Search results

Actually confirmed or folks just posting about it and AI picking that up for the search engines and so folks find that result when searching in a self inflating circle of internet common knowledge that is based on nothing? I do not know the answer, but I do not recall anybody actually being...

This was his second pass, when he had more confidence to really push that Mustang.

If it ever existed, then yes, it could be eliminated. Don't you think that the tuners would be all over this making a bundle of money selling tunes to every Mustang owner in America if this was true? I would gather all of my money, hire a team of marketers and tuners and customer service...

No, it doesn't. No, I can't. Mine pulls hard right up to the shift point. In fact, in Track Mode I never drop below 6,000 rpm. Anyway, talk about irrelevant posts. The OP had a failure. The dealer fixed it under warranty. Now his car pulls hard up to the redline - no one of the two...

Nice. 1971 is my favorite year, due to the front grill, but I certainly wouldn't kick a 70 out of my garage! Can we see a pic of the car (not just the engine)? 🙂

LOL. No. He has a failure. They fixed it. Dip gone.

I pounded the rod bearings out of a 10.5 to 1 engine. But it had cast iron heads and tuning was a carb and a distributor . . . and I sure thought that car was fast until I damaged the bearings, and it was, compared to cars back then. Cars are much better and more powerful today. I mean...

How? 🤔 They are paid like 1500 bucks a month.

I'm with you, but Ford does not present it that way in the manual.

This is not "spirited" driving, but just commuting? The CS has an optional performance package which would have an auxiliary transmission cooler. Does your car have the optional performance package?

On track, there are times when you are riding down the brakes hard from a very high speed to a very slow turn, and the transmission will start downshifting a bunch of times, each time sounding like a double clutch downshift as the engine bumps the throttle enough each time to keep the engine...

Exactly. And I bet Racer57 agrees. On the other hand, if I put 93 octane in my 8:1 compression 350 small block from 1974, I am not going to get any more horsepower, so Racer57 is also correct that octane, all by itself, does not add horsepower. I am just saying no need to fight about it...

Well, I am not going to pretend to answer for anybody else, but yes, for me. Using the paddles kind of sucks, because there is this lengthy delay. You click it and wait and then it shifts. Just leaving it in D in track mode keeps the rpms up. With 10 gears, that is a lot to try to keep...

I did not use my paddles, but let the transmission shift itself. I experienced no problems like this.

The advanced timing and higher boost pressures mean more horsepower. You are being pedantic. I think you are on the same page with us if you stop to think about it. If you look back, you will also see that nobody, not one post, made the claim that higher octane gasoline makes more horsepower...

It appears that this is not what he was referring to. His car was actually malfunctioning. So this and all of the one throttle body closing and other theories are not what was going on. Some sort of camshaft issue - hopefully we get some more detail about what was going wrong with the camshaft.

Fixed under warranty?

Nothing like that available here in Georgia, to your north.

I could swear I hear the little springs sound of light pinging when at low rpm and adding load, but not enough for the transmission to downshift . . . and this is on 93.

We did 9 pages on this previously: https://www.mustang7g.com/forums/threads/does-5-0-coyote-performance-improve-with-octane.170469/