RE: Ford Mustang supercharged to 760hp by Roush

RE: Ford Mustang supercharged to 760hp by Roush

Wednesday 22nd January 2020

Ford Mustang supercharged to 760hp by Roush

US tuner's phase two 'charger kit edges 5.0-litre to within 10hp of the flat-plane 5.2-powered GT500



If you're a Mustang owner yearning GT500-level power on a (relative) budget, US tuner Roush has you covered with its latest supercharger kit, which tunes the car's 5.0-litre V8 to produce 750 American horsepower. That's 760 metric hp, just 11hp fewer than the Shelby-tuned GT500 with its supercharged 5.2-litre flat-plane crank motor - and it's accompanied by 670lb ft of eight-cylinder twist. Better still, the kit is compatible with the six-speed manual as well as the automatic gearbox - something Shelby's auto-only monster cannot claim to be.

At the heart of the phase two kit is an Eaton TVS R265 superhcharger, which blows through high-flowing front inlet and outlet ports that "greatly enhance thermal and volumetric efficiency across the entire RPM range". For maximum bang, there's a new fuel injection system, while an intercooler, larger radiator and bespoke engine calibration keep things working at their optimum level. The phase two map takes things up by 50hp thanks to 93 (rather than 91) fuel octane settings. It is compatible with higher quality petrol, although Roush makes no mention of a boost in peak output for European customers with access to the good stuff.


Additionally, the latest kit is said to enhance the car's performance durability, enabling "more laps at the track" before things get hot. Roush does state that cars featuring a particulate filter won't be compatible, although we suspect those forking out $7,700 (about £5,865) for its parts won't be too bothered by the loss of said component. In fact, barring Ford's Bullitt version of the Mustang, it seems all 2018-2020 models are compatible, with the upgrade covered by Roush's three year/36,000-mile warranty. Shows just how much confidence the firm has in Ford's 5.0-litre block.

While the peak figure of Roush's work should bring a 'normal' Mustang into line with Shelby's flat-plane cranked range-topper, we ought to add that the kit doesn't include chassis, brake or aero upgrades. So you'd still be a fair way off the overall performance of the factory-approved machine with a supercharged GT. But for those in Blighty not able to stretch to GT500 import costs, Roush's kit represents an exciting way to take things up to eleven.


Search for a Mustang here


Author
Discussion

Augustus Windsock

Original Poster:

3,370 posts

156 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
Now they just need to come up with a kit to replace the hard-touch plastics of the interior (I’m using press reports / reviews as I’ve not actually been in one btw).
But other than that it sounds like good vfm to me despite the fact that potential owners will probably be best to upgrade the brakes and/or suspension.

J4CKO

41,628 posts

201 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
Had a nosey round one the other day, the new shape like this one is seems a bit better int hat respect than the pre facelift.


terryb

976 posts

245 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
Fact Cheker..,..

The GT500 uses a cross-plane crank, not a flat-plane crank that is used in the GT350. Tsh... biggrin

sumpoil

431 posts

165 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
terryb said:
Fact Cheker..,..

The GT500 uses a cross-plane crank, not a flat-plane crank that is used in the GT350. Tsh... biggrin
Spell checker is a good idea too biggrin

aeropilot

34,666 posts

228 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
sumpoil said:
terryb said:
Fact Cheker..,..

The GT500 uses a cross-plane crank, not a flat-plane crank that is used in the GT350. Tsh... biggrin
Spell checker is a good idea too biggrin
rofl

TREMAiNE

3,918 posts

150 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
Long term, I'd love to get this package. Unfortunately, I can't quite afford it right now...

Augustus Windsock said:
(I’m using press reports / reviews as I’ve not actually been in one btw).
Reviews make the interior sound so much worse than it is. I didn't consider a Mustang at all because of the supposed naff interior. When I stumbled across one in the flesh and had a proper look, I realized it was all nonsense. A much nicer place to sit than a lot of German cars in terms of design. Quality is not quite on par but really not far off at all. For the price, I think it's a bargain. Used V8's with under 30k miles start from about 25k, they're a steal IMO...


Anyone interested in what the Mustang is like can click >> here << to see.

terryb

976 posts

245 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
sumpoil said:
Spell checker is a good idea too biggrin
lol - busted biggrin

cib24

1,117 posts

154 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
The problem with that Roush kit is it heatsoaks like crazy. You are better off spending a few thousand more for a Whipple or Procharger.

