• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

68 289 turbo or supercharge ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdriggers9662
  • Start date Start date Feb 24, 2009
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 3 of 4 Next Last
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Feb 28, 2009
#41
  • Feb 28, 2009
  • #41
Haha, no kidding. I did score a good block, but my stock internals went to 532 rwhp for a few years. Want more and just pulled it out in one piece ! Have seen stock ford junk go to 700 rwhp before kicking a rod.

Bet you wouldn't believe his stock 351w block was holding aprox 800 fwhp then huh ?, or enough to go 142mph full interior.

Damn ford junk

YouTube - 67 mustang turbo
 

classic boost

Founding Member
Feb 3, 1999
709
0
0
canton, oh
Feb 28, 2009
#42
  • Feb 28, 2009
  • #42
mikethebike said:
And you think I really believe that?
Click to expand...

just because you can't do it, doesn't mean others can't.
it was in incon twin turbo kit. others have been faster than me.
my oooold site. read it and weep. two stangs
 

classic boost

Founding Member
Feb 3, 1999
709
0
0
canton, oh
Feb 28, 2009
#43
  • Feb 28, 2009
  • #43
i also think it's halarious that you need a solid cam, low gear, big block to run a ****ty 11.80 (probably at only 114mph). i ran almost that with an ABSOLUTELY stock 302 with just 9psi (119mph too).
welcome to the world of forced induction.
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Feb 28, 2009
#44
  • Feb 28, 2009
  • #44
It is kind of funny when people say things can't be done that already have been done.
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Mar 1, 2009
#45
  • Mar 1, 2009
  • #45
brianj5600 said:
It is kind of funny when people say things can't be done that already have been done.
Click to expand...

Kinda like blo-thru huh ?
 
M

mikethebike

Member
Jun 12, 2007
358
0
17
Greenville, SC
Mar 1, 2009
#46
  • Mar 1, 2009
  • #46
65ShelbyClone said:
It had forced induction, so what's not to believe?
Click to expand...

The part about it staying together long term as a daily driver AND running 10's on the weekends. I know of a GN-X that did it but the block, rods, crank, rockers, valves, pistons were all the McLaren pieces for that engine.....plus it was far more tha 3.8 litres. And it was fully blue-printed by a pro shop that specialized in those engines.
Let's face it...just because Ronnie Sox could twist a 409 Chevy to 8500 more than once doesn't mean we all can.
 
M

mikethebike

Member
Jun 12, 2007
358
0
17
Greenville, SC
Mar 1, 2009
#47
  • Mar 1, 2009
  • #47
classic boost said:
i also think it's halarious that you need a solid cam, low gear, big block to run a ****ty 11.80 (probably at only 114mph). i ran almost that with an ABSOLUTELY stock 302 with just 9psi (119mph too).
welcome to the world of forced induction.
Click to expand...

Well, it was 1970 before computer aided designed cams, cnc machine shops, extrude honeing and computer controlled engines. Do ya'll remember Tasca Fords 'Beat-the-Boss' "429" Mustang? The car ran low 11's on street tires. The engine was a 490 cid Holeman-Moody item with a full manual-overide automatic, a spool out back and I think a 4.10 gear. It weighed around 3200 lbs. My Chevelle weighed 4000 lbs and was a true 427 cid. with a 4-speed. And as I said Sox could go 11.2 to 11.4 in the car. But they wouldn't put-up the $10,000.00 to 'Beat-the-BOSS' if he drove the Chevelle.

And the speed was closer to 125.
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Mar 1, 2009
#48
  • Mar 1, 2009
  • #48
is this a history lesson or a forced induction SBF vs N/A BBC question?
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Mar 3, 2009
#49
  • Mar 3, 2009
  • #49
iskwezm said:
is this a history lesson or a forced induction SBF vs N/A BBC question?
Click to expand...

 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Mar 3, 2009
#50
  • Mar 3, 2009
  • #50
Back to the original question.Blower or turbo. i had a Paxton blower, didnt run the best, wasnt tuned.Put the turbo on and didnt change anything and it was a whole different car.
 
