Wow, we've come a looooong way from the reborn Mustang GT of 1982, that managed just 175hp from its 5.0, with heads sourced from the Ford marine 5.0, and hi-flow 2-barrel carburetor. Sweeeeet.
    • Load More Comments