300hp N/A v6, how to.

fazm83 · Jul 25, 2005

I dont know if this applies to the v6, but my dads old ford pickup that he had, had a 289 in it (only like 50cid bigger) and with an intake, exhaust, and a radical cam he picked up 115hp at the wheels. (it was a 12 sec truck, ive only seen pics but he use to be a semi-pro drag racer).

If this is an idea of what cams can give (say 50hp for the cams) that would be a huge diff.

P&P, cams, intake, exhaust, tune should make for at least 100hp at the wheels in this case, which would make the 300rwhp job a lot easier.

Philstang · Jul 25, 2005

I am seeing alot of balooned #'s in this thread...

Jenns01TA · Jul 26, 2005

Philstang said:
I am seeing alot of balooned #'s in this thread...

Hey Phil, If you are reading Faz's quoted post, I recall advising that we go low on the increase figures. It's really hard to do this unless you have the Engine Design Software to run the conceivable scenaerios through it.

5-Speedstallion. Welcome and nice work on the 3.8. I appreciate from a machining and engineering standpoint the work and design that goes into refabricating and altering the stock specifications on the V-6s to give them that much power.

Jenn

Philstang · Jul 26, 2005

Jenns05Stang said:
Hey Phil, If you are reading Faz's quoted post, I recall advising that we go low on the increase figures. It's really hard to do this unless you have the Engine Design Software to run the conceivable scenaerios through it.

Jenn

yea, It would be awesome if those gains could be realized, but based on #'s from similar combo's on the 5.0, the 5.0's usually don't gain 100hp, and this is with an all new set of heads, not just ported stockers, and with a whole new intake manifold, with the case of the 4.0 V6 the stock plastic manifold would still be used (Run on sentence, lol). I would keep my expectations conservative, so that when some low numbers came out I wouldn't be overly depressed. But if the #'s were higher, then we would be .

Jenns01TA · Jul 26, 2005

Philstang said:
yea, It would be awesome if those gains could be realized, but based on #'s from similar combo's on the 5.0, the 5.0's usually don't gain 100hp, and this is with an all new set of heads, not just ported stockers, and with a whole new intake manifold, with the case of the 4.0 V6 the stock plastic manifold would still be used (Run on sentence, lol). I would keep my expectations conservative, so that when some low numbers came out I wouldn't be overly depressed. But if the #'s were higher, then we would be .

Yeah. One thing we have to remember is to not compare this set-up to the 5.0. The pushrod CAM set-up with the rods that go up through the block and into the head to move the rockers actually add mass to the system, which increases the load on the valve springs. So, we now have to take into account stronger VS requirements to produce sufficient load on the compression stroke. yada yada yada. Chassis and engine weight, not to mention drag coefficient increases due to body design, all reduce the end result numbers of the individualized replacement compenents.

I for one LOVE the Fox Body 5.0L (89 Black-on-Black is a project dream car of mine). When sufficient time, design changes and $ are put into them they can launch like a rocket.

I agree that we keep theoretical increases low. Expect the worst and strive for the best. Until each component is replaced, tuned and tested to achieve optimum results, we do not know how each additional change in the overall design will affect another and in the end account for any HP/TQ changes.

But, I want to see where the guys with the guts and the $ can take this platform. I am anxious to see some at the track.

Jenn

MSP · Jul 26, 2005

Jenns05Stang said:
Well, it appears that after this small brainstorming process, we are back to MSPs S/C... It is much easier (albeight not as much fun ). Okay. Back to waiting for a two screw whipple for the 6 that costs less the $5,000.

Thread is dead - T.=Dead

Jenn

AHH!! No Sweety!! The thread is not dead.. Infact, your post's have recently enlightend me to the fact, that your husband or boyfriend is perhaps one of the luckiest men on earth. Its also quite possible he does not even know it.. Please continue by all means Jenn.. You know at first, I just gave you alot of credit and respected your opinion.. But seriously, I am so impressed with your total delivery on things, I am in shock! LOL!! Well, enough about you, continue on with the thread.. LOL!!

I know at some point I mentioned I was not impressed, but that was a damn lie!!

j0nkatz · Jul 26, 2005

Well...

I really am not one to judge my car's power by HP.
I'd rather measure it by 1/4 mile time.
What do the '05 GTs pull in the 1/4?