M

mdriggers9662

New Member
Feb 17, 2009
20
0
1
El Dorado Arkansas
Mar 3, 2009
#51
  • Mar 3, 2009
  • #51
All I wanted was a few opinions but looks like I started an online riot. Really,alot of good comments. Not knowing anything about either but wanting more bang for the buck you guys have taught me alot and given me much to think about. Thanks for all your help.
 

boosted68stang

New Member
Jan 25, 2009
47
0
0
massachusetts
Mar 6, 2009
#52
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #52
the best thing to do is look around.. It doesnt hurt to shop.. I came across a Paxton supercharger that was never installed but it was a year old and i purchased it for $600 with brackets... only thing i need is a pulley ($25-$50) and a oil needle jet ($50) and the set up was for a foxbody 302 (which is whats planning on being in my 68.. total of $700 isnt bad at all for what i consider a brand new set up lol.. I have been in a supercharged foxbody at 5psi and I was impressed and even at 5psi you get sucked in the seat.. Turbos I think are a cheaper project if your gonna do the custom work... The results of both are the same to me except superchargers dont have "turbo lag"
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Mar 6, 2009
#53
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #53
boosted68stang said:
The results of both are the same to me except superchargers dont have "turbo lag"
Click to expand...

 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Mar 6, 2009
#54
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #54
whats turbo lag??? Is that when you go from cruising to WOT with uncontrollable wheel spin
 

classic boost

Founding Member
Feb 3, 1999
709
0
0
canton, oh
Mar 6, 2009
#55
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #55
the turbo lag comment cracked me up too, but i didn't feel like typing a reply. if they don't know by now, then they never will.
 

turbo20B

New Member
Mar 6, 2009
1
0
0
Mar 6, 2009
#56
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #56
it all depends on what you are after , there are appliations where a supercharger is more desirable and vice versa
both do the same thing but just differently , it all depends on youre needs and the build at hand
keep in mind though a serious(*read proper*) turbo setup is expensive ,usually more than a blower
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Mar 6, 2009
#57
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #57
Turbo lag is the period of time of low torque before you push down the accelerator pedal.
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Mar 6, 2009
#58
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #58
I have $2000 give or take $100 in my turbo set up. That is with all new parts. Tial waste gate, BOV and MPT-70. The turbo is being upgraded to an S475 which is the same price as the MPT-70. I expect The S475 to take me as fast as I want to go. Blowers capable of making the same 800-900 HP can't be done that cheap. The key is you have to be willing to do your own fab work to get a turbo in the car for ~$2000.
 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member
Sep 9, 2000
4,675
38
119
Antelope Valley, SoCal
Mar 6, 2009
#59
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #59
turbo20B said:
turbo setup is expensive ,usually more than a blower
Click to expand...

huhwhut?
 
6

68EFIvert

Member
Jan 13, 2007
639
0
17
Camas, Washington
Mar 6, 2009
#60
  • Mar 6, 2009
  • #60
I have a blower and a custom chip in my car and have all the power I can use. A turbo would bo cool but I stayed away from that since my fabrication skills are not up to my expectation levels. I am putting out 10 lbs of boost on a stock bottom end and it seems to be holding up just fine. My setup is not nearly as rowdy as a lot of others may have on here though.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 3 of 4 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Foxbody Misfire 5.0 Swap
  • DPORTER0729
  • May 2, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
620
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 13, 2025
90sickfox
Engine HELP - 351W Based Build Under Stock Hood
  • thinkfaster
  • Oct 17, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
13
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Dec 31, 2025
Qtrhrse23
Q
J
Progress Thread Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
  • JRC99
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2025
JRC99
J
Fox Build ideas for the 'Hudson Heap' (87 GT)
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Sep 19, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Sep 27, 2023
MadSquirrelTech
Took some pics, i do really own a mustang...
  • 2000xp8
  • Jun 20, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 6 7 8
Replies
148
Views
19K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 1, 2024
Mustang5L5
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang 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?