exactly.. hence why i asked his reasonings for it. there is no point unless ur gonna go f/i
You are not going to make any power at 7000rpms with a NA 2v no matter how much you build it. It can not flow air like a 4v. That is why the 4v has a higher rev limit.
4v and 2v have the same rods and pistons except 03-04 cobra.
You are not going to make any power at 7000rpms with a NA 2v no matter how much you build it. It can not flow air like a 4v. That is why the 4v has a higher rev limit.
4v and 2v have the same rods and pistons except 03-04 cobra.
You are not going to make any power at 7000rpms with a NA 2v no matter how much you build it. It can not flow air like a 4v. That is why the 4v has a higher rev limit.
4v and 2v have the same rods and pistons except 03-04 cobra.
it makes sense to me. the 2v heads on a stock GT arent maxed out as to their flow capacity. they flow the air that a 4.6 at stock compression needs to flow. but with a 5.4, much more air will be moving into the combustion chamber. more displacement=more air flow. stock heads on a 5.4 would be the weakest point though b/c i could see them maxing out. thats why they would need some kind of headwork to increase flow.It also makes no sense at all that a 5.4 would be able to rev higher than a 4.6 given the same heads. Flow is the limiting factor and you'll hit that limit earlier with the 5.4!
im not wanting to rev higher just for the sake of revving higher, but the whole point is to continue to make more power in the higher rpms. even if i made the same power at 7k that i do at 6k, i would prefer it b/c it makes for a smoother powerband, plus there is less shifting, so less wear on the clutch.I still don't see the point in reving higher. Yes, revs build horsepower, but the real fun and what moves the car is Torque. If your going to spend that much money, go with a roots blower or nitrous instead. Build torque and (big)horsepower will follow.
it makes sense to me. the 2v heads on a stock GT arent maxed out as to their flow capacity. they flow the air that a 4.6 at stock compression needs to flow. but with a 5.4, much more air will be moving into the combustion chamber. more displacement=more air flow. stock heads on a 5.4 would be the weakest point though b/c i could see them maxing out. thats why they would need some kind of headwork to increase flow.
im not wanting to rev higher just for the sake of revving higher, but the whole point is to continue to make more power in the higher rpms. even if i made the same power at 7k that i do at 6k, i would prefer it b/c it makes for a smoother powerband, plus there is less shifting, so less wear on the clutch.
Lets see some links to these 2v engines spinning to 7000 and making 450-500bhp. I am throwing the biggest BS flag ever on that statement. A fully built 2v will only make 370rwhp or around 425bhp NA. I have tried and that is about the limit.
isnt that what i typed in my previous post? lemme checkYour logic doesn't make any sense at all. Given the same head and intake combination, a larger displacement engine will ALWAYS peak earlier. The 5.4 will TRY to move more air, but it will hit the same limit, wether it is the heads or the intake... the 5.4 will just hit the limit sooner.
yup, that is what i wrote. and we're not talking much of a difference between a 4.6 and a 5.4. why can one rev to 7k no problem, but the other not? i know a longer stroke is not made to rev high, but we're not talking about a 7 liter engine here. we're only looking at a 6.65 stroke. ive already talked to a couple engine builders and both mave told me that a 5.4 can make power and safely rev to at least 7k rpms.the 2v heads on a stock GT arent maxed out as to their flow capacity. they flow the air that a 4.6 at stock compression needs to flow. but with a 5.4, much more air will be moving into the combustion chamber. more displacement=more air flow. stock heads on a 5.4 would be the weakest point though b/c i could see them maxing out. thats why they would need some kind of headwork to increase flow.
come on man, theres no need for name calling because you have a different view point. i didnt say i wanted the same amount of power at a higher rpm. i just said if that happens to be the case i wouldnt mind. it obviously wouldnt. the whole point of revving higher is to increase power and continue making more power for longer, rather than having to shiftSorry, but the 5.4 is not good for any kind of high rpm operation. The 4.6 has an equal bore and stoke, which isn't bad, but when you stroke it to 5.4, the bore-stroke ratio goes to crap. If you want to know why the 5.0 was so successful and could make power reving high, look at the bore-stroke ratio.
The comments in your 2nd paragraph make you sound like a clueless ricer. If you want to make the same power at a higher rpm, I'd suggest you destroke the 4.6 to about 3.8-4.0L. That will accomplish exactly what you are looking for... same power at a higher rpm.
Anyway, I'm done here as well. I hope to run into you on the street or the drag strip.
Why didn't you tell us what was in that motor?
I see a number of ported 2v heads that will produce between 450 and 500 N/A Flywheel HP at the 7K or more range in a 2v 4.6L with the correct cams and other modifications. Look at heads Fox Lake, BH Performance, C.A.P.A. Performance, M2 Race Systems, total engine Airflow
very easy to raise redline. u will need to invest in some better internals, and also u will need to mods to GIVE U ENOUGH POWER TO USE THE EXTRA REV.
i dont know what ur reasoning is for wanting to redline higher; is it so u can think your car is cooler, or is it to serve a purpose like needing the extra tach to not redline at the end of the 1320?
u would be surprised.... there are a lot of ppl who would like to be like vtak yo and rev higher...
dude iv been around these cars for