I just got some Bullitt wheels and tires from my friends 05 GT so I will see if that helps with my traction at the track tonight. Supposed to be a little cooler tonight but dang Memphis gets hot in the Summer time.

Jenns01TA · Jul 26, 2005

j0nkatz said:
I really am not one to judge my car's power by HP.
I'd rather measure it by 1/4 mile time.
What do the '05 GTs pull in the 1/4?

I just got some Bullitt wheels and tires from my friends 05 GT so I will see if that helps with my traction at the track tonight. Supposed to be a little cooler tonight but dang Memphis gets hot in the Summer time.

Stock GTs are pulling mid to upper 13s at about 100-103MPH dependant on track conditions.

Good luck at the track. Let us know how you do!

Jenn

fazm83 · Jul 26, 2005

I wish i wasn't in phoenix right now, i wont have a decent track time until november. but i think i still might go this weekend, see if i can even pull off 15's with this weather lol.

MSP · Jul 26, 2005

j0nkatz said:
I really am not one to judge my car's power by HP.
I'd rather measure it by 1/4 mile time.
What do the '05 GTs pull in the 1/4?

I just got some Bullitt wheels and tires from my friends 05 GT so I will see if that helps with my traction at the track tonight. Supposed to be a little cooler tonight but dang Memphis gets hot in the Summer time.

Your car looks like a GT to me.. Why such a high ET? The red on bullitt stang looks factory GT.. Good Job!!

Also, post larger pics of the car..

I meant HIGH ET!!

NJstangpilot · Jul 26, 2005

I took a look at the stock intake manifold to see if I could identify any obvious restriction points. It seems like a fairly decent design although the intake runners don't seem to be "tuned" perfectly. I believe the optimal configuration for the manifolds (intake as well as exhaust) is an even-length design, where the distance from the throttle body to the intake valve(s) being equal/constant. Same thing for the headers, with the exhaust port opening to collector distance being equal (i.e. equal length primaries).

I'm not sure why an aftermarket aluminum (or plastic) manifold couldn't be designed which flows better or more consistently. I'm also not sure why the stocker being plastic precludes the swap for an aftermarket one (I thought someone said the manifold couldn't be changed b/c it was plastic).

One thought I have regarding this (currently hypothetical) quest for 300+ (crank) HP, is that all the components from air filter to muffler will probably need to be upgraded in order for this to be realized. In simple terms, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Any "flow restricting" point will obviate much of the advantages of the other mods. I'm pretty sure a good CAI, manifold, P+P, headers, high flow cats, dual exhaust and mufflers will cover things "soup to nuts". A performance cam and proper tune rounds it out and *should* give around 260rwhp. Maybe. Possibly. Hopefully...

I'm not sure why I'm a fan of N/A power over forced induction as I don't have enough data or evidence to suggest one is significantly better than the other. The N/A setup *seems* like it will weigh less, offer instant throttle response and possibly be more reliable.

I am wondering why manufacturers don't install blowers or turbos more often in cars. It seems like engineers spend countless hours developing technologies like OHC, 3-5 valve heads, variable valve timing, advanced computer control, lightweight internals, friction reducing materials, etc in their quest to squeeze an extra 10 - 25% more power out of a current engine, when they could just slap a supercharger on it and get 50% more real easy. There must be some advantage to N/A which I'm not aware of (or some problem with F/I). Any thoughts?

MSP · Jul 26, 2005

NJstangpilot said:
I took a look at the stock intake manifold to see if I could identify any obvious restriction points. It seems like a fairly decent design although the intake runners don't seem to be "tuned" perfectly. I believe the optimal configuration for the manifolds (intake as well as exhaust) is an even-length design, where the distance from the throttle body to the intake valve(s) being equal/constant. Same thing for the headers, with the exhaust port opening to collector distance being equal (i.e. equal length primaries).

I'm not sure why an aftermarket aluminum (or plastic) manifold couldn't be designed which flows better or more consistently. I'm also not sure why the stocker being plastic precludes the swap for an aftermarket one (I thought someone said the manifold couldn't be changed b/c it was plastic).

One thought I have regarding this (currently hypothetical) quest for 300+ (crank) HP, is that all the components from air filter to muffler will probably need to be upgraded in order for this to be realized. In simple terms, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Any "flow restricting" point will obviate much of the advantages of the other mods. I'm pretty sure a good CAI, manifold, P+P, headers, high flow cats, dual exhaust and mufflers will cover things "soup to nuts". A performance cam and proper tune rounds it out and *should* give around 260rwhp. Maybe. Possibly. Hopefully...

