Re: 2003 SVT Cobra vs. The BMW M3

Discussion in '2003 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra' started by Cobra Man, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Thank-you....You just pointed out how little you know of dynoing a vehicle....and that you`ve done very little reading or seen this in person.

    SAE power includes adjustments for Altitude, Temperature, Humidity, barometric pressure. It runs raw data, applies an algorithm to compensate for the conditions and outputs an estimated data for the amount of power in perfect conditions. If you spent any time around a dyno or tuning shops....you would know this. It is so universal throughout the world, even when my vehicle was dynoed in Japan, results were given by "SAE". Catch a clue.

    Second...its ironic with your little tyrade that the LOWER output of 337 was recorded by an individual during dyno day, while the HIGHER output was that of a shop.

    Like I said before, I`ve seen a few Cobras ON dyno`s and never seen these magical high 360-70-80`s....not without pulling parts. But then again...that`s not a stock vehicle. As a matter of fact, it`s not even street legal....the air silencer is required to meet noise requirements, and I think just about everybody knows it is illegal to remove the cat....
     
  2. Cough***bullsh!t***cough...

    No matter, every dyno will still give different numbers dipsh!t, if you've been around so many of them you'd already know this. Please take your car to 5 or 6 different dyno's and then come back here. Oh guess it's hard to take a car you don't own to the dyno's huh? And not every dyno gives out SAE numbers.

    I'm done with you, your starting to bore me with your stupdity.
     
  3. I didn't figure you'd have any insight to the matter.....just more name calling.

    No matter....in other words...Yes, American HP was wrong, but it's trivial....we are only talking about the accuracy of dyno #'s. Like I said...you don't know jack....

    Every dyno graphic I have listed gave numbers in SAE. It is POSSIBLE numbers may not be given in SAE.....POSSIBLE....but it would be ridiculous. The REASON numbers are given in SAE so you have a reasonable assumption of power in comparison to other vehicles. Otherwise, what would be the point? One dyno to another will typically vary 3%. By all means....wander your ass to an ASE site and check yourself. 30HP out of 350 is THREE TIMES that percent.

    It's COMPLETELY possible someone went out in 10 degF weather and had their car dyno'd on a machine not giving SAE numbers and came up with a 365 or higher, but it's VERY improbable.

     
  4. The fact remains moron that you found 2 dyno read outs that suit your needs, while there are HUNDREDS out there that are higher like me and the others are saying. I'm done with this, no matter if you want to believe this or not it's true, the cobra is underrated.
    Steps on how you can realize this.
    1. Take your head out of your a$s.
    2. Stop being such a moron.
    3. Stop pretending you own a fast car, you don't.
    4. Take your head out of you a$s again (I'm sure you put it back up there).
     
  5. #430 65blueyes, Aug 25, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    I dont know if this has been posted, but heres some specs and facts that I found on the web. This is an article published by Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords comparing the newest Camaro SS and the new Cobra. And dont say that its biased (we all know someone will)...
    (quote)
    "Now, whenever we venture to do something like this, there is always someone crying "Foul!" We know we're impartial, but when your magazine's name is Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords, there will certainly be those in the audience who will question the fairness of the test. To quell these fears, we did the test in the presence of staffers from sister Primedia magazines GM High Tech Performance and High Performance Pontiac."

    http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/features/0208mmff_deathmatch/

    They even say this that the Cobra is underated and they show that one pulled 381 RWHP!
    (quote)
    "Maybe, but it still produced 381 horsepower at the rear wheels, an indication that actual output is well over 400 at the flywheel."

    Oh and if you dont believe a simple quote from the article, well here you go heres another one, not only that but in the article is the actual dyno sheet. Please look at this, it proves 381 RWHP STOCK, then they pulled the silencer and aircleaner and got over 390 RWHP.
    (quote)
    "When we heard the SVT Cobra under acceleration, it was clearly choked off. It made no intake noise whatsoever and if it's one thing we love around here it's intake noise. And free beer and pizza. But that's another story. We were obviously pleased when our Cobra twisted the rollers at Crazy Horse Racing (South Amboy, N.J.) to the tune of 381 corrected rwhp. The 374 lbs.-ft. of torque didn't disappoint us either. What blew us away was what the dyno said after we yanked the air silencer and factory filter out. Usually, the silencer is worth 3 hp and the filter maybe a couple more. But when the dyno said 394 horsepower and 375 lbs.-ft., we almost fainted--13 rwhp from a simple trick?"

