• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-

2011 5.0L power capacity

  • Thread starter Thread starter SpartaPerformance
  • Start date Start date Feb 21, 2010
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

SpartaPerformance

10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2006
2,517
61
89
Long Island NY
Feb 21, 2010
#1
  • Feb 21, 2010
  • #1
I was at a performance & accessory trade show today, I was speaking to the FRPP guys and when I asked them if they've had or foresee any issues with the powder metal forged rods on the new 302 they said no! The FRPP tech's face went from joking laughing having a good time to a blank stone look when I asked the question, he said " With Mullaly if the quality is not there it doesn't come out". They've been working with Shelby on the GT-350, he also said they've melted one motor already so they're pretty sure of it's limits. There will be a whole load of FRPP available in time for the vehicle launch.
 

Marc S

New Member
Jan 23, 2009
61
0
0
Feb 22, 2010
#2
  • Feb 22, 2010
  • #2
I would not trust the rods with forced induction and 11 to 1 compression. Time will tell though, I could be wrong.
 
1

1slo5ohh

New Member
Jan 25, 2009
19
0
0
Maryland
Feb 22, 2010
#3
  • Feb 22, 2010
  • #3
the high compression will be great for the guys who wanna spray it
 

053vstang

Member
Feb 16, 2010
39
0
6
Detroit
Mar 1, 2010
#4
  • Mar 1, 2010
  • #4
I just want to see what kinda power this engine will make with forced induction before it grenades? Not that it cant be done, but I think 11:1 is a little high for forced induction. And we all know the rods are suspect, even if the FRPP guys dont know, lol!
 

Cobra Jay

Member
Apr 7, 2004
889
0
16
Motor City
Mar 1, 2010
#5
  • Mar 1, 2010
  • #5
Marc S said:
I would not trust the rods with forced induction and 11 to 1 compression. Time will tell though, I could be wrong.
Click to expand...


053vstang said:
I just want to see what kinda power this engine will make with forced induction before it grenades? Not that it cant be done, but I think 11:1 is a little high for forced induction. And we all know the rods are suspect, even if the FRPP guys dont know, lol!
Click to expand...

Like SpartaPerformance said, The new Shelby GT350 5.0 comes with a Whipple.................................

Those rod will handle more than you think
 

Marc S

New Member
Jan 23, 2009
61
0
0
Mar 1, 2010
#6
  • Mar 1, 2010
  • #6
GT JAY said:
Like SpartaPerformance said, The new Shelby GT350 5.0 comes with a Whipple.................................

Those rod will handle more than you think
Click to expand...

Actually, they will handle about as much as I know they will Jay.

I am sure they will take some boost without issue. However, I have been building blown alcohol/gas engines for 20+ years. I know from experience that 11:1 compression will only handle so much boost before parts breakage or detonation occurs. Ya I know, more efficient combustion chambers designs will allow more timing and cylinder pressure and modern electronics monitor functions in milliseconds. But you can't overcome physics. Even Shelby says the engines will have to have a very conservative tune and limited boost. He is expecting the flywheel HP to be between 500 and 550. If you convert rated HP to wrhp, 550 is about 467 at the ground. Any 3V with forced induction can make that.

I'm sure the engine will be great, I am not arguing that. I look forward to seeing how well they respond to mods. I wish Ford could have gotten past the 5.0 thing and build some real displacement though. The 3V has about the same HP per liter as the Camaro and the new 5.0 exceeds them both. However, if you put FI on a 2011 Mustang and you run into a 2011 Camaro with FI, the Mustang will not keep up. I just finished a 2010 Camaro with a Procharger, it made 561 rwhp on a mild tune.

I would be more excited if Ford would have sacrificed HP per liter and given us a 6.0 liter with about 9:1 compression and 425 HP and with rods/crank that would handle 15 lbs of boost so we all could enjoy 600rwhp.
 

Cobra Jay

Member
Apr 7, 2004
889
0
16
Motor City
Mar 2, 2010
#7
  • Mar 2, 2010
  • #7
I'm sure they'll handle 8-10#'s no problem

Most people who are buying them, aren't going to touch them at all anyway
 
B

bluestang347

Active Member
Dec 24, 2006
155
104
53
GA
Mar 3, 2010
#8
  • Mar 3, 2010
  • #8
Marc S said:
Actually, they will handle about as much as I know they will Jay.

