.

the car junkie daily magazine.

.

Ford Shelby GT350’s 5.2L V8: 526 Horsepower, 429 Pounds Of Torque, And An 8,250 RPM Redline – Meet The Screamer


Ford Shelby GT350’s 5.2L V8: 526 Horsepower, 429 Pounds Of Torque, And An 8,250 RPM Redline – Meet The Screamer

(Photos: Ford) We’ve been waiting to hear the official numbers for Ford’s Shelby GT350, mostly because the speculation of what the 5.2L flat-plane crank V8 would put out was all over the map. Would it be like a last-generation Boss 302 or would it be a stomper that could rival the prior GT500? We knew the thing would rev like a Honda on nitrous, but lately it’s been a numbers game (looking at you, Dodge) and we wanted to see if the new Shelby was going to take a swipe at the Hellcat twins or try to follow Ford’s balanced-car approach. While the numbers are nowhere near as stratospheric as the Hellcat, make no mistake…this is one sincerely potent engine. Challenger and Camaro, meet the new enemy.

GT350 chart

Photo courtesy of MustangG6.com user Todd15Fastback

 

Here’s the hard numbers: 526 HP@7500 RPM and 429 ft/lbs of torque@4750 RPM. The 315ci V8 is the highest-revving production V8 Ford has ever unleashed and it sports Ford’s largest production throttle body (87mm) and will be backed only with a Tremec TR-3160 six speed manual transmission.

ford voodoo crank

“The Shelby GT350 program began with a clear objective – create the most balanced, nimble and exhilarating production Mustang yet,” said Jamal Hameedi, Ford Performance chief engineer. “Every change we made to this car was driven by the functional requirements of a powerful, responsive powerplant. The high-revving, naturally aspirated 5.2-liter flat-plane V8 delivers on every target we set – high horsepower, broad torque curve, aggressive throttle response and light weight.”

ford voodoo v8


  • Share This
  • Pinterest
  • 0

16 thoughts on “Ford Shelby GT350’s 5.2L V8: 526 Horsepower, 429 Pounds Of Torque, And An 8,250 RPM Redline – Meet The Screamer

  1. ColoradoKid

    Yeah baby ! Now thats a performance Ford .. nary a hint of EcoSnooze in sight… real exhaust sounds rather than manufactured … and a real motor rather than an asthmatic turbo pretending to be a real engine .

    Too bad Ford’s going down the Turbo Rabbit’s Hole with the GT instead of shoving a hopped up one o’ these in its rump .

    Oh well . At least Ford hasn’t blasphemed Shelby’s name with an EcoSnooze .. yet that is 😉

  2. Rye

    Good thing for the L and R on the heads, you Ford kids might get them mixed up! Ok now that the obligatory Ford bashing is done, that engine is freakin sick! The car looks well done from these press photo’s. Really looking forward to seeing strip and roadcourse times. As for the Dodge twins and Camaro, I don’t think they’re in the same ballpark.

  3. Logan

    The power graph looks to be wrong, horsepower and torque cross do not cross at 5252rpm. Unless Ford has some new equation to calculate power numbers something isn’t right

    1. cole

      Look at both sides of the graph; right is HP, left is torque. If you level them out, you’ll see they cross correctly.

  4. mooseface

    Thinking about this article a bit, and the comparison in power to the Hellcat twins, I think the smaller power figure of this engine will be aided by its weight, which is about 1600 pounds lighter than the Challenger Hellcat and ballpark 1100 lighter than the charger Hellcat. Plus the aero of the new Mustang design.
    I think we have a genuine contender, folks.

    1. mooseface

      I got my mopars crossed. 1600 lighter than the Carger ~1100 lighter than the Challenger. Derp.

      1. Nick D.

        Not so sure that this has a Mopar competitor. The GT350 is built to fight the Z/28 and the Mopar equivalent would be a Challenger T/A (if they ever built one). The Hellcat is meant to compete with the GT500 and ZL-1 high-horsepower sluggers, so it would be kind of an apples-to-oranges fight.

        1. mooseface

          I see what you mean, more than anything I was using the ‘Cats as an example because they’re the big milestone in contemporary factory horsepower in this fight.
          Price-wise and in terms of exclusivity, yeah, the GT350 is the wrong beast for this comparison.

  5. jeff

    Who cares about comparing figures with a Hellcat? Apples and oranges. This car is made to road race. On a road course, where handling and a very specific power curve is involved, it’s only competitor (by design) is the Z28. Nothing else by the big 3 will come close on the track. Want to compare something to the Hellcat, ZR1, Z06, etc….wait until they bring out the GT500. That’s the true car to test against it’s higher HP competition, not the GT350.

  6. jerry z

    Probably get slammed for this but wish they had done the Z28 with the COPO 5.3 (w/o the boost) since it is a big bore/small stroke engine. Nothing beats a high winding small block motor!

    1. mooseface

      No slamming from my corner, I love a high-winding big bore motor, too. There’s nothing like it, holes are too big for it to “scream” like an Euro motor, but it’s moving to fast to sound like a typical V8, it just sounds like a bellow, and it loves to be wound up to the red line. What’s not to love?

    2. Nitrostreet

      Jerry, your comment brings back an old memory from years ago at the dragstrip; a guy there was turning his 302 Chevy to 11,000 rpm and he looked at me laughing and said “Lets see your big block turn 11 grand!!!” I looked back at him and said “Let’s see your small block beat my big block”
      (His 302 was running 10’s and my 572 was running 8’s; this was around 1995)

  7. Darren. N.

    I had the chance to see a couple of GT350’s at the Formula SAE Michigan event couple weeks back (also saw a C7R and LS7 COPO 😀 ). IMHO this is the baddest Mustang yet. BS, you guys completely forgot to mention the active suspension. For shame! This thing is going to be an all out animal, can’t wait to see what the GT350R will do on track. p.s. The GT350R will also sport the world’s first widely available OEM carbon fiber rims.

Comments are closed.