• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

critique my engine build

  • Thread starter Thread starter 5.0Torx
  • Start date Start date Mar 25, 2008

5.0Torx

Active Member
Dec 30, 2007
252
3
29
Mar 25, 2008
#1
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #1
hello all

Im building up my 5.0 and am getting ready to decide on the cam. from what ive read on the tfs stage 1, its alot like the stock HO cam. Ive also read that the crane 2040 is very good for a balanced power band.

What i want to do with the car / my goals:
Its my dd. No 12 mpg here, fellas. I get about 20 when im good in the city, and 25 highway. I would like to maintain this gas mileage as best i can. As for power, i would like the power peak to happen over 6000 rpm. Ideally, i'd say power peak at 6500 and shift at 7000 in the lower gears. that would make me very happy. Will the good ol 3 inch stroke 302 have zero bottom end if the power peak is that high? I realize ill probably have to come down on the power peak. I would rather have a nice wide power band (an engine that can do everything) at the cost of 20 high end hp, because its my dd. Im also going to stick with the 3.08 rear gears for a while.



What i have:

The car is a 93. Hypereutectic pistons. stock, at 110k miles. is a rebuild necessary here? i would like to try and leave the bottom end alone as this combo should only put out around 280-300 rwhp, which is about 350 flywheel. Not earth shattering.

GT40p heads which im thinking will have to be ported and reworked to fit 1.9 intake and 1.6 exhaust valves. Im assuming a dual pattern cam would still be best, even with the larger exhaust valve.

Exploder intake which im assuming will also have to be ported.

Already have full 2.5" exhaust on the car. bbk shorties, upr catted x, and slp LM1s.

C&L 73 mm MAF.

My understanding is that the gt40p and exploder intake flow about 200 cfm stock, and can be ported to flow about 230-240 cfm. Is that enough to feed a 302 at 7000 rpm? I forget the equation. Will i need 24# injectors?

TIA
 

BigHairyMonkey

Founding Member
Jun 18, 2003
411
1
16
Houston (Bellaire) TX
Mar 25, 2008
#2
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #2
you will not spin a stock shortblock 302 to 7k rpm.. unless you want a big paperweight.
 
D

DrMaxit

Founding Member
Nov 4, 2002
139
0
16
Augsta GA
Mar 25, 2008
#3
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #3
Might I ask, for a street car, why do you want the redline so high? Most of your street driving is done at lower rpms and a low end torque filled car will be more fun on the street if you ask me. And no you definitely don't want to spin a stock bottom that high, as stated above. High rpms is for high horsepower, which you said yourself you only want a ~300rwhp car, not that much, but still fun on the street.

--Chuck
 

allballsmustang

Member
Mar 31, 2005
174
0
16
Lehigh Valley, PA
Mar 25, 2008
#4
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #4
BigHairyMonkey said:
you will not spin a stock shortblock 302 to 7k rpm.. unless you want a big paperweight.
Click to expand...

+1

id say your going to need to do something much more than stock to hold a bottom end that is going to handle 7000 rpm
 
V

v8only

Active Member
Jul 3, 2003
2,378
22
49
Mar 25, 2008
#5
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #5
from my understanding, the tfs 1 cam is more like an e cam than a stock HO cam.

1. 7k is way off. If you're running a stock block, you're not going to want to rev that past 6200ish.

2. P heads won't make power to 7k, even ported. My buddy runs afr 165's, and makes power maybe till 6400 rpms.

3. P heads are difficult to port, and MUST be done by someone who really knows their stuff with p heads. I'd just pick up gt40 heads if you want something to be ported.

My combo is the p heads, stock HO cam, ported explorer intake, and stock 19# injectors. It runs hard, real hard. My bro runs a similar combo, but with regular gt40 heads, unported explorer intake, and a tfs 1 cam. His pulls a little harder, but he's also got a magnaflow x, a tremec 3550 trans he can beat the snot out of, and that cam. With his tfs 1 cam, he makes power to 6k, but not over 6k. With my stock HO cam, I make power perhaps to 5500 rpms.

the stock 19# injectors are plenty in our case. Hell, I'm even running a stock 88lph fuel pump in the tank (which will be swapped out soon...)....if you run with ported heads i'd swap to 24 # injectors.
 

mazroth

Member
May 20, 2005
56
0
6
KY
Mar 25, 2008
#6
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #6
5.0Torx said:
The car is a 93. Hypereutectic pistons. stock, at 110k miles. is a rebuild necessary here? i would like to try and leave the bottom end alone as this combo should only put out around 280-300 rwhp, which is about 350 flywheel. Not earth shattering.

GT40p heads which im thinking will have to be ported and reworked to fit 1.9 intake and 1.6 exhaust valves. Im assuming a dual pattern cam would still be best, even with the larger exhaust valve.

Exploder intake which im assuming will also have to be ported.

Already have full 2.5" exhaust on the car. bbk shorties, upr catted x, and slp LM1s.

C&L 73 mm MAF.

My understanding is that the gt40p and exploder intake flow about 200 cfm stock, and can be ported to flow about 230-240 cfm. Is that enough to feed a 302 at 7000 rpm? I forget the equation. Will i need 24# injectors?

TIA
Click to expand...


To put down a solid 300 at the wheels is easy with a 5 speed..you do have a 5 speed right, or is it an auto?