I am sure they will take some boost without issue. However, I have been building blown alcohol/gas engines for 20+ years. I know from experience that 11:1 compression will only handle so much boost before parts breakage or detonation occurs. Ya I know, more efficient combustion chambers designs will allow more timing and cylinder pressure and modern electronics monitor functions in milliseconds. But you can't overcome physics. Even Shelby says the engines will have to have a very conservative tune and limited boost. He is expecting the flywheel HP to be between 500 and 550. If you convert rated HP to wrhp, 550 is about 467 at the ground. Any 3V with forced induction can make that.

I'm sure the engine will be great, I am not arguing that. I look forward to seeing how well they respond to mods. I wish Ford could have gotten past the 5.0 thing and build some real displacement though. The 3V has about the same HP per liter as the Camaro and the new 5.0 exceeds them both. However, if you put FI on a 2011 Mustang and you run into a 2011 Camaro with FI, the Mustang will not keep up. I just finished a 2010 Camaro with a Procharger, it made 561 rwhp on a mild tune.

I would be more excited if Ford would have sacrificed HP per liter and given us a 6.0 liter with about 9:1 compression and 425 HP and with rods/crank that would handle 15 lbs of boost so we all could enjoy 600rwhp.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree!
 
L

lamach1

New Member
Dec 21, 2003
16
0
0
Mar 3, 2010
#9
  • Mar 3, 2010
  • #9
Marc S said:
Actually, they will handle about as much as I know they will Jay.

I am sure they will take some boost without issue. However, I have been building blown alcohol/gas engines for 20+ years. I know from experience that 11:1 compression will only handle so much boost before parts breakage or detonation occurs. Ya I know, more efficient combustion chambers designs will allow more timing and cylinder pressure and modern electronics monitor functions in milliseconds. But you can't overcome physics. Even Shelby says the engines will have to have a very conservative tune and limited boost. He is expecting the flywheel HP to be between 500 and 550. If you convert rated HP to wrhp, 550 is about 467 at the ground. Any 3V with forced induction can make that.

I'm sure the engine will be great, I am not arguing that. I look forward to seeing how well they respond to mods. I wish Ford could have gotten past the 5.0 thing and build some real displacement though. The 3V has about the same HP per liter as the Camaro and the new 5.0 exceeds them both. However, if you put FI on a 2011 Mustang and you run into a 2011 Camaro with FI, the Mustang will not keep up. I just finished a 2010 Camaro with a Procharger, it made 561 rwhp on a mild tune.

I would be more excited if Ford would have sacrificed HP per liter and given us a 6.0 liter with about 9:1 compression and 425 HP and with rods/crank that would handle 15 lbs of boost so we all could enjoy 600rwhp.
Click to expand...


I agree, but I guess we have to go with what we got. Have you got any idea what it would cost to put forged pistons and rods in a new 5.0?
 

Marc S

New Member
Jan 23, 2009
61
0
0
Mar 3, 2010
#10
  • Mar 3, 2010
  • #10
It should cost about the same as the 4.6 to swap out the rod's, crank and pistons. I would guess the kits will be around $2,000.00.
 

Five Oh Brian

Member
Jun 13, 2007
552
1
16
Pacific Northwest
Mar 4, 2010
#11
  • Mar 4, 2010
  • #11
GT JAY said:
I'm sure they'll handle 8-10#'s no problem...
Click to expand...

Please tell me you don't really believe that! 4-5 psi boost is pushing it with 11:1 compression in the factory short block. Put together a stout, forged bottom end, and then 8-10 psi boost might be okay, but not the factory short block.
 

Marc S

New Member
Jan 23, 2009
61
0
0
Mar 5, 2010
#12
  • Mar 5, 2010
  • #12
Five Oh Brian said:
Please tell me you don't really believe that! 4-5 psi boost is pushing it with 11:1 compression in the factory short block. Put together a stout, forged bottom end, and then 8-10 psi boost might be okay, but not the factory short block.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% Brian, but I did not want to say it. Glad you did though.

John told me you have some new and improved ET's and dyno numbers. I was trying to catch up to you N/A. I guess I will have to throw the Procharger on mine before the tracks open.
 