The interior is far better than journalists would have you believe. Yes, it's built to a price but there are absolutely no rattles in mine, the digital dash is very good, I'm pretty sure Ford's Sync sat nav is better than anyone else's in terms of accuracy and re-routing, and my Recaro seats are lovely. I was genuinely surprised after a test drive, and so surprised by it's handling with Magneride that I bought one. Go figure.

avonllahxuav

3 posts

52 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
US 91 octane is approx Euro 95 RON and US 93 octane is approx Euro 98 RON. Not sure our fuel is much better.

ducnick

1,794 posts

244 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
Thank god someone pointed out that the Americans measure octane in a different unit!
The coyote gen 3 roush front entry kit doesn’t heat soak as bad as the old rear entry one now that they have copied whipple gen2. Having said that the gen 3 whipple or Harrop is less prone to heat soak.
500bhp in mine is plenty for most days, but occasionally when it’s hooked up you do yearn for indecent torque. The big power ones I have seen are genuinely scary fast from 50-180mph. I had a 800bhp one walk away from me like i was in a fiesta and I was wide open, yet upto 50 mph we were level as he couldn’t put the extra power to the road.

Edited by ducnick on Wednesday 22 January 21:04

mac96

3,791 posts

144 months

Wednesday 22nd January 2020
quotequote all
I love the idea of a 760 bhp Mustang in theory, but in reality I don't often think mine needs another 300 + bhp!
Most of the money would really be better spent on handling upgrades if you want to go faster..

But...it IS tempting!

jimdollar

51 posts

89 months

Thursday 23rd January 2020
quotequote all
There's one identical to this in our local Ford dealer for £70000, reduced from £80000.

eliot

11,439 posts

255 months

Thursday 23rd January 2020
quotequote all
avonllahxuav said:
US 91 octane is approx Euro 95 RON and US 93 octane is approx Euro 98 RON. Not sure our fuel is much better.
That’s what I was thinking too.

CraigJ

599 posts

206 months

Thursday 23rd January 2020
quotequote all
ducnick said:
Thank god someone pointed out that the Americans measure octane in a different unit!
The coyote gen 3 roush front entry kit doesn’t heat soak as bad as the old rear entry one now that they have copied whipple gen2. Having said that the gen 3 whipple or Harrop is less prone to heat soak.
500bhp in mine is plenty for most days, but occasionally when it’s hooked up you do yearn for indecent torque. The big power ones I have seen are genuinely scary fast from 50-180mph. I had a 800bhp one walk away from me like i was in a fiesta and I was wide open, yet upto 50 mph we were level as he couldn’t put the extra power to the road.

Edited by ducnick on Wednesday 22 January 21:04
I have the same issue, Have 325's on the rear and cant get it to hook at this time of year. The odd quick squirt but cant go WOT as it just breaks loose at anything under 80ish. In summer on my old 275's i could hook up in 3rd WOT from 2.5k rpm.

Just doing the last mods to mine this month and should be in the high 600whp (750+ flywheel)

I went Edelbrock but the smaller 2300 kit as they were selling them off. Not disappointed at all. Once the griptec pulley, Meth plate and oil cooler arrive the car will be used to have a crack at 200mph on the standing mile at Elvington.

unsprung

5,467 posts

125 months

Thursday 23rd January 2020
quotequote all


PH article said:
The phase two map takes things up by 50hp thanks to 93 (rather than 91) fuel octane settings. It is compatible with higher quality petrol, although Roush makes no mention of a boost in peak output for European customers with access to the good stuff.
Simply. Un. Believeable.

Come on, PH editorial staff. This old chestnut about purportedly low-octane, low quality petrol in the US tarnishes the good reputation of PH.

Hats off to the PH'ers above who've already flagged this issue. They know the difference.

I'm not the first person to post the following link:

"In most countries in Europe, the 'headline' octane rating shown on the pump is the RON, but in Canada, the United States, Brazil, and some other countries, the headline number is the simple mean or average of the RON and the MON, called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), and often written on pumps as (R+M)/2."

"Because of the 8 to 12 octane number difference between RON and MON noted above, the AKI shown in Canada and the United States is 4 to 6 octane numbers lower than elsewhere in the world for the same fuel."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating#Anti-K...






Plate spinner

17,727 posts

201 months

Thursday 23rd January 2020
quotequote all
unsprung said:
PH article said:
The phase two map takes things up by 50hp thanks to 93 (rather than 91) fuel octane settings. It is compatible with higher quality petrol, although Roush makes no mention of a boost in peak output for European customers with access to the good stuff.
Simply. Un. Believeable.

Come on, PH editorial staff. This old chestnut about purportedly low-octane, low quality petrol in the US tarnishes the good reputation of PH.

Hats off to the PH'ers above who've already flagged this issue. They know the difference.

I'm not the first person to post the following link:

"In most countries in Europe, the 'headline' octane rating shown on the pump is the RON, but in Canada, the United States, Brazil, and some other countries, the headline number is the simple mean or average of the RON and the MON, called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), and often written on pumps as (R+M)/2."

"Because of the 8 to 12 octane number difference between RON and MON noted above, the AKI shown in Canada and the United States is 4 to 6 octane numbers lower than elsewhere in the world for the same fuel."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating#Anti-K...
Agreed, some of the writing is utter st.

The PH forums are where it’s at, the actual articles are often utter garbage / simply click bait.