Finally, here's my combo... guess my RWHP and track times (Results now posted)

#21
Killercanary said:
I still use stock valve covers that I beat into submission to clear the rockers. I only run the spacer because I bought the intake used and it didn't come with any hardware. Rather than trying to source the odd length upper to lower bolts, I opted to just get a 3/8" spacer. I can say that is doesn't seem to do squat for keeping heat out of the upper as suggested in their marketing.
Click to expand...

so it would fit over stock valve covers without needing a spacer then, right? just making 100% sure because i am collecting info on a debate going on on another forum.
 
#22
I'm pretty sure it does. When I was in a hurry to get my car done for Carlisle I didn't think that I would have time to get my new hood on and painted, but I was worried about hood clearance with the stocker. I know that it did not clear the hood with the spacer, and without it the intake still hit the center bar that runs down the middle of the hood. I do not remember any issues with clearance on the VC's. I'm fairly certain that it did clear, and honestly I couldn't see why it wouldn't. It may have even cleared the stock hood as well. At a car show earlier this year Troy (yeahloh95) and I were parked next to each other. He noticed that my engine looked to sit a lot higher in the engine bay than his did. I'm not sure if mine is higher or if his is lower, but there was a definite difference. We run different K members though. With Troy's setup and a stock hood, I have no doubt that the intake would fit.

BTW Chris, I've been reading the following thread to see how my numbers compare to other 94-95 guys with strokers. After I post the results, go back and look at the numbers in this thread, I think you'll find my results interesting if nothing else in comparison.
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=840509&highlight=331/347&page=2
 
#25
Killercanary said:
I'm pretty sure it does. When I was in a hurry to get my car done for Carlisle I didn't think that I would have time to get my new hood on and painted, but I was worried about hood clearance with the stocker. I know that it did not clear the hood with the spacer, and without it the intake still hit the center bar that runs down the middle of the hood. I do not remember any issues with clearance on the VC's. I'm fairly certain that it did clear, and honestly I couldn't see why it wouldn't. It may have even cleared the stock hood as well. At a car show earlier this year Troy (yeahloh95) and I were parked next to each other. He noticed that my engine looked to sit a lot higher in the engine bay than his did. I'm not sure if mine is higher or if his is lower, but there was a definite difference. We run different K members though. With Troy's setup and a stock hood, I have no doubt that the intake would fit.
Click to expand...
thanks paul.
Killercanary said:
BTW Chris, I've been reading the following thread to see how my numbers compare to other 94-95 guys with strokers. After I post the results, go back and look at the numbers in this thread, I think you'll find my results interesting if nothing else in comparison.
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=840509&highlight=331/347&page=2
Click to expand...
funny ... that is an old thread of mine and how much has changed for me since then ... post your results there, ok?
 
#28
I'm on board with the efficiency, and I will venture to say your heads, cam, and lower compression play well together but not optimal, I'll go with 1hp per cube.
So 331hp, and 345tq.
As for your times, i'll venture it be right in the mid to low 11 sec range, at 115-120mph.



final5-0 said:
You gained efficiency from :nice:
The b & b block
and
That intake

Also :)
I know you've been playin around on the street with your AEM :D

349rwhp

Grady
Click to expand...
 
#30
with good compression and the right cam, i'd agree 100% that the power would be in the 350 range, but the compression is so low that the power has to be down. that is even lower than stock compression, isn't it? and the cam was optimized for paul's previous combo.

but i bet it's great for low octane gas :cheers:
 
#35
Hmm...

You were picking up 23 mph or so with your 302 combo right?

So we are looking at roughly a 4-5 mph gain over what you previously did.

112.51 mph best with the 302 combo, and roughly the same race weight.

116-117 mph...:shrug:

But then again, your 1/8 mile mph will be higher than your old 302 1/8 mile mph.
 
#36
So if my math is right you should be right about 127 - 128 mph. So my previously stated Hp is going to be wrong, I still think my time's are close, but my hp is off by a dozen or so, I'm holding strong to the Tq# though, i'll give it another 5.

so my new numbers are 345hp, 350tq, 127-128 mph, at a low 11 sec.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
Replies
4
Views
977
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
gray owl
G
from6to8
Which one of these 3 intakes make the most sense for my 331 combo
Replies
7
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
AeroCoupe
AeroCoupe
Boydster
SOLD SOLD!!!! 1993 Notchback Roadracer For Sale. She's a beast!
Replies
0
Views
1K
Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93)
Boydster
Boydster
AvalancheSVT
For Sale 97 Cobra with built 99 cobra drivetrain
Replies
3
Views
3K
SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04)
AvalancheSVT
AvalancheSVT
M
Engine Is my Top end combo good?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
FastDriver
FastDriver
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Menu