PP vs. Non PP?
- Thread starter 14 TUX BL
- Start date
The Right Way To Choose A Gear Ratio Combination - oldie but goodie article
http://www.dragracingonline.com/technical/vi_8-gearing-1.html
Check for drag racing vs cruising optimization
http://wallaceracing.com/calcrgr.php
2.76 gears will get you 140 mph with 20" tires at 6500 rpm.
3.16 gears will get you 122 mph with 20" tires at 6500 rpm.
It's about torque to the ground!
http://rubydist.com/Family/Power.html
http://www.dragracingonline.com/technical/vi_8-gearing-1.html
Check for drag racing vs cruising optimization
http://wallaceracing.com/calcrgr.php
2.76 gears will get you 140 mph with 20" tires at 6500 rpm.
3.16 gears will get you 122 mph with 20" tires at 6500 rpm.
It's about torque to the ground!
http://rubydist.com/Family/Power.html
Please disregard my statement about there being no difference my head temporarily exploded then I regained my logic.
I was thinking it made perfect sense for a hardware change to have no change whatsoever and even make the car slower but then I regained consciousness and realized how idiotic that would be so I apologize.
I was thinking it made perfect sense for a hardware change to have no change whatsoever and even make the car slower but then I regained consciousness and realized how idiotic that would be so I apologize.
At the end of the day, we strapped on the old VBox and grabbed some acceleration and braking numbers on the long flat straight and were impressed. Acceleration-wise, it's a testament to repeatability, overlaying almost exactly on our 2010 Performance-Package SHO with a 5.2-second blast to 60 mph and a 13.7-second quarter mile at 103.2 mph (0.2 mph faster than the last one). Braking, however, was a big improvement at 106 feet versus 112. There was no chance to get figure eight numbers, but you can expect lap times to drop and overall g level to rise with the improved braking
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1205_2013_ford_taurus_sho_performance_package_first_test/#ixzz3XD0whfmx
So the PP is 0.2 faster in a quarter mile.Z
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1205_2013_ford_taurus_sho_performance_package_first_test/#ixzz3XD0whfmx
So the PP is 0.2 faster in a quarter mile.Z
Great responses everyone, that's the kind of back and forth discussion I like seeing!
If I read the article correctly, MT was comparing the 2013 SHO PP to their original test of a 2010 SHO PP:
"Acceleration-wise, it's a testament to repeatability, overlaying almost exactly on our 2010 Performance-Package SHO with a 5.2-second blast to 60 mph and a 13.7-second quarter mile at 103.2 mph (0.2 mph faster than the last one)."
So the 2013 SHO PP they tested was .2 mph faster in the quarter (not .2 sec faster) than the 2010 PP. Mags rarely test the "base" version of a performance car, everyone I can find of the 2010-present SHO's are all PP.
ZSHO said:
If I read the article correctly, MT was comparing the 2013 SHO PP to their original test of a 2010 SHO PP:
"Acceleration-wise, it's a testament to repeatability, overlaying almost exactly on our 2010 Performance-Package SHO with a 5.2-second blast to 60 mph and a 13.7-second quarter mile at 103.2 mph (0.2 mph faster than the last one)."
So the 2013 SHO PP they tested was .2 mph faster in the quarter (not .2 sec faster) than the 2010 PP. Mags rarely test the "base" version of a performance car, everyone I can find of the 2010-present SHO's are all PP.
IHeartGroceries
New member
You can argue about acceleration until you're blue in the face.
But you're overlooking the two features found on PP, which makes the upgrade well worthwhile - ability to completely defeat AdvanceTrac and the additional cooling. The front transfer unit already has a humorously small fill of oil, which seems to turn to peanut butter rather quickly, from overheating. The aux water cooling will most certainly prolong the life of that oil.
But you're overlooking the two features found on PP, which makes the upgrade well worthwhile - ability to completely defeat AdvanceTrac and the additional cooling. The front transfer unit already has a humorously small fill of oil, which seems to turn to peanut butter rather quickly, from overheating. The aux water cooling will most certainly prolong the life of that oil.
