All I know is that the 13-14' were rated at 420hp the 11-12' were rated at 412. Only thing I can think of is ask around see who dynoed their 11-12s stock and what were their #s and stock dyno #s from the 13-14s ... in theory the 13-14s should put down more power.

Dang, I thought this was going to be about the '11-'12's looking like Mustangs and the '13-'14's like Chargers. My bad.

I blew my engine at 11k cyl 8 failure due to bad injector. I got a new 13 short block only 2k on the rebuild but to be honest power is the same. The coyotes are all under rated and thats confirmed by dynos of all years. Lets not have a dick meazuring contest we're all about 5.0

Shit at 11k? That blows.

Yea two rear end gear sets replaced and on my third tranny re build. Late 12 build. It sucks but she runs hard for me and I bang gears. Took an I/T/E Gen5 Camaro by 3 lengths to 140 with my brother onboard.

140 is fast bro!

Just a quick pull empty stretch of highway no ricer swerving

The '13 cars did not have piston squirters, tune slightly revised, pistons are coated, head bolts are different, front clips rear taillights and interior is different, most '13 I have seen manual make around 390 rwhp 11-12 make 370-380. Handful of differences but essentially the same car

Yes, but being someone who's ran both blocks I can say they are the same butt dyno wise and they dyno the same. Dyno Jet, Mustang, SAE and no matter the fact think about it like this... If their was a revised tune dont you think their would be a Tsb reflash? Ive seen 13s eat 12s/11s and vise versus . I think the up-rating on the Hp#s was a compensation on Ford's under rating the car to begin with.

I heard it was a government conspiracy where the government forced ford to underrate the horsepower numbers to help boost camaro sales while the government owned a large steak in GM... no I'm joking, but its as good a guess as anyone... p.s. my 2011 smokes 13 all the time, from digs or rolls so 8 extra horses be dammed..

My '12 M6 3.73 made 390/371 on your dyno with it's OEM engine and heavy cast 20" wheels. I haven't put it on the rollers with the new engine, but 2mph should be significant.

I much prefer the styling of the '11-12 front end and the black rockers (the painted ones make these cars look bloated) but otherwise I prefer the '13-14 cars. They're all good platforms for inexpensive fun.

PS - If I was going to buy a used 5.0, I would personally avoid a '11-12 car just because of my own experience and the fact I haven't seen a '13-14 engine let go. I'm sure it's happened but I'm not aware of it.

I agree.

Mod for mod they are identical, but stock for stock my experience the '13 make around 390 ish rwhp m6 car and the '11-12 make 380 ish. There are a few "freak" '11-12 out there but majority of them are in the 380 range. Remember also that the early '12 had the "'11" engines and late model '12 had the "'13" engines with the revised head bolts missing oil squirters and updated programming. Hell we had an '11 come in that made 405 bone stock m6 car and we have seen m6 cars make a low as 360... The '13 are real consistent 385-390 bone stock..

Oh I agree, the front end of the '13 are not appealing nor are the rear taillights of the '13. I would like to get a '13 with the digital display setup but convert the front and rear to '11-12 styling.

you have to be the only person that prefers the 11-12 tails to the 13-14s. The tails are the only thing that kept me from pulling the trigger on one earlier. I think the stock tail lights on the 11-12 is aweful. the 13-14s look like pure sex.