I'm not sure why I'm a fan of N/A power over forced induction as I don't have enough data or evidence to suggest one is significantly better than the other. The N/A setup *seems* like it will weigh less, offer instant throttle response and possibly be more reliable.

I am wondering why manufacturers don't install blowers or turbos more often in cars. It seems like engineers spend countless hours developing technologies like OHC, 3-5 valve heads, variable valve timing, advanced computer control, lightweight internals, friction reducing materials, etc in their quest to squeeze an extra 10 - 25% more power out of a current engine, when they could just slap a supercharger on it and get 50% more real easy. There must be some advantage to N/A which I'm not aware of (or some problem with F/I). Any thoughts?

Interesting comment about why manufacturers dont use Supercharging more often.. Perhaps we should find and post the pros and cons of both.. But I dont think you can include reliablilty as a possible reason..

Jenns01TA · Jul 26, 2005

MSP said:
AHH!! No Sweety!! The thread is not dead.. Infact, your post's have recently enlightend me to the fact, that your husband or boyfriend is perhaps one of the luckiest men on earth. Its also quite possible he does not even know it.. Please continue by all means Jenn.. You know at first, I just gave you alot of credit and respected your opinion.. But seriously, I am so impressed with your total delivery on things, I am in shock! LOL!! Well, enough about you, continue on with the thread.. LOL!!

I know at some point I mentioned I was not impressed, but that was a damn lie!!

Thanks MSP. I am but a lonely divorced mother of a sweet and smart 7 year old boy. I am happy and extremley greatful for all I have and learned in my 34 years of life. My Ex and I get along better now than when we were together for 15 years! Sometimes we don't know what we have until it is gone and it goes both ways! LOL.

A truly appreciate your acceptance of my input into the tech threads. It's hard being a woman where one "does not belong". But, it is through this type of open communication that we all learn a little about each other's individuality and that lessens gender generalizations. I would have been an Engineer, but fighting to prove my knowledge and skills was not worth it to me. So, I just do it as a hobby and for fun.

I am going to review NJs comments after my mid-afternoon nap! Nice to be able to "work" at home. I just finished a heated battle with army guys and hot wheels!

Thanks to all you fellas who have accepted me as "one of the guys"! I love you all for being men enough to be comfortable with that!

Jenn

5-SpeedStallion · Jul 26, 2005

fazm83 said:
I dont know if this applies to the v6, but my dads old ford pickup that he had, had a 289 in it (only like 50cid bigger) and with an intake, exhaust, and a radical cam he picked up 115hp at the wheels. (it was a 12 sec truck, ive only seen pics but he use to be a semi-pro drag racer).

If this is an idea of what cams can give (say 50hp for the cams) that would be a huge diff.

P&P, cams, intake, exhaust, tune should make for at least 100hp at the wheels in this case, which would make the 300rwhp job a lot easier.

Just for a reference, the greatest increase I know of for JUST a new cam on a bolt-on 3.8L Mustang is 28whp. Of course, it COULD be more and often less... it just depends how many of the other bottlenecks are removed already and how the cam meshes w/ the rest of the variables.

Philstang said:
the 5.0's usually don't gain 100hp, and this is with an all new set of heads, not just ported stockers,

Well, my P&P stock 3.8 heads @ ~250cfm intake flow better than several aftermarket 5.0 heads, but your point is still valid, nonetheless. I think the general numbers in the thread are a little optimistic.

MSP · Jul 26, 2005

5-SpeedStallion said:
Just for a reference, the greatest increase I know of for JUST a new cam on a bolt-on 3.8L Mustang is 28whp. Of course, it COULD be more and often less... it just depends how many of the other bottlenecks are removed already and how the cam meshes w/ the rest of the variables.

Well, my P&P stock 3.8 heads @ ~250cfm intake flow better than several aftermarket 5.0 heads, but your point is still valid, nonetheless. I think the general numbers in the thread are a little optimistic.

