I bought a 92 gt 5speed with 3.08 gears. Im just wondering if anyone could guess the power to the wheels and torque. This is what i know it has. Cobra intake, msd distributor, shorty headers with flowmaster force ll, cai with mass flow still for 19lb injectors, underdrive pulleys, ac removed, aluminum driveshaft, 130 amp alternator, upgraded clutch id have to look through paperwork for the name and subframe connectors. Not sure if anything was changed internally. Seems quite fast but havent got a chance to play with anyone to compare. Alot faster then my 87 convertible was even with 3.73 gears and flowmasters. I think she was tired. Thanks. Closest dyno is 3hrs away so im just curious. Im not sure if the timing was played with but im loving it.thanks again
92 gt bolt on horsepower to the wheels?
- Thread starter Jvshouse
- Start date
Gun to my head 175hp/240tq Realistically it’s a 25-year-old car so the engine is probably pretty worn. Then you have to account for 25% loss to the drivetrain which brings it to around 155 hp. Then if you put 13° of timing and basic bolt ons you would be round 175 wheel. Unfortunately it’s not an LS you can’t just bolt on horsepower. With a cam swap long tubes and a tune you can get around 400 wheel with an LS. If you reringed your block Swapped a GT 40 heads got a trick flow cam a long tubes you could probably get her onto 240 horse. Imo
Last edited:
I hate it when people compare the sbf with the ls gm engine
sbf - 50 (+ ) year old design with several upgrades over the years and by 1992 Ford was all in on the modular design.
LS was probably being developed or maybe an actual working model in 1992 and is a 'clean sheet ' design, it doesn't even compare with the old sbc pushrod engine.
Compare it to chevys 60 (+) year old design and you get 210hp for the 350 and maybe 195hp for the 305 ci. If they were even still making the 305 in 92.
Now I'm not knocking the LS engine, it's a remarkable piece. And I'm not knocking you for your post but lets compare apples to apples.
sbf - 50 (+ ) year old design with several upgrades over the years and by 1992 Ford was all in on the modular design.
LS was probably being developed or maybe an actual working model in 1992 and is a 'clean sheet ' design, it doesn't even compare with the old sbc pushrod engine.
Compare it to chevys 60 (+) year old design and you get 210hp for the 350 and maybe 195hp for the 305 ci. If they were even still making the 305 in 92.
Now I'm not knocking the LS engine, it's a remarkable piece. And I'm not knocking you for your post but lets compare apples to apples.
It's very hard to guess...
back in the day, when these cars had 40k or less miles, that combo with an off-road H/X would put down 240hp/300tq on the high end of the spectrum... they usually had larger than stock fuel pump and a fair number of passes at the track dialing in fuel pressure/timing/plugs.
many were making around 220hp/290tq... while just as many were struggling at 200hp/275tq...
Add more confusion, some cars were just a little stronger from the factory than others, while some were a little weaker.
Most back in the day dyno'd 180/190hp at the wheels... some a little over 200hp... mine put down 218hp with nothing but a cheap H pipe.
So many factors on an older engine now... condition of sensors, condition of fuel pump, leaky/clogged injectors, gunked up intake/heads/pistons, tired rings/seal...
So to answer your question... somewhere between 175/240hp and 250/300tq.
back in the day, when these cars had 40k or less miles, that combo with an off-road H/X would put down 240hp/300tq on the high end of the spectrum... they usually had larger than stock fuel pump and a fair number of passes at the track dialing in fuel pressure/timing/plugs.
many were making around 220hp/290tq... while just as many were struggling at 200hp/275tq...
Add more confusion, some cars were just a little stronger from the factory than others, while some were a little weaker.
Most back in the day dyno'd 180/190hp at the wheels... some a little over 200hp... mine put down 218hp with nothing but a cheap H pipe.
So many factors on an older engine now... condition of sensors, condition of fuel pump, leaky/clogged injectors, gunked up intake/heads/pistons, tired rings/seal...
So to answer your question... somewhere between 175/240hp and 250/300tq.
if the dyno is software/hardware/sensors are setup correctly and functioning, it will spit out density altitude corrected numbers.
When you see these same cars at the track geared similarly and on slicks and skinnies with similar modifications running anywhere from 12.6's to 13.5's it tells the tale.
Yes, there are a lot of factors, but not enough to reason the seemingly ~70hp performance difference... some are just stronger, more pure, than others for a myrid of reasons.
When you see these same cars at the track geared similarly and on slicks and skinnies with similar modifications running anywhere from 12.6's to 13.5's it tells the tale.
Yes, there are a lot of factors, but not enough to reason the seemingly ~70hp performance difference... some are just stronger, more pure, than others for a myrid of reasons.
- Jul 12, 2017
- 2,474
- 1,348
- 173
Those cars that came out stronger/faster from the factory are called Wednesday cars. Nobody wants to work on Mondays and Fridays. Tues-Thurs cars were the ones to have.
Last edited:
intake: 10-15
shorties: 10-15
CAI: 5
UD pullies: 5-10
So, 30-45 rhwp, but they don't stack at the exact same RPM. So, I'd say 25-35 rwhp on top of stock, which is typically in the 190-200 rwhp range.
Thus:
215-235 rwhp.
shorties: 10-15
CAI: 5
UD pullies: 5-10
So, 30-45 rhwp, but they don't stack at the exact same RPM. So, I'd say 25-35 rwhp on top of stock, which is typically in the 190-200 rwhp range.
Thus:
215-235 rwhp.
