As for the Mustangs, I bought my 5.0 LX new in 88. Best bang for the buck.

And yes RPM matters on shift points. It varies from engine to engine.

I don't have the graph on the 08-back, the 09 peaks hp at 5600rpm and torque @ 3900rpm.

They show to cross lines @ 4700rpm.

Doing the math according to the Dodge graph, conflicts with this theory. HMM 410lb/ft x 3900rpm peak / 5252 = 304.6hp

The 4.7L and 3.7L cross @ about 5252. Strange.

So I guesss the Hemi may like to go a couple hundred more, but I would keep it no more than 6000rpm. The main reason, which I didn't take into consideration is that crappy drop from 1st to 2nd. Dodge should have had a 6 speed auto years ago.

 

+ 1 four and five speed auto trans are obsolete

 

I have a 90' mustang coupe with a single 80 mm turbo on it. There are fun cars that can be be made fast for not a lot of money.

 

The lines will cross only if the graph scales are set up the same. Look at this link - the lines cross at an arbitrary RPM, but if you look to the right, where the graph ends around 5200 RPM, both torque and HP are about 188.

http://www.binaryweb.com/88lx/dynorun1.jpg

The curves only cross at 5252 if the HP and torque start from zero and scale the same, which could make the graph hard to read. The values always will match at 5252 though.

An interesting note - that Mustang (an '88 LX I just saw, total coincidence) makes almost 320 peak tq and only 190 at 5000 RPM. If the car had very close gearbox ratios, as they might for a track or strip racer, shifting sooner could help.

 

Actually, the torque multiplifcation effects of the shorter gears would lean to holding the gears out longer then a stocker...

My 90' 5.0 bone stock really wasn't worth shifting past 5500. A set of 4.10 gears alone really made it feel stronger higher up in the rpm.

 

yeah i does seem like alot of us on here have stangs..

 

That link takes me to a web hosting spam site.


My Stang has 3.55 gears with a 26" tall tire and a T-5 with a 3.35 1st gear.