We wouldnt have been able to sign the papers for these cars, if we were not ready to be totally optimistic as to its capabilities.. To maintain an aurora of doubt, will make it very hard to keep up on the payments.. Please allow us to inflate things such as HP, RWHP, TQ,RWTQ, MPG, and insurance savings.. You have to understand that we are in this for atleast 24mos.. Some for 60mos.. We must make the payments.. So we will continue to inflate these numbers as needed, to make sure all of our payments make it in time.. LOL!!!

This is a Sarcastic Post!!

fazm83 · Jul 26, 2005

Dont they do loans up to 84 months now? That would be crazy

MSP · Jul 26, 2005

fazm83 said:
Dont they do loans up to 84 months now? That would be crazy

LOL!!! MY GOD fazm83!! My point exaclty!! LOL!! What fool in his right mind would sign the loan for 84 months, if he didnt dream of running 10's by the end of the term.. LOL!! That would be totally nuts!!!

Under those circumstances, I would try my hardest to believe we could smoke GT's bone stock!! LOL!!

fazm83 · Jul 26, 2005

Maybe i should buy a ford GT and see if i can get a home loan company to finance me...maybe even interest only hah

Chris_NY · Jul 26, 2005

I am not an expert ...but IMO .. ppl lean away from forced induction because it puts more stress on the engine ...

Think about what happens when you force air down the intake of the car faster then the engine itself can take it on it's own. it's the similar to forcing air into a balloon .. what happens when you force too much air into a balloon too fast? POP.. so what is the weakest part? The head gasket ..

Second all this air being forced into the cylinders (more then was ever meant to go into them at one time) will create heat. When the Piston comes up it will attempt to compress this air .. when you compress air you make heat... (This is how I believe a diesel engine works .. the glow plug just gets things started but a diesel engine uses this heat generated by compressing the air and the heat from combustion to keep the engine going that is why you need a block heater in the winter time)

Granted this air makes combustion more efficient and therefore creates an assload of HP..but it puts 50% more HP/Torque onto an engine meant to handle 210/240

Last when you build an NA egine you basically build the whole engine to be more efficient and stronger.. What I mean is when you slap a blower on an engine you slapped 50% more HP and Torque onto an engine that was never meant to put out that kind of power. When you build NA you change Heads, Cranks .. you change Pistons and Rods, Cams... to HIGH performance versions. So people lean to NA over FI because it's a more reliable and a safer way to get more power out of an engine. When the engineer makes the car they are thinking long term safe efficient HP that will break down the least and make YOU happy and apt to buy their car again.

My parting thought is ..

Forced induction is cool but to do it right you STILL should beef up the engine and do all those things you do to make NA power(or many). By not doing so you just put stress on your engine and create problems .. throwing a blower on without taking the proper precautions first is a short cut and with all short cuts you will get in trouble. Some things can just not be cut short ..

This is all my oppinion though ..

NJstangpilot · Jul 27, 2005

Chris,

I, too, am no expert on the pros and cons of engine induction, which is why I am posing these questions. However, I believe I read somewhere that a modest 6 psi or so of boost will not harm most engines. The head gasket may need to be swapped for a tougher version, but I doubt the rods/crank/pistons will require this for such a low boost. Granted, if you start shoving 10+ psi down the manifold, you will probably need to beef up the internals, but 6-7 should be OK for the stock components.

I know turbos are notoriously unreliable (15,000+ rpm at exhaust manifold temps will do that...) but superchargers tend to be more reliable. Unfortunately, many of the centrifugal types suffer the same lag as the turbos but w/o the high rpm performance. The roots and screw types tend to be very expensive and often quite large.

Lastly, I don't think the internals will need to be upgraded on the path to 300 N/A HP from this engine. The block is iron and I believe the internals could handle 300 crank HP w/o any problems. I *think*. 300 rwhp is another story...that might require stronger bits.

300hp N/A v6, how to.

fazm83

New Member

Philstang

New Member

Jenns01TA

Active Member

Philstang

New Member

Jenns01TA

Active Member

MSP

j0nkatz

New Member

Jenns01TA

Active Member

fazm83

New Member

MSP

NJstangpilot

New Member

MSP

Jenns01TA

Active Member

5-SpeedStallion

MSP

fazm83

New Member

MSP

fazm83

New Member

Chris_NY

New Member

NJstangpilot

New Member

Similar threads

300hp N/A v6, how to.

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Active Member

MSP

New Member

Active Member

New Member

MSP

New Member

MSP

Active Member

MSP

New Member

MSP

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency