• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

1rwhp per c.i. = streetable. True or False Thread.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pokageek
  • Start date Start date Aug 24, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
S

sage2k

Member
May 23, 2005
645
0
16
Baton Rouge, LA
Aug 25, 2007
#21
  • Aug 25, 2007
  • #21
i think it all depends on the person and the setup!
cant just say more than xxx hp is unstreetable
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Aug 25, 2007
#22
  • Aug 25, 2007
  • #22
Pokageek said:
edit - I did a little research and as it seems, production cars, (a little off topic but I'd like to address), most of the cars over the 1- 1 ratio are DOHC - yes true. That's a whole nuther subject too..
Click to expand...

I know the DOHC cobra's aren't up there, unless you count the positive displacement blower equipped 03/04 Cobra, but that of course is not N/A

The 96-98 Cobra's get around 250rwhp, or in that range, and they have 281 cubic inches and rev near 7,000 rpm. So they make less than 1rwhp per cubic inch.

Same for the 99/01's, but they dyno around 270-285rwhp I think. Maybe closer to the 281 cubic inches. Either way it is very close to 1rwhp per cubic inch.

I think you can reach in the 1.1-1.2:1 ratio, if you aren't too picky...but I think 1:1 is a pretty good rule of thumb for a daily driver for sure.
 

Shamus O'toole

New Member
Jul 3, 2007
18
0
0
Florida
Aug 25, 2007
#23
  • Aug 25, 2007
  • #23
Grady, Awesome post!! You have def. done your homework on what you wanted out of your car. Great job in my eyes and not an easy accomplishment. It is def. easier to tune a car for WOT then for drivability as you have. Once again great job!!
 

VIPRETR

New Member
Mar 9, 2007
19
0
0
Kalamazoo, MI.
Aug 25, 2007
#24
  • Aug 25, 2007
  • #24
Honda S2000 DOHC 2 litre 240bhp. Thats approx 122cu. inches, 190rwhp, for a 1.6-1 ratio. ( If my calcs. are correct ) Not sure if this fits Grady's criteria, with the soft bottom end and being biased towards the track. i.e. harsh ride, too much in town shifting, and high RPM's on the highway. I know it's apples to oranges but I thought I'd give an example of a highly efficient, stock motored vehicle that def. beats 1-1 ratio.
 

WHITE94COBRA

New Member
Nov 14, 2003
816
0
0
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Aug 25, 2007
#25
  • Aug 25, 2007
  • #25
I am going to elaborate more, but i'm at work late tonight, i'll talk about this more in the morning.
 

Dino Dino Bambino

15 Year Member
Jun 13, 2007
1,672
89
79
Cyprus
Aug 26, 2007
#26
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #26
There's a long list of modern EFI cars whose engines are putting out at least 100hp/liter (1.64hp/ci) at the flywheel naturally-aspirated but they all have the following in common:

4 or even 5 valves per cylinder
DOHC per bank of cylinders
Peak HP comes at more than 7000rpm

and they may also have at least one of the following:

Variable length intake manifold
Variable intake valve timing +/- lift
Variable exhaust valve timing +/- lift

The last three are used to fill out the torque curve at low rpm so that these engines have good street manners despite having peak torque coming in at sky high rpm.
Now you might be wondering where our 5.0 engines come into the equation. Since the 5.0 has none of this modern technowizardry, I think it would be safe to say that peak HP should be not higher than ~6000rpm (I'm talking naturally-aspirated here) if the engine's going to perform reasonably well at low revs. That means 400hp or 80hp/liter (~1.3hp/ci) at the flywheel (or ~1.15hp/ci at the rear wheels) will be a realistic maximum for good streetability. Anything more and the idle is likely to be lumpy and the engine will feel soggy below 2000rpm.
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Aug 26, 2007
#27
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #27
-
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Aug 26, 2007
#28
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #28
Shamus O'toole said:
Grady, Awesome post!! You have def. done your homework on what you wanted out of your car. Great job in my eyes and not an easy accomplishment. It is def. easier to tune a car for WOT then for drivability as you have. Once again great job!!
Click to expand...

Thank You for the kind words

I do want to tell everybody the focus of what I was able to accomplish should be more on what others before me did than my individual efforts

I looked at combos that obtained results that were close to what I desired and asked their owners very specific questions about them.