    As for the drag test times, MMFF has before hit off a 12.4 in the quarter mile, ill have to find my magazine with it, and this is stock. But with a 25 mph headwind the best they pulled off was a 12.79 at 106.39, but it says he missed fourth thats why the trap speed isnt on par with the usual 110-111 mph. As for the Camaro, the best they pulled off was 13.252 at 106.42. Now this is pretty good for both cars, but both can do better with better track days. The Camaro even touching into the very high 12's.

    This is just to back up the previously stated facts that people have stated before. If you still keep up this crap about not beleive the underrated hp figures of the new Cobra and the 1/4 times, then you obviously didnt read the article, or you are so jealous that you can't come to your senses. Not only have I had my car dynoed, but heres another example. I have seen a dyno website with different types of cars shown and I saw one with a stock dyno sheet and it hit over 370 RWHP. Ill have to find that and post that too.

    Ill still try and put up my dyno sheet showing my cobra pulling off 371 RWHP in stock form, no i didnt remove anything and this is COMPLETELY STOCK with only 600 miles on the car. Recently I have had my car dynoed again with new air filter, Magnaflow cat back exhaust and the air silencer removed and I pulled off 410 RWHP.

    Oh and when I said that the Cobra was no better that the M3, you must have misunderstood what I meant, they are both equally great cars, each excelling in their own categories, but it just so happens that for straighline performance and, from my experience, twisty roads, the Cobra it better suited. The M3 is a wonderfull handling car and performance car that is more refined, but lacks behind in performance, just barely. So one is not better than the other cause while the cobra is a better performer, the m3 makes us in in refinement and luxury.
     
  6. You're right?

    Give me a break man!

    He managed...still means he did it. Why do you always do this shit? It's known that Skylines are underrated and you won't argue that...but yet when Amerian Cars are underrated you'll argue that to the grave. Get over yourself bro...You're very knowledgeable indeed but right now some of us no more about this car than you.
     
  7. There's a qualified REASON as to why a number of Japanese cars are underrated.

    There's no such reason in the U.S.
     
  8. Yes...you're talking about a Pro-Ford magazine dyno....


    it still doesn't explain the numbers I have seen with my own eyes at dyno days....nor does it explain the 337HP obtained for SCCA's dyno day......

    It seems you're suggesting there could be a 50HP discrepancy between the runs. VERY unlikely.
     
  9. There must also be a qualified reason why you are such a tool.

    There are reasons why ford has it underrated, one of those reasons is the 99 cobra. They didn't want anything like that to happen again.
     
  10. Sure there is...Insurance reasons...

    Not to mention...ford made a mistake with the 99' Cobra by actually overrating it..it made less then what was documented...So in 03' They made sure it wouldn't happen again...Would you pissed to find out your car makes more hp than claimed?
     
  11. While the 99 Cobra MIGHT be a conceivable reason....

    the insurance underating is a crock. While it may have been true in the 60's and early 70's, since the establishment of the NHTSA, insurance companies have relied on their data to post quotes on vehicles....NOT manufacturers claims.
    I don't understand why this rumor continues to persist!
     
  12. Well whatever reason you go with...the 99' is the main reason...

    Even with my SS...it's underrated too...The reason for that is because the LS1 does put out more than 340hp on the Vette...GM didn't want to out do they're flagship however...they made the SS's exhaust much more freeflowing and I, including many Fbody owners have put out 300rwhp in my car all that with stock exhuast manifolds! Recently I installed Hooker Long Tube Headers and an Offroad pipe so naturally I'll be making even more hp...Not sure what yet..maybe 30more hp but we'll see when I take it to a dyno once again.
     
