Heads, cam or intake?

zenboy99

Founding Member

May 12, 2002

2,212

0

47

Madison, WI

Dec 30, 2003

#21

• Dec 30, 2003

• #21

Here is the thread that includes the article. They only gained 6rwhp with heads.

http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=313892

 

tmoss

Gettin Wired

Founding Member

Jun 28, 2001

7,153

32

128

Saint Louis, MO

Dec 30, 2003

#22

• Dec 30, 2003

• #22

Hey, that 97 5.0 article put the heads on before exhaust changes or intake changes - no wonder it didn't make more power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

zenboy99

Founding Member

May 12, 2002

2,212

0

47

Madison, WI

Dec 30, 2003

#23

• Dec 30, 2003

• #23

And Maxboost50 only has a catback.

 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my

15 Year Member

May 7, 2002

11,178

13

89

Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"

Dec 30, 2003

#24

• Dec 30, 2003

• #24

Killercanary said:

...... Heads are a great idea in terms of being there to support future goals for the car, but if I could only pick one... it'd be the intake.

Click to expand...

WERD!!!!

1. Much easier.
2. 1/2 the price..(or less)
3. great gains on a stock car.

I mentioned before that I know 2 different guys that took cars with gears and exhaust and put on an intake, MAM and TB, and they said the car felt like a totally different machine.

You can do ALL that PLUS a homemade CAI for the price of heads.

RC

 

zenboy99

Founding Member

May 12, 2002

2,212

0

47

Madison, WI

Dec 30, 2003

#25

• Dec 30, 2003

• #25

I completely agree, thats the route I went and I'm very happy with it.