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

heads or supercharger????

  • Thread starter Thread starter n8s92fox
  • Start date Start date Aug 30, 2009
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
N

n8s92fox

New Member
Aug 30, 2009
4
0
0
anderson,ca
Aug 30, 2009
#1
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #1
I'm having a hard time deciding on what to do next on my mustang I have the money to either supercharge it or put heads on it.Eventually it will have both.I liked to get some opinions on what i should to first.Its the stock motor with the usual bolt ons.I also plan on putting a 347 in it too but that will be later on down the road.Any suggestions in helping me decide what be greatly appreciated because I'm torn right now as to which route I want to go. Thanks nate
 

89stang1

Stroked and Juiced
10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2008
730
234
74
nj
Aug 30, 2009
#2
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #2
It boils down to are u a N/A guy or do u like the whine of a supercharger, i know im N/A all the way my 333 stroker makes 400RWHP (dynojet) i have seen some blown 331 not make that much, so really u can split a block with either one probably with a 347 and a blower quicker. A good aluminum head and custom cam can be lots of fun
 

rbonella

Member
Dec 15, 2008
409
6
19
@ home
Aug 30, 2009
#3
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #3
If I were you, I would choose a nice set of heads for your upcoming 347, Trick Flows, AFR's, Canfields, what ever. Make a nasty 347 with moderate compression, good heads, appropriate cam, high cfm intake, great exhaust etc...then enjoy it for a while. If and WHEN you need more....throw a blower on it and see ya later!!! But I would start with a healthy na 347. JMO
 

LaserSVT

Got FB banned again for saying nards
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
9,394
3,542
233
Aug 30, 2009
#4
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #4
89stang1 said:
It boils down to are u a N/A guy or do u like the whine of a supercharger, i know im N/A all the way my 333 stroker makes 400RWHP (dynojet) i have seen some blown 331 not make that much, so really u can split a block with either one probably with a 347 and a blower quicker. A good aluminum head and custom cam can be lots of fun
Click to expand...
When did you hit 400 rwhp?
Thought you were around 360ish
 
K

Kevins89notch5.0

Founding Member
Founding Member
Jan 1, 2000
5,864
1
78
Aug 30, 2009
#5
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #5
S-Trim will give you a lot more power than heads.
 
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Aug 30, 2009
#6
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #6
A supercharger should only be installed to compliment a well built engine. If you haven't already done heads/cam/intake, then you shouldn't be looking to supercharge it yet. And remember, any power you put to the ground goes through the transmission. Stock 5.0 transmissions are not built to withstand large amounts of horsepower.
 
9

91foxbod50

Member
Sep 26, 2007
486
0
16
Aug 30, 2009
#7
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #7
I disagree with rhe Above reply. A superchaeger isn't meant for a fully built motor it can be as well as a mundane driver. Its just a bolt on. With a good tune and proper fuel you could even see better power then some hci kits. Just my .02 I would go supercharger first, it might be all you need for a while then you might decide to go another route.
 

89stang1

Stroked and Juiced
10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2008
730
234
74
nj
Aug 30, 2009
#8
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #8
LaserSVT said:
When did you hit 400 rwhp?
Thought you were around 360ish
Click to expand...

Mustang dynos are known for making 12 to 16% less RWHP+RWT than Dynojet dynos, Dynojets dynos are 99% of what u read in sigs, my car made 360RWHP and 383RWT on a mustang dyno so i added 12% the low side which is 403.2RWHP also i have upgraded a couple things which hopefully added more HP and Torque.

Laser u didnt know there was a difference between the 2 dynos
 
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Aug 30, 2009
#9
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #9
91foxbod50 said:
I disagree with rhe Above reply. A superchaeger isn't meant for a fully built motor it can be as well as a mundane driver. Its just a bolt on. With a good tune and proper fuel you could even see better power then some hci kits. Just my .02 I would go supercharger first, it might be all you need for a while then you might decide to go another route.
Click to expand...

A supercharger is not "a bolt on."
 
9

91foxbod50

Member
Sep 26, 2007
486
0
16
Aug 30, 2009
#10
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #10
Yes........ It is a bolt on....
 

LaserSVT

Got FB banned again for saying nards
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
9,394
3,542
233
Aug 30, 2009
#11
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #11
89stang1 said:
Mustang dynos are known for making 12 to 16% less RWHP+RWT than Dynojet dynos, Dynojets dynos are 99% of what u read in sigs, my car made 360RWHP and 383RWT on a mustang dyno so i added 12% the low side which is 403.2RWHP also i have upgraded a couple things which hopefully added more HP and Torque.

Laser u didnt know there was a difference between the 2 dynos
Click to expand...
Yes I am aware of the difference but wouldnt say a particular dyno said your car makes x ammount of power when it was on a different dyno that said it made a different ammount. Thats just me.
Your car is impressive and if it were mine I would just stick with the facts. My Cobra made 447 rwhp on a Mustang dyno and when anyone would ask me what it made I said 447 not "500 rwhp on a Dynojet" cause I didnt run it on one.

And DeVus, how is a bolt on supercharger kit not a bolt on? You just bolt it up and bolt in your FMU and drive it, no? (I am talking about a Vortech kit that comes complete)
 
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Aug 30, 2009
#12
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #12
91foxbod50 said:
Yes........ It is a bolt on....
Click to expand...