  13. My best bud has a 2002 Camaro SS Anniversary Edition, and that was dynoed stock also and I know as a fact it was underrated, not sure on the figures though.

    Anyways yes insurance is still a huge problem. I beleive it was John Coletti from Ford SVT who stated they didnt want to advertise the 03 Cobra over 400 horsepower for that very reason.

    I cant believe you, they have the proven dyno sheet of what the 03 Cobra made. A company who dynoes cars wouldnt show that they dynoed a car and falsified the readings. I cant beleive how rediculous you sound.

    Grow up, get with it, its right there in front of you. You sound like someone so jealous. Yes the new Cobra is fast and underrated, thats just the truth plain and simple.

    And you say you saw a Cobra pulling 330 rwhp? Prove it... I bet the Cobra was cold and was on its first run. It DOES make a difference. Thats why shops do more then one dyno run.
     
  14. #439 65blueyes, Aug 29, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Read this and weep!

    http://www.dynoperformance.com/article_details.php?ID=20

    Wam Bam Thank You Maam!

    Oh BTW, this is site is not related to anything Ford, or Ford biased. Just suck it in and take it like a man <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>

    Well lets hear it... what junk do you have to say about this...
     
  15. Actually, 337, as shown by my earlier result, falls right at that limit.

    Second......if you look at the dyno, it was done in PERFECT conditions. Meaning the algorithms that compute power output which are designed around ambient temps of 30-90degF and 20-80% humidity aren't valid. It was a rigged test.

    0.0deg F with a 68deg intake temp? 0.0% humidity?! Since they can obviously control conditions, why didn't they run the test at 70.0degF and 20% humidity? Then they could have taken raw data and proved it without a doubt!

    In addition they assume a 16% drive-train loss throughout the power band.....this is a pretty generous statement (something I've seen throughout a NUMBER of places). This is only partly correct as it varies. The large range of RPM between max HP and max torque (where peak drivetrain loss occurs) makes this a VERY difficult determination.

    As for DynoPerformance....Dean Hantzis...co-founder of DYNOPERFORMANCE is a '97 Mustang Cobra owner and avid Mustang fan.
     
  16. So far you have said that EVERY dyno sheet has been "rigged" lol, thats so funny.

    Have you heard of a thing called "Corrected"? Thats what they do, to acount for the environment conditions. A car may put down a certain power in an environment, then they correct those figures to take into account the conditions. Every shop does this, and everyone takes SAE corrected figures as the actual figures.

    Keep bringing this crap forward haha!
     
  17. #442 65blueyes, Aug 29, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Heres some more dyno sheets for yah...

    http://www.bonedaddy.net/scaven/mystein1.jpg

    Baseline is stock Cobra all the way down to the air silencer installed. This was in the 5 run pulling in 4th gear. My first figures were 340, 362, 375, 371, 382. I have seen Cobras pulled in 3rd and the resulting figures were way off, in the low 330's rwhp. The first pull was cold, and the a/f chart showed it running rich.

    The second curve is with Magnaflow and intake installed.

    Oh btw, before you start yappin how each Cobra is pulling different figures, I talked to the technician and he told me stock cars vary 5% in hp figures from the build up, and especially since these engines are hand built. If you take that into effect, 5% of 400 horse is 20 hp give or take. Not only that but variations in the Cobras include colder plugs, etc, which will definitely effect numbers on a dyno pull. The fact of the matter is though that the Cobra is way underrated.
     
  18. #443 65blueyes, Aug 29, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    I thought this was pretty cool, has a stock cobra (the silver one) and other Cobras making dyno runs on video. Its pulling 369 RWHP. Nicely done video. Its a big file, so only people with high bandwidth watch, unless you have patience.

    http://www.bonedaddy.net/scaven/NEDTDynoDay.wmv
     
  19. Here...reposted because you didn`t read it the first time.

    "Second......if you look at the dyno, it was done in PERFECT conditions. Meaning the algorithms that compute power output which are designed around ambient temps of 30-90degF and 20-80% humidity aren't valid. It was a rigged test."