The P heads with that cam and intake will not make power above 6k. Now, if you changed the cam and intake, and ported the heads, then you could. If your car is a manual, I would keep the P heads, get a mild cleanup and a good valve job, get a good valvetrain put on them, get your lower intake ported by someone like tmoss, then put a custom cam in there, it will be snappy with low end torque, and pull to 6k easily. Though, you may need to change gears help. You will also need a larger than stock tb and meter, and probably some 24s.

If you just bolt on say the P heads and have them cleaned up, bolt on the stock explorer intake with say the tfs1 cam, you will probably get around 270 or so at the wheels, maybe more if lucky. Porting, and matching the parts, then having a custom cam sort it all out will net you more. Also, on the P heads, you shouldnt have to change the valve size.
 

mazroth

Member
May 20, 2005
56
0
6
KY
Mar 25, 2008
#7
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #7
v8only said:
2. P heads won't make power to 7k, even ported. My buddy runs afr 165's, and makes power maybe till 6400 rpms.
Click to expand...


They can make power up that high, if ported correctly and has the right valvetrain on them. You cant choke it with a baby cam and long runner intake either.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Mar 25, 2008
#8
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #8
all I have to say is don't try for 7000 rpm, just keep it at the most 6000.
 

5.0Torx

Active Member
Dec 30, 2007
252
3
29
Mar 25, 2008
#9
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #9
ok, thanks for the replies guys.

what of the difference between the crane 2040 and the tfs stage 1?

I do need to pass emissions and as stated before, gas mileage is a consideration.
 
P

PJC Racing

New Member
Nov 21, 2007
199
0
0
Mar 26, 2008
#10
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #10
If you don't change the valve springs in the heads to match the cam you will not achieve the rpm you want. The stock springs will float.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Mar 26, 2008
#11
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #11
5.0Torx said:
I do need to pass emissions and as stated before, gas mileage is a consideration.
Click to expand...

Then you should just stick with the stock cam. It really is not a bad cam, I was running the E-cam for a while and I prefer the stock one.
 
S

Sicarius428

Active Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,085
5
49
Mar 26, 2008
#12
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #12
The TFS stage 1 is not emissions legal. Technically it shouldn't matter since they can't see it but I live in ca and have had both the E and Stage 1 in my car and I wish I left the Stage 1 in there. With your setup I would guess you will make 260-270 to the wheels if you have a 5 speed and 19 lbs injectors will be just fine with that setup.
Kevin
 
I

irish

New Member
Oct 18, 2006
168
0
0
Florida
Mar 26, 2008
#13
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #13
For porting gt-40s I'd use thumper for sure, I'd recommend having a cam/springs/lifter package from someone like Jay Allen who will make it based on your goals, Ed Curtis could do it, so could Mark McKowen.

Matt
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,015
1,613
194
NJ
Mar 26, 2008
#14
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #14
Few ideas i don't like about that setup.
c&l meters suck
Your rpm hp peak is very unrealistic, more like 5500rpm.
IMO P's are meant for people who plan to run them the way they are, maybe a valve job, but that's about it.
With P heads Valve jobbing, bowl cleanup, porting, milling, and better springs will quickly exceed their valve, and even the value of aluminum heads that make more power box stock. Their a budget oriented head, keep them that way or there is no point using them.
It's just silly to dump a ton of cash into $250 heads.
Headwork local to me costs as follows:
$225 valve job (includes bowl work)
$100 for the springs+whatever the locks and retainer cost.
$100 milling
porting starts at $250
headers are $200, when used shorties are a dime a dozen for $100 or less.
If you ship the heads out to be done, add in $50 shipping each way.

Couple these numbers with the P head value of $250 you would be close to Twisted wedge value when new, used ones you may exceed.

Don't forget either that P heads require P specific headers.
 

5.0Torx

Active Member
Dec 30, 2007
252
3
29
Mar 26, 2008
#15
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #15
why do c&l meters suck?
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,015
1,613
194
NJ
Mar 26, 2008
#16
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #16
5.0Torx said:
why do c&l meters suck?
Click to expand...

Unreliable and inaccurate, you will find more negative posts here about them, than positive.
The sampling tube method of metering that C&L incorporates for different injectors makes them even worse.
Use a Pro M or PMAS meter, ya it costs more, but you get more, such as a calibrated sensor and a bigger meter.
Some guys here will stand for the C&L, but no repudable dyno shop would put one on your car.
 
V

v8only

Active Member
Jul 3, 2003
2,378
22
49
Mar 26, 2008
#17
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #17
my bro passed cali functional smog with a tfs 1 cam.
 
S

Sicarius428

Active Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,085
5
49
Mar 26, 2008
#18
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #18
I would have passed too but I wanted the car to be completely street legal which is my own doing. The stage 1 should pass without a second look. Also good cats make a huge difference.
Kevin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Engine Donor '00 Mountaineer meet '91 Fox
  • 91firecracker
  • May 11, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
41
Views
561
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 28, 2026
91firecracker
9
Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
604
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
648
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
J
Transmission
  • Jraesims
  • Mar 7, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
160
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 8, 2026
JD1964
T
First Car, what should I do for power??
  • tunedV6
  • Apr 13, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
214
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- May 4, 2026
580HP*428Cj
5
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 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?