A bolt on part is something that is easy to install and requires nothing more than taking off the old part and putting the new one on. You can't just stick a supercharger on your engine and call it a night. Please, stop feeding bad information to people. This article covers pretty much all of the standard bolt ons that are done to a Foxbody Mustang:

5.0 Mustang and Super Fords Article
 

LaserSVT

Got FB banned again for saying nards
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
9,394
3,542
233
Aug 30, 2009
#13
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #13
Just cause it has more parts to "bolt" on does not mean its not a bolt on. I was just watching Project Nightmare getting its Vortch kit and aside from punching a hole in the oil pan it all easily bolted into place.
To me a bolt on is something the average guy could do with average hand tools. Something that does not require expensive and specific tools nor require you to get to the "internals".
A supercharger kit is basically like if you had to do a fuel pump, intake, underdrive pullies and fuel pressure regulator all at the same time (yes I know there is more to it then that) and all of those are bolt ons.
 
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Aug 30, 2009
#14
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #14
LaserSVT said:
Just cause it has more parts to "bolt" on does not mean its not a bolt on. I was just watching Project Nightmare getting its Vortch kit and aside from punching a hole in the oil pan it all easily bolted into place.
To me a bolt on is something the average guy could do with average hand tools. Something that does not require expensive and specific tools nor require you to get to the "internals".
A supercharger kit is basically like if you had to do a fuel pump, intake, underdrive pullies and fuel pressure regulator all at the same time (yes I know there is more to it then that) and all of those are bolt ons.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely incorrect, but thanks for playing.

Using your logic, everything you install, besides maybe the cam, is a bolt on. Including the transmission, gears and heads. All of these can be done by an "average guy" with "average hand tools."
 

LaserSVT

Got FB banned again for saying nards
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
9,394
3,542
233
Aug 30, 2009
#15
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #15
DeVus1 said:
You are absolutely incorrect, but thanks for playing.
Click to expand...
Opinions and ass holes. Everybody has one and they are all full of poopies.

From Vortech: "These part numbers are complete systems including all components required for a bolt-on installation by the experienced do-it-yourselfer. All systems are 50-state emissions legal or are pending smog legal. "

ATI: "Bolt-on 50-85% more emmisions legal hp"

Paxton: "These are complete systems including all components required for a bolt-on installation by the experienced do-it-yourselfer"
 
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Aug 30, 2009
#16
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #16
LaserSVT said:
Opinions and ass holes. Everybody has one and they are all full of poopies.

From Vortech: "These part numbers are complete systems including all components required for a bolt-on installation by the experienced do-it-yourselfer. All systems are 50-state emissions legal or are pending smog legal. "

ATI: "Bolt-on 50-85% more emmisions legal hp"

Paxton: "These are complete systems including all components required for a bolt-on installation by the experienced do-it-yourselfer"
Click to expand...

So much for being installed by an "average guy" with "average hand tools." Yes, it does require bolts to install it, it doesn't make it a "bolt on" modification. And to think, members of the "Talk Posse" used to be respectable, knowledgeable people.
 

89stang1

Stroked and Juiced
10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2008
730
234
74
nj
Aug 30, 2009
#17
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #17
LaserSVT said:
Yes I am aware of the difference but wouldnt say a particular dyno said your car makes x ammount of power when it was on a different dyno that said it made a different ammount. Thats just me.
Your car is impressive and if it were mine I would just stick with the facts. My Cobra made 447 rwhp on a Mustang dyno and when anyone would ask me what it made I said 447 not "500 rwhp on a Dynojet" cause I didnt run it on one.

Thanks Laser...... i do stick with the facts as u see in my sig but to keep it easier for explanation sake with the threads question in mind i went with dynojet figures, saying my car makes 360RWHP for those not knowing the difference between the 2 dynos would be missleading. Glad to hear how u would explain ur HP now :Zip2:
Click to expand...
 
9

91foxbod50

Member
Sep 26, 2007
486
0
16
Aug 30, 2009
#18
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #18
So your saying that a supercharger kit inclines too much fabbing to be a bolt on? Funny that there called direct bolt on kits. Even so you can pick up a self contained kit without having to tap the pan. anything that is colted on is a damn bolt on. So you please stop filling the threads with incorrect knowledge and use the acronym kiss. As in keep it simple stupid , don't get technical because a supercharger is something that can be installed by any average joe
 
9

91foxbod50

Member
Sep 26, 2007
486
0
16
Aug 30, 2009
#19
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #19
Unless your one of those engine vs motor guys. U no the motor is usually electrical and an engine is usually gas op'd

So u can't say I need motor mounts I need engine mounts. Or so on so forth
 

LaserSVT

Got FB banned again for saying nards
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
9,394
3,542
233
Aug 30, 2009
#20
  • Aug 30, 2009
  • #20
89stang1, sorry if I cam off wrong. I didnt mean anything negative or anything. I totally love your car and even if a dynojet said 360 rwhp on your car I would still be impressed. I love your engine combo... cars not too bad eaither.

DeVus' WTF is your problem. The vast majority of the modification world calls supercharger kits that require NO FABRICATION a bolt on item. ALL the manufacturers call them bolt on as well. The two kits I have installed were easy bolt on kits and one of them I did before I knew squat about modifications but I could figure out which way the wrench was supposed to turn. Yeah they take some time because there are so many parts but damn near anyone with the slightest mechanical ability can do it.

Now I may be being harsh and came off wrong assuming you knew how to work on your car. If you spent a mint having someone else install a supercharger for you because you were so sure it was not a bolt on then I am sorry.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fox won't crank over and fuel pump won't kick on.
  • djj62478
  • Jun 7, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
16
Views
436
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 11, 2026
General karthief
Strut Tower Help!
  • 93Nifty
  • Jan 10, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
28
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 28, 2026
General karthief
W
Speedometer and shifting issues
  • wyatt-tetro891
  • Aug 17, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
169
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 18, 2026
wyatt-tetro891
W
S
Block questions
  • s_vargas54
  • Jan 25, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
851
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 8, 2026
Trogdor
9
Engine Donor '00 Mountaineer meet '91 Fox
  • 91firecracker
  • May 11, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
41
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 28, 2026
91firecracker
9
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
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?