Power train is 60k right? At 48 right now, and we have the FoMoCo 100k bumper to bumper.SHOdded said:Do you have powertrain warranty remaining, Rich? Hopefully your rigorous maintenance will keep the PTU out of the replacement hospital, but need to work up a longterm strategy
Fluid still looks pretty good though. It was full and had a light colored tone to it. Used a zip-tie taped to a garden stick to check the level. Pic, looks darker than the fluid was.
Rich
IHeartGroceries said:
What I was looking for was either:
a) people putting a 100% bone stock PP vs. non PP car on the same track, on the same day
b) an similar automotive journal test
No luck.
Wasn't overlooking anything, just that there were no used PP SHO's in my area when I got my car so the topic wasn't relevant to me.
And seeing how I'll never road race my vehicle, being able to completely turn off Advance Trac isn't an issue.
Regarding the "sludge" problem (noting that the recent gen SHO's have been around for 5 years) it's reasonable there would be tens of thousand of reported failures on forums. But what I see are some reports that the fluid has failed, and other reports that the fluid is ok. Also, it seems that the people who do report the issue have both PP and non PP vehicles.
IHeartGroceries
New member
You bought a sport lux car, with wonderful power. As if having no manual trans option isn't bad enough, if the inability to defeat traction control really isn't a problem, that's incredible!
That's like having the world's fastest supercomputer with no mouse or keyboard to use it! Lol
That's like having the world's fastest supercomputer with no mouse or keyboard to use it! Lol
My only 2 cents on this thread is 1 question. Do you want a fast car or do you want a quick car?
The higher gear ratio (PP) simply put will get you to speed quicker, and will affect engine speed. Hence the earlier 2-3 shift to get to 60 mph in the PP model. Someone posted on this thread the top end for PP was 122 mph and Non as 140 mph. That may be a little exaggerated but sounds about right. All related to final drive gearing.
Then the heavy duty parts just adds longevity to the all the parts. But that's not to say the standard equipment is within itself sub par for the task at hand.
So is there more joy in beating someone from a dig to 60 mph, the quarter mile or from 40-130 mph? And there are a couple you tube videos from New Mexico of these cars running on the back side of 130+ mph. And a recent article made the comment "the SHO is always hunting for 130 mph!" I will try to find that article but I think it was posted on this forum somewhere.
The higher gear ratio (PP) simply put will get you to speed quicker, and will affect engine speed. Hence the earlier 2-3 shift to get to 60 mph in the PP model. Someone posted on this thread the top end for PP was 122 mph and Non as 140 mph. That may be a little exaggerated but sounds about right. All related to final drive gearing.
Then the heavy duty parts just adds longevity to the all the parts. But that's not to say the standard equipment is within itself sub par for the task at hand.
So is there more joy in beating someone from a dig to 60 mph, the quarter mile or from 40-130 mph? And there are a couple you tube videos from New Mexico of these cars running on the back side of 130+ mph. And a recent article made the comment "the SHO is always hunting for 130 mph!" I will try to find that article but I think it was posted on this forum somewhere.
Well even stock it would be much higher than 122....and my stock strategy showed 140 or 145 for the electronic throttle limit...meaning the throttle will close when u hit that speed...there are speed limits for oil temp and outside ambient temp.
I'm going about 70mph at 2000 with pp. even with the 3.16 the theoretical speed should be close to 200 mph if you redline 6th and my car hits 140 on a regular basis and would easily do 160 if I had the room...so I'm not sure where the 122 comes from even stock
I'm going about 70mph at 2000 with pp. even with the 3.16 the theoretical speed should be close to 200 mph if you redline 6th and my car hits 140 on a regular basis and would easily do 160 if I had the room...so I'm not sure where the 122 comes from even stock
IHeartGroceries
New member
Drag limited?
The highest I had mine was 120 mph, and it was still pulling.
I just don't have the cojones to press on after that.
The highest I had mine was 120 mph, and it was still pulling.
I just don't have the cojones to press on after that.
I was using the numbers from SHOdded on post #21, so I dunno actual numbers. But theoretically, it would be true higher engine speed = lower top speed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTjcxFPLNps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiFA-V1zZcg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTjcxFPLNps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiFA-V1zZcg