5.0 vs 5.0
 

I just saw a commercial on a charity give away of a new Mustang GT with a 5.0 l which was S/C and put out 875 HP. Now I assume there are various modifications but there are other 5.0L ford engines putting out 500 - 600 HP. So the jag 4.2 was somewhat of a ford design but the 5.0 is supposed to be a Jag design but what is the difference. Can you get more HP from a ford or is it just because there are more aftermarket performance parts available. Just curious.

The AJ series of engines are a Jaguar design. Ford used modified versions in some of their vehicles such as the Lincoln LS with the 3.9 litre unit.

The Ford 'Coyote' 5.0 litre uses a 'flat-plane' crankshaft and is not associated with the Jaguar AJ133.

My wheezing little 4.2 with a huffer ate a newer 5.0 stang that sounded built up.

Ford did a lot of open sourcing with the aftermarket companies several years ago so they would know what did what in the code. Ford wanted the aftermarket to survive. Made a huge difference in creating safe performance tunes versus other manufacturers.

All things being equal the Ford Coyote engine puts out about the same HP as a AJ133Gen3.

Beyond that there are lots of tweaks, thanks to the hundreds of vendors who specialize in virtually every aspect of the engine, from fuel delivery to headers.

But none of it is balanced power. i.e. its not tempered with fuel economy, comfort, character, composure nor emissions.

The Coyote does license a tweak from Jaguar, the torque actuated cam.

Even at the same displacement, engines can have markedly different characters.

Bore vs stroke, head design, valve design, port design, inlet, exhaust, cam profiles, etc.

There are some hang ups for the Jaguar design when it comes to maximum performance.

On top of this, the XKR has cam profiles and maximum RPM restrictions designed around a very broad torque band instead of chasing maximum power.

When it comes to building more horsepower, there just isn't a market for people to make things for the Jaguar.

A Mustang owner might not think twice about spending $75,000 on forged and dynamically balanced engine componets, Jaguar owners are complaining about the price of a coolant hose being $100....

The money just isn't there.

The 5.0 Coyote is a cross plane crankshaft.

However, such is the power of marketing and "halo" versions, it has guys talking about it like it is every Mustang.

Also, if you read through all the threads that have been made on performance from the XKR, the transmission is a major limiting factor. The way it is tied into the car does not make for cost effective solutions.

Thank you for pointing that out; my mistake.

I was supposed to be typing 5.2 litre, which is a very large displacement for such an arrangement as a 'flat-plane' crankshaft.

I've compiled a list of n/ a 5.0 engines produce around the same time as the aj133.

Even though we have the highest compression ratio we put out the least amount of hp.

With maximum torque produced at 3500 and a torque level only bettered by the coyote it seems these engines were designed for comfort/low down grunt over outright power.

2009 AJ133 (11.5 comp) - Jaguar
380hp @6500
380ft @3500

2011 Coyote (11.0 comp) - Ford
412hp @6500
390ft @4250

2008 2UR-GSE (11.4 comp) - Lexus
417hp @6600
373ft @5200

2009 VK50VE (10.9 comp) - Infiniti
390hp @6500
370ft @4400

The Ford 6R80, found in the '11+ Mustang GT, is a license- built 6HP28. The programming and perhaps electrical side of things is most likely different, but the internal hard parts should all be the same. The Mustang guys are throwing 800+ HP through the 6R with minor mods, ie- a clutch pack and billet intermediate shaft, and it's been confirmed that these parts fit the 6HP26 and 6HP28.

https://www.vmpperformance.com/Bullet-proof-your-6r80-p/bullet6r80.htm

Mike from Eurotoys has told me several times that there's no issue with the 6HP28, even at the 630hp range with his upper and lower pulleys + heat exchanger and tune. Considering that's about as far as you can take the power with what's currently available, I'd say that as of now, the transmission isn't the limiting factor... yet.

As these cars become more accessible to middle income folks that enjoy modifying, you're going to see more and more technical threads that explore the boundaries of what lies within.

The regular 5.0 coyote doesn't have a flat plane crank,
only the GT350+.
the 5.0 coyote has striking similarities to the AJ133.

Despite some similarities to the 435-hp 5.0-liter Coyote V-8 in the current 2015 Mustang GT, the 5.2 is virtually an all-new engine from top to bottom; bore spacing and deck height are the same as the Coyote’s for production reasons, but little else is.

What size supercharger is on the Mustang?
I know the one on the XKR isn't that big. I'm guessing if comparing apples to apples the Jag output would be similar to what the ford 5 liter puts out.

Don't know if this helps, from what I have read the 5.0L XKR Supercharger is the same as the 2013 Mustang Shelby GT500 Supercharger. It has the same replacement part number.

Cheers,

Dave

Every place I look them up the interchange lists the 2013 GT500 also.

A few examples https://www.turbochargerpros.com/buynow/40-10054_R https://www.buyautoparts.com/buynow/40-10054_R
Even Ebay says they are the same, LOL https://www.ebay.com/itm/Remanufactu...-/323112323283

Here are the OEM interchange part numbers:
OEM #: 9W83 6F066 FA, 9W83-6F066-FA, 9W836F066FA, AJ812255, C2Z20835, DR3Z 6F066 A, DR3Z-6F066-A, DR3Z6F066A, DW93 6F066 BA, DW93-6F066-BA, DW936F066BA, LR0 48089, LR0 96455, LR011341, LR032056, LR048089, LR096455, 40-10054R

Cheers,

Dave

Aj 133 vs coyote
 

Im the proud owner of my xjr575 love everything about it even fuel economy 45mpg which I was shocked at but I have a nagging question would the supercharger from whipple bolt on the aj133 heads as it does the cyote

I don't believe that 45 mpg. I just don't. Jaguar says a maximum combined of 18 with highway of 23. Even those Jaguar numbers are exaggerated.

mine gets 55mpg after tune




in neutral

the fuel economy I can prove 35 around town 45 on a run, it shouldnt do those numbers but the realtime mpg does sit stable at that with cruise control on the motorway but remember the numbers they use aren't real-time they work on average over a distance around a track the car its self only weights in at just over 1800kg with that engine the car isn't using any power its sitting in 8th at 1400rpm