Dyno Results - 2024+ Mustang GT (Pop & Bang Tune Only, No Performance Tune)

[YONGSEOK KIM]

Hi everyone!


My name is Kim, and I'm a Mustang enthusiast from South Korea.
I'm excited to learn from the community.


I recently put my S650 Mustang GT on a dyno and got the following results:

• 394 WHP
• 430 Nm (317 lb-ft) of wheel torque

The car only has a Pop & Bang tune for exhaust sound. No performance tune or power modifications have been made.


I'm a bit surprised because these numbers seem noticeably lower than Ford's advertised crank horsepower.


Here are the test conditions:

• Transmission: 10R80 automatic
• Fuel:98 RON premium gasoline (South Korea)
  • Unfortunately, E85 is not available here.
• Dyno: DYNOCOM
• Ambient temperature: Around 25°C (77°F)

I'm wondering:

1. Is it normal for the 10R80 drivetrain loss to be this significant?
2. Does DYNOCOM typically read lower than Dynojet?
3. Does anyone have stock S650 GT dyno graphs (especially 10R80 automatic) for comparison?

I'm really curious to see what other stock cars are putting down, especially those running 93 octane or E85.


Thanks in advance!

Sponsored

 

[Joshinator99]

Factory HP ratings are always engine only…so therefore a chassis dyno will always read lower. Every car of every brand will have drivetrain loss. 10-15% drivetrain loss is a typical ballpark figure.

 

[robvas]

What gear was it in?

How hot was the car?

Are those numbers STD or SAE?

I'd expect to see another 15hp out of a car like that but what do other S650's make on that same dyno? That's a better baseline. You can't compare dyno to dyno.

Your HP peak being at 6700rpm is a little low, if you look at other cars they peak at 7000-7200

 

[Q6543]

Dyno com is a “heartbreaker” dyno.
that would be 5-10% higher on a dyno jet

 

[MidwayJ]

Factory HP ratings are always engine only…so therefore a chassis dyno will always read lower. Every car of every brand will have drivetrain loss. 10-15% drivetrain loss is a typical ballpark figure.

The OP seems aware that a dyno will read lower but is questioning whether the reading in this case (19% lower) is what should be expected.

 

[Joshinator99]

I'm a bit surprised because these numbers seem noticeably lower than Ford's advertised crank horsepower.

The OP seems aware that a dyno will read lower but is questioning whether the reading in this case (19% lower) is what should be expected.

Given the OP’s above statement, I wasn’t sure that he did.

Chassis dynos are great for comparing changes to the car and a very useful tuning tool. But as an absolute measure of power they aren’t great, which is why many “dyno queens” don’t trap the MPH they should. For example, just putting the tires forward or backward on the dyno roller an inch or two off has a significant impact on the dyno reading. How tightly the car is strapped down affects the reading! The type of tire and its compound used can affect the reading as well. Again, great for tuning and comparing changes to your car on the same dyno, but as an absolute measure of power (especially compared to a factory BHP rating) they’re flawed at best. I have better and more consistent results on a hub dyno. Check out the HP Academy video on chassis dynos, it’s pretty informative.

 

[GrabThatBlue]

I know European Mustangs have an OPF filter and they advertise 445hp for the GT.

Do you have this version of the Mustang or the NA version with 486hp?

 

[Dave2013M3]

The issue with the S650 is they are heat senstive and will pull timing. Thats why the dyno runs are all over the place with these cars.

 

[Paul's stable]

Hi everyone!


My name is Kim, and I'm a Mustang enthusiast from South Korea.
I'm excited to learn from the community.


I recently put my S650 Mustang GT on a dyno and got the following results:

• 394 WHP
• 430 Nm (317 lb-ft) of wheel torque

The car only has a Pop & Bang tune for exhaust sound. No performance tune or power modifications have been made.


I'm a bit surprised because these numbers seem noticeably lower than Ford's advertised crank horsepower.


Here are the test conditions:

• Transmission: 10R80 automatic
• Fuel:98 RON premium gasoline (South Korea)
  • Unfortunately, E85 is not available here.
• Dyno: DYNOCOM
• Ambient temperature: Around 25°C (77°F)

I'm wondering:

1. Is it normal for the 10R80 drivetrain loss to be this significant?
2. Does DYNOCOM typically read lower than Dynojet?
3. Does anyone have stock S650 GT dyno graphs (especially 10R80 automatic) for comparison?

I'm really curious to see what other stock cars are putting down, especially those running 93 octane or E85.


Thanks in advance!

I'm guessing the 394 is rear wheel HP. That would be closer to 480 at the crank. Keep rocking The Mustang in South Korea.

 

[Cody5.0]

I'm guessing the 394 is rear wheel HP. That would be closer to 480 at the crank. Keep rocking The Mustang in South Korea.

These cars aren’t losing 90hp through the drivetrain.

 

[d4rkg04t]

394rwhp/.8=490bhp

It's about right.

 

[Epiphany]

These cars aren’t loosing 90hp through the drivetrain.

That's because the drivetrain is tight. If something was loose, power could be lost and in a race he might be the loser.

 

[Kaleza]

Hi everyone!


My name is Kim, and I'm a Mustang enthusiast from South Korea.
I'm excited to learn from the community.


I recently put my S650 Mustang GT on a dyno and got the following results:

• 394 WHP
• 430 Nm (317 lb-ft) of wheel torque

The car only has a Pop & Bang tune for exhaust sound. No performance tune or power modifications have been made.


I'm a bit surprised because these numbers seem noticeably lower than Ford's advertised crank horsepower.


Here are the test conditions:

• Transmission: 10R80 automatic
• Fuel:98 RON premium gasoline (South Korea)
  • Unfortunately, E85 is not available here.
• Dyno: DYNOCOM
• Ambient temperature: Around 25°C (77°F)

I'm wondering:

1. Is it normal for the 10R80 drivetrain loss to be this significant?
2. Does DYNOCOM typically read lower than Dynojet?
3. Does anyone have stock S650 GT dyno graphs (especially 10R80 automatic) for comparison?

I'm really curious to see what other stock cars are putting down, especially those running 93 octane or E85.


Thanks in advance!

Post the video with pops and bangs

 

[Cody5.0]

I'm guessing the 394 is rear wheel HP. That would be closer to 480 at the crank. Keep rocking The Mustang in South Korea.

These cars aren’t loosing 90hp through the drivetrain.

That's because the drivetrain is tight. If something was loose, power could be lost and in a race he might be the loser.

At first I was like what in the hell then I read my post again.

 

[robvas]

394rwhp/.8=490bhp

It's about right.

20% drivetrain loss isn't anywhere close. It's not a 1979 Mustang

Sponsored