• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

300+ rwhp all motor on 99+gt?

  • Thread starter Thread starter snoopy98
  • Start date Start date Jun 1, 2004
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 2 of 4 Next Last
J

jj2002

New Member
May 19, 2004
16
0
0
Jun 1, 2004
#21
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #21
I have 288 RWHP on a 2002 GT just bolt on's

MODIFCATIONS
1) C & L PLENUM
2) C@L TURE FLOW TUBE
3) BBK 75MM THROTTLE
4) 3.73 GEARS TIRES 275/40/17
5)STEEDA TIMMING (VERY GOOD BOLT ON )
6)C@L 85 MAF
7) STEEDA PULLEYS
8) JBA Shorty Headers 1625S-1JT
9) MAGNAFLOW CATBACK
10)IGnition Solutions Plasma Booster

288 RWHP 347FT LB
 

nickthegenius

Active Member
Dec 23, 2002
1,631
1
38
Elwood, IN
Jun 1, 2004
#22
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #22
jj2002 said:
MODIFCATIONS
1) C & L PLENUM
2) C@L TURE FLOW TUBE
3) BBK 75MM THROTTLE
4) 3.73 GEARS TIRES 275/40/17
5)STEEDA TIMMING (VERY GOOD BOLT ON )
6)C@L 85 MAF
7) STEEDA PULLEYS
8) JBA Shorty Headers 1625S-1JT
9) MAGNAFLOW CATBACK
10)IGnition Solutions Plasma Booster

288 RWHP 347FT LB
Click to expand...

I will refrain from commenting.
 

twogts4us

15 Year Member
Apr 1, 2004
4,188
12
79
Dunedin, FL
Jun 1, 2004
#23
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #23
jj2002 said:
I have 288 RWHP on a 2002 GT just bolt on's

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

MODIFCATIONS
1) C & L PLENUM
2) C@L TURE FLOW TUBE
3) BBK 75MM THROTTLE
4) 3.73 GEARS TIRES 275/40/17
5)STEEDA TIMMING (VERY GOOD BOLT ON )
6)C@L 85 MAF
7) STEEDA PULLEYS
8) JBA Shorty Headers 1625S-1JT
9) MAGNAFLOW CATBACK
10)IGnition Solutions Plasma Booster

288 RWHP 347FT LB
Click to expand...
nickthegenius said:
I will refrain from commenting.
Click to expand...

I won't refrain -
 
J

jj2002

New Member
May 19, 2004
16
0
0
Jun 1, 2004
#24
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #24
can you read this BS!!

Dyno before the Plasma Booster and JBA headers-
Lets here some more dumb asssss BS before I show DYNO 2
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/howto/138_0307_plasma/
 

Attachments

  • dyno-1.webp
    13 KB · Views: 212
J

just some guy

Founding Member
Sep 23, 2002
723
0
0
FL
Jun 1, 2004
#25
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #25
some of you guys are really funny.

i put down 256 with just x pipe, t/a, catback and cold air.

ive now got cnl plenum...i should be in the 260s somewhere...

coming soon i will have vt stage 2s and comp valve springs which made almost 30 hp peak on a stock everything car. then longtubes...

if i dont have 300 rwhp or somewhere real close ima be really mad. headwork isnt needed although with weaker cam profiles it is needed to reach that goal. a lot lies in your tuner as well as your cam/intake/exhaust configuration, where you want power and how high you want to rev. a stock motor has been shown to rev fine to 6400 rpm with little wear and not too much of a chance of breaking.
 
J

just some guy

Founding Member
Sep 23, 2002
723
0
0
FL
Jun 1, 2004
#26
  • Jun 1, 2004
  • #26
ps. dude: your dyno is messed up, i have seen some high powered mustangs and none of them have ever had over 330 rwtq on a 2v without some sort of pa. id ask for a refund because your s%%% is skewwed.
 

nickthegenius

Active Member
Dec 23, 2002
1,631
1
38
Elwood, IN
Jun 2, 2004
#27
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #27
jj2002 said:
Dyno before the Plasma Booster and JBA headers-
Lets here some more dumb asssss BS before I show DYNO 2
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/howto/138_0307_plasma/
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can read it. Do I believe it? No. There is no way a 4.6L with your mods is making 348ft/lbs. The HP is out of whack too. Why? I have no idea unless you got the strongest 4.6L 2v to ever come from the factory.

Teh dYn0 !s fux0red
 
J

jj2002

New Member
May 19, 2004
16
0
0
Jun 2, 2004
#28
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #28
just some guy said:
ps. dude: your dyno is messed up, i have seen some high powered mustangs and none of them have ever had over 330 rwtq on a 2v without some sort of pa. id ask for a refund because your s%%% is skewwed.
Click to expand...
You have the know what you are doing! Alot of reading and testing- YOU are saying JBA Racing DYNO is wrong! The DYNO Shop was higher!
http://www.cnlperformance.com/plenum04.html
 
J

just some guy

Founding Member
Sep 23, 2002
723
0
0
FL
Jun 2, 2004
#29
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #29
i dont care, live on your cloud thinking you have that much power. but come down here put it on my buddy's dynojet and ill guarantee you that you will lose almost 40 lb-ft. i am not calling bs on you...im calling it on the dyno itself.
 
G

GinoGT

Founding Member
Aug 11, 2002
1,862
0
36
Jun 2, 2004
#30
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #30


Let's race! I'll take websites, you get magazines!

Go to the track. You'll find out real quick if you have 350 RWTQ or not.
 
J

jj2002

New Member
May 19, 2004
16
0
0
Jun 2, 2004
#31
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #31
GinoGT said:


Let's race! I'll take websites, you get magazines!