    Corrected...yes....its standard hat to report (and chart for that matter) all power in SAE corrected. Look up above about four posts and you`ll see me schooling American in the same fashion. HOWEVER, as I said, those algorithms that are used to determine SAE CORRECTED are designed to be applied when ambient temps are between 30-90degF and 20-80% humidity. The test conditions were a far cry.

    In case you haven`t noticed thus far....I`m VERY educated in this subject matter.
     
  20. What your saying is that there was no need for it to be Corrected hp since the conditions were perfect yet they corrected it anyway unneccessarily(giving it an unfair advantage)? or is it always corrected no matter what?

    In case you haven't noticed... I'm not very educated in this subject matter.
     
  21. There are two popular standards for SAE Corrected....J607 and J1349. As an example in temperature, the first is an applied correction to 60deg F and the second is a correction to 77degF. (One of the reasons for the 5% discepancy between dynos)....

    The algorithms were only designed to handle a normal distribution of temperatures. 0.0degF is not normal in any book...and is well below the effective range for the algorithm.

    What makes me VERY suspicious about that particular dyno, is that they obviously can control the temperature (0.0degF) in their dyno booth....so why didn`t they set the booth to one of the SAE temps? THAT way, they wouldn`t have to apply the algorithm, and would know exactly what the car puts out....which is best for FI anyway since the algorithm is much more accurate on an NA engine than in an FI engine.

    In real engine testing (off-frame, or non-chassis dyno runs), the booth temp is set to one of the SAE standards (or to the average temp of the environment to be used in....you wouldn`t test the output of an engine designed for a SnowCat in 60degF).
     
  22. We arnt just talking about that particular one, every single dyno sheet you have said was falsified. WTF??? Haha thats absurd. If you are as educated as you are in this you wouldnt be agruing this. Cause the fact is the 03 Cobra is underrated from factory. I can show you countless more dyno graphs, but your just going to whine about them. As for the low hp figures you saw, as I said it prolly wasnt a dynojet dyno, wasnt corrected, was the Cobras first pull, its was cold (engine), wasnt pulled in 4th gear (a 3rd gear pull will yield low numbers), cats were clogged (which isnt uncommon for any car), or again just a shitty dyno. Either way theres something fishy about it. Let me ask you this... did you even get to see the A/F graph? You prolly didnt or else you would have seen it was a bad run.

    Well as you keep bickering I am heading over the the drags to race my 03.
     
  23. The reason I`m sticking to my guns on this one is that I have seen a few 03s on the dyno (in person mind you...not internet heresay) and NOT ONE dynoed over around 352-3RWHP when they were stock.

    Why would ANYONE dyno this car in third gear....1-1 gear ratio is almost is in fourth?! That`s just reaching....and entirely backwards anyway. Dynoing a car in a lower gear will give you HIGHER results. Higher ratio gives you a gearing ADVANTAGE. You are making MORE power to the wheels in 3rd than you are in 4th. Hence you accelerate faster in 3rd than you do in 4th.



    Now who`s making (innaccurate) excuses for an "underpowered" run?

    I`ve seen what I`ve seen.
     
  24. I'm sticking with the lowest dyno shown (and not the average of dynos) since all you Stang buffs are sticking to the lowest 1/4 mile time shown even though no other mag besides MM & FF got under 13 seconds. The dynos that showed around 350 were the only ones that were COMPLETELY stock from the factory. Rustangs would just show 370s and up and say "do you really think removing an airlid will do that much" and "an exaust system couldn't add 20-30 hp could it"? No it doesn't seem like those minor things could add that much and yet a truly bone stock 03 Cobra dynoed a 354 which still qualifies as under-rated but how much hp are you guys claiming here... I would say 15hp tops but some people seem to think 30-50 or more.
     
  25. Actually, on an FI vehicle in which it's breathing is restricted (either for noise, or emissions reasons), output can be GREATLY affected.
     

Share This Page