...

Go Back   Lateral-g Forums > Lateral-G Open Discussions > Open Discussion
User Name
Password



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-22-2016, 09:38 PM
Centerforce's Avatar
Centerforce Centerforce is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Vendor
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 149
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Vicious Mustang Puts Down 1003whp!

We're sure that most of you are now familiar with Vicious, the 65 Mustang build that made waves at this years SEMA show. After taking Ford's Design of the Year award, it was time to prove that this Stang was not just all show. Under the care of Motec's head tuner, the car went in yesterday for its date with the dyno.

Due to the lack of compound-charged, coyote-powered classic mustangs, no one knew what type of power numbers to expect, other than it was going to be BIG. This assumption proved true as the car put down a whopping 1003whp/784wtq on a conservative E85 tune with the help of our DYAD twin-disk clutch!

There is no chance of this car just being a Dyno queen. Its owner, Chris, plans to do plenty of road racing and auto-x events with the car, including Optima Challenge next year. You can stay up to date with the build via these social channels:
https://www.instagram.com/viciousstang/
https://www.facebook.com/viciousstang/











Last edited by Centerforce; 12-22-2016 at 09:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-01-2017, 03:26 PM
RobertH RobertH is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I'm really surprised they're going to beat on that car, that is really cool.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-01-2017, 07:46 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,079 Times in 387 Posts
Default

Funny! The MULE -- put down 1021 HP with twin turbos an 8 stack.... and old fashioned heads etc. and a whopping 389 cubic inches (relatively old fashioned compared to all the new motors).


I'd have thought this might have produced MUCH more than 1000 hp.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-01-2017, 08:02 PM
clill's Avatar
clill clill is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,557
Thanks: 58
Thanked 1,698 Times in 599 Posts
Default

Mule was 1021 at the flywheel.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-01-2017, 08:09 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,079 Times in 387 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clill View Post
Mule was 1021 at the flywheel.



AH --- MY BAD THEN -- but still --- you'd think with all that hardware it would have made more.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-02-2017, 03:18 PM
rustomatic rustomatic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: ATL
Posts: 748
Thanks: 11
Thanked 58 Times in 36 Posts
Default

They did say that the tune was "conservative." Surely they do not want to grenade the thing during the first round of glory tests . . .

Yes, I just called you Shirley.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-02-2017, 03:43 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,079 Times in 387 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rustomatic View Post
They did say that the tune was "conservative." Surely they do not want to grenade the thing during the first round of glory tests . . .

Yes, I just called you Shirley.



Think about HellFire - makes 950HP - drives across country multiple times per year - gets tracked - and generally gets the crap driven out of it..... and I hear the new build will be 1000+....... So my point was more that there is an awful lot going on here for the result.... when 1000HP these days is pretty "easy".... and on PUMP gas not E85.

I love the car and the build -- please don't misread what I'm saying. The car is bad ass 100%. I just was expecting 1750 +
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-03-2017, 04:20 PM
preston preston is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 653
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 17 Posts
Default

I don't think you are gaining any efficiency by compound boosting it in this application, so the extra complexity is more for show than go - What I mean is I think they would have put up the same number with only turbos and the same boost. Heck, maybe more. Generally the compound boosting is to allow the positive displacement charger to fill in the bottom end before the turbos are full flow.

I think I had a similar reaction to you, but more because the chart showed they were using 27 psi to make the power. That's a crap load of boost, my rough numbers show that the base motor is making less than 400whp without boost. But again that could be the tune and lots of other things.

But agreed, this is a totally cool car nothing negative to say about it except I think the compound deal is more for show, it would probably be lighter and make just as much power with turbos only.

Always curious how the CF brakes will work in the real world without ABS (or did I miss that part ?). According to Clill himself that can be a dicey proposition.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-03-2017, 04:28 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,079 Times in 387 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by preston View Post
I don't think you are gaining any efficiency by compound boosting it in this application, so the extra complexity is more for show than go - What I mean is I think they would have put up the same number with only turbos and the same boost. Heck, maybe more. Generally the compound boosting is to allow the positive displacement charger to fill in the bottom end before the turbos are full flow.

I think I had a similar reaction to you, but more because the chart showed they were using 27 psi to make the power. That's a crap load of boost, my rough numbers show that the base motor is making less than 400whp without boost. But again that could be the tune and lots of other things.

But agreed, this is a totally cool car nothing negative to say about it except I think the compound deal is more for show, it would probably be lighter and make just as much power with turbos only.

Always curious how the CF brakes will work in the real world without ABS (or did I miss that part ?). According to Clill himself that can be a dicey proposition.



I was playing yesterday with the LSX platform ---- Hot Rod magazine built a STOCK LSX 376 -- put on a single 76MM turbo and made 1000 HP.... on pump gas with 19 psi.


Mind you -- that's flywheel....


http://www.hotrod.com/articles/make-...ecision-turbo/


I agree --- super killer build -- love the looks and the color choices and the carbon and all of it.

The carbon brakes on our 911 S Turbo's are better than fantastic!! And according to Mark Steilow -- We might wear out a set of rotors about 30 sets of brake pads from now. Amazing!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-03-2017, 05:59 PM
Tinker's Avatar
Tinker Tinker is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 278
Thanks: 119
Thanked 91 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Who else out there remembers when 450hp was usually considered barely streetable?
__________________
Chris
1969 Firebird: injected Pontiac 462ci, T56
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net