Go to the track. You'll find out real quick if you have 350 RWTQ or not.
Click to expand...

Lets race--- Carlsbad CA, anytime!!
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Jun 2, 2004
#32
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #32
That dyno looks really wierd. Where does the Torque and Hp cross at? What RPM. You are an auto arent you?
 

Stangt00

New Member
Oct 6, 2003
50
0
0
Jun 2, 2004
#33
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #33
jj2002 said:
Lets race--- Carlsbad CA, anytime!!
Click to expand...

Website mouth racing at it's finest. That Dyno must be converting to or reading flywheel HP and Tq. Let me guess, it run's 11's all day too right?

Dyno sheets are a measure of **** size. Time slips are the only thing that means ANYTHING. I can get my hands on a couple of 10 second passes if you want to buy one.
 

Stangt00

New Member
Oct 6, 2003
50
0
0
Jun 2, 2004
#34
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #34
jj2002 said:
Dyno before the Plasma Booster and JBA headers-
Lets here some more dumb asssss BS before I show DYNO 2
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/howto/138_0307_plasma/
Click to expand...

Now I see where you got your numbers from. A supercharged stang that gained a few horsepower.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Jun 2, 2004
#35
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #35
the cost of the ported pi headswap, cams, long tubes and all the other stuff that goes with it to get 300 rwhp was why i decided to sell my 96 and buy a 95 5.0. 4.6 stuff is just too expensive for my blood. kick a$$ heads/cam/intake for that platform is like 2 grand:

$1200: heads
$400: upper/lower intake
$300: cam
$150: gasket set

that's all you need for 300 rwhp from a 5.0. do the other stuff and you're talking more like 330.
 

C.Harris

Da Boss
Founding Member
Dec 20, 1998
1,850
0
0
Jun 2, 2004
#36
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #36
Black96 you do make a good point. The ability to eclipse 300 rwhp with a 302 is fairly easy and much easier on the wallet. I am sure you are not alone in your decision-making. There are quite a few ways to achieve this mark naturally aspirated with the old smallblock.....an example to just how choked up the 5.0s were with factory components! Ashame they never really received the graces from Ford the 4.6 engines enjoy today.

The 4.6 2V is fairly optimal and a good performer from the factory, sure there is room for improvement, but because they are already efficient and Ford gave them the ability to breathe well in stock trim, makes the quest for finding considerable power gains a little harder using simple bolt-ons. This would also explain why they respond so well to supercharging in stock configuration.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Jun 2, 2004
#37
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #37
CHarris said:
Black96 you do make a good point. The ability to eclipse 300 rwhp with a 302 is fairly easy and much easier on the wallet. I am sure you are not alone in your decision-making. There are quite a few ways to achieve this mark naturally aspirated with the old smallblock.....an example to just how choked up the 5.0s were with factory components! Ashame they never really received the graces from Ford the 4.6 engines enjoy today.

The 4.6 2V is fairly optimal and a good performer from the factory, sure there is room for improvement, but because they are already efficient and Ford gave them the ability to breathe well in stock trim, makes the quest for finding considerable power gains a little harder using simple bolt-ons. This would also explain why they respond so well to supercharging in stock configuration.
Click to expand...
thanks. i have read that the 96-98 heads actually flow pretty well and they can outflow the pi heads at higher rpms. my understanding is that the main bottleneck on the 96-98s is the lower intake. swapping in a 99+ lower intake supposedly nets like 40 hp, mostly in the upper rpms.
 

Trublu01

SPRAYMAN
Founding Member
Mar 11, 2001
6,673
0
0
Loxahatchee, FL
Jun 2, 2004
#38
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #38
WOW! Nice TQ!










 

nickthegenius

Active Member
Dec 23, 2002
1,631
1
38
Elwood, IN
Jun 2, 2004
#39
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #39
jj2002 said:
You have the know what you are doing! Alot of reading and testing- YOU are saying JBA Racing DYNO is wrong! The DYNO Shop was higher!
http://www.cnlperformance.com/plenum04.html
Click to expand...

My best guess is that JBA wanted to show you just how delightfully splendid their headers are.

I wonder if Comp Cams had an in-house dyno and I took my car there if I would get like 537rwhp/794rwtq since I have Comp Cams?
 

twogts4us

15 Year Member
Apr 1, 2004
4,188
12
79
Dunedin, FL
Jun 2, 2004
#40
  • Jun 2, 2004
  • #40
nickthegenius said:
My best guess is that JBA wanted to show you just how delightfully splendid their headers are.

I wonder if Comp Cams had an in-house dyno and I took my car there if I would get like 537rwhp/794rwtq since I have Comp Cams?
Click to expand...

At least, Nick!!!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 2 of 4 Next Last
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
98 gt fuel pressure issues
  • chasecollier1984
  • Jun 2, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
0
Views
92
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 2, 2026
chasecollier1984
C
B
Airaid reduction sleeve?
  • BriansNSane
  • Dec 20, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
0
Views
148
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Dec 20, 2025
BriansNSane
B
H
Electrical 2003 GT convertible battery drain
  • Huggybear56
  • May 31, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
1
Views
107
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech May 31, 2026
Bronco2fan
B
O
My rebirth, Hi from PA
  • onemore1987
  • Jun 28, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
3
Views
133
The Welcome Wagon Jun 29, 2026
onemore1987
O
S
01 GT DRIVERS SIDE DOOR LOCK CYLINDER LINKAGE
  • Scwhitten
  • May 13, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
173
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 19, 2026
melo.timo
M
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang 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?