M

mustangdave

My rearend needs a stud and two nuts.
Founding Member
Feb 26, 2002
2,976
1
56
North Carolina
Mar 8, 2010
#13
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #13
I read an article from the engineer that helped design the engine and he said the rods were just strong enough. In other words, boost is a ticlking time bomb. The penny pinchers wouldn't go for stronger rods. A blower wouldn't be worth the expense since you have to keep the boost so low and a conservative tune. These are the first Mustangs in a long time that are not going to hold up well to engine mods.
 

scupking

Active Member
Sep 18, 2005
1,186
1
36
Enfield, CT
Mar 8, 2010
#14
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #14
It would be funny if the new V6 will hold more power then the V8.
 

castine917

Member
Mar 20, 2009
126
3
19
Wyoming, Mi.
Mar 8, 2010
#15
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #15
the new 5.0 looks to be less "modable" but it is coming from the factory at a higher starting point. we have been asking for more power stock for so long and they finally listened sorta. it would be really awesome if they did a high compression naturally aspirated and a low compression option.
 
R

ruffy

Member
Apr 10, 2003
314
0
16
Skopje, Macedonia
Mar 9, 2010
#16
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #16
In the past people with the 4.6 were adding bolt ons, blowers, and others tricks of the trade and ending up with a car just as fast if not faster than a base GT 500. Perhaps Ford saw this and wanted to make the 5.0 "less modable" as Castine917 said as a way to discourage the practice, or they needed to do it that way to keep the fuel economy high and emissions low. God only knows what they did with the computer. Tuners might have their work cut out for them.
 

Cobra Jay

Member
Apr 7, 2004
889
0
16
Motor City
Oct 10, 2010
#17
  • Oct 10, 2010
  • #17
Less Modable

Someone better tell all these tuners that they better stop putting over 5 psi on their '11 5.0s


opcorn:
 
K

kyle_99gt

Member
Nov 4, 2008
166
1
16
Oct 14, 2010
#18
  • Oct 14, 2010
  • #18
anyone know much about evolution performance? Iv seen there latest vids and there running a SC 5.0 with 24 lbs of boost, did they do something extraordinary to make this happen? I mean if your gona spend the money on a sc you can get some stronger rods too.
 

1wildGT

Founding Member
Jun 4, 2001
1,026
6
38
Abilene TX
Oct 15, 2010
#19
  • Oct 15, 2010
  • #19
kyle_99gt said:
anyone know much about evolution performance? Iv seen there latest vids and there running a SC 5.0 with 24 lbs of boost, did they do something extraordinary to make this happen? I mean if your gona spend the money on a sc you can get some stronger rods too.
Click to expand...

They ran 8.89 @ 148 with these mods:

Mod List
L&M Race Engines Built 5.0L 4V - Oliver Billet Rods and Custom Diamond Pistons (L&M Engines)
Procharger F1C @ 24lbs of Boost (ProCharger Self-contained Superchargers and Intercooled Supercharging Systems)
Procharger Air to Water Intercooler (ProCharger Self-contained Superchargers and Intercooled Supercharging Systems)
Fore Precision Works F4 Fuel Regulator (Fore Precision Fuel System Components)
Aeromotive Return Fuel System (Aeromotive*|*Serious Fuel Systems)
American Racing 1 7/8 Longtube Headers (American Racing Headers)
Alky Control Water/Meth Injection (http://alkycontrol.com/)
Evolution Performance Fabricated Ford 9" Rear with Built On Anti-Rollbar (Evolution Performance - Mustang Performance Parts & Accessories)
Pro-Formance C4 Transmission (www.dynamicconverters.com)
Frank Lupo's Dynamic Converter (www.dynamicconverters.com)
Evolution Performance, Inc. 4" Aluminum Driveshaft (Evolution Performance - Mustang Performance Parts & Accessories)
15" Bogart Racing Wheels (Bogart Racing Wheels)
Mickey Thompson ET Drag Slicks (Mickey Thompson Performance Tires & Wheels)
N2MB Racing WOT Box 2-Step (www2)
Custom Tuned By Jon Lund (Lund Racing, LLC.)
 
U

unas2k5

New Member
Feb 6, 2010
80
0
0
Oct 16, 2010
#20
  • Oct 16, 2010
  • #20
So basically if you want to SC your 5.0 you need an extra 2k for parts?
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Progress Thread Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
  • JRC99
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2025
JRC99
J
T
Help me solve a mystery
  • TheeMonster
  • Dec 1, 2019
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
9
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 2, 2019
ThinBlue502
  • Locked
“Doing stuff the wrong way for the right reasons”: A related stupid story.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 26, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 27, 2020
a91what
Jer, Bear, And A Couple Of Longhairs.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • May 20, 2012
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 25, 2012
No.11
Random Thoughts About The Hot Rod Power Tour
  • Pops Fun
  • Jun 9, 2012
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 11, 2012
Pops Fun
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?