I was very specific with my questions when talking to peeps like Ed Curtis for parts selection and various Tuning Gurus when planning out my combo.

Simply Put

I sought out the knowledge of those who did what I desired
cause
They be the folk that had the fruit of success I desired

Thats the thing thats so great about the internet

The info is so easily available to everybody

Grady
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Aug 26, 2007
#29
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #29
my definition of streetable is similar to grady's ... a/c, power steering, no idle searching or bucking, no worries about stalling out on cold or hot starts, or coming to a stop at a stoplight.

as to >1 rwhp per cube being streetable ... absolutely it is possible, but it is not an overnight thing. when a 302 is putting down 350 at the wheels (or a 410 putting down 450), it can get pretty agressive, and that is when the above issues start coming into play.

like grady said, it comes down to how much time you can devote to the tune. for me, the tuning process is just beginning. i have my idle at 1200 when in drive, it starts right up either hot or cold, and idles solidly at 1200 when at a stop light. as time goes on and i get the injector slopes and injector timing right, i should be able to lower the idle rpms to closer to 850 and still have a solid idle with no startup issues. but it is going to take a while.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Aug 26, 2007
#30
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #30
Pokageek said:
Wow excellent posts Grady and others including Bullitt95!!
Click to expand...

x2
 

m0l0

Member
Nov 20, 2005
178
0
17
Aug 26, 2007
#31
  • Aug 26, 2007
  • #31
Bullitt95 said:
There's a long list of modern EFI cars whose engines are putting out at least 100hp/liter (1.64hp/ci) at the flywheel naturally-aspirated but they all have the following in common:

4 or even 5 valves per cylinder
DOHC per bank of cylinders
Peak HP comes at more than 7000rpm

and they may also have at least one of the following:

Variable length intake manifold
Variable intake valve timing +/- lift
Variable exhaust valve timing +/- lift
Click to expand...

It depends a lot also on the compression, look at those cars making more than 1.xx WHP, take a look on their compression ratio , you will see that most of them are on or above 9.5:1, they need more than 91 octane gas, otherwise they start to backup timing to avoid detonation, it would be interesting to see one car on regular gas, you will see how much HP they loose.
 

Dino Dino Bambino

15 Year Member
Jun 13, 2007
1,672
89
79
Cyprus
Aug 27, 2007
#32
  • Aug 27, 2007
  • #32
m0l0 said:
It depends a lot also on the compression, look at those cars making more than 1.xx WHP, take a look on their compression ratio , you will see that most of them are on or above 9.5:1, they need more than 91 octane gas, otherwise they start to backup timing to avoid detonation, it would be interesting to see one car on regular gas, you will see how much HP they loose.
Click to expand...

Actually most of them are running CR's of 10:1 or higher and indeed they require premium fuel to get maximum performance. With knock sensor timing retard the performance of most, if not all of those vehicles, would be degraded if they used lower octane fuel.
A good case in point is the new BMW M5; 5.0L V10, 500hp@7750rpm, 368lbft@6100rpm, redline 8250rpm, 12.0:1 CR.
Same displacement as our 5.0 engines, but maximum torque comes in at higher rpm than our engines make maximum HP.

 

Attachments

  • 9578-2006-BMW-M5-Dyno.webp
    66.2 KB · Views: 101
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mustang5L5’s progress thread - Rear window fun
  • Mustang5L5
  • Feb 29, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 22 23 24
Replies
479
Views
29K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 15, 2026
General karthief
SOLD Rebuilt EcuExchange 87'-'93 A9L Computer: $325
  • Habu135
  • Jan 28, 2024
  • Engine and Power Adder
Replies
2
Views
1K
Engine and Power Adder Feb 16, 2024
Habu135
6
Progress Thread 68 Fastback Build Thread=> Rebuild to Restomod
  • 68 Fstbck
  • Mar 29, 2023
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
2K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Apr 16, 2023
68 Fstbck
6
Ultimate 5-lug swap thread - new/updated
  • Mustang5L5
  • Jul 21, 2022
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
33
Views
34K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 13, 2024
qikgts
knowmoto app feedback thread
  • MRaburn
  • Jul 20, 2021
  • Feedback Area | Testing Zone
Replies
14
Views
2K
Feedback Area | Testing Zone Jul 23, 2021
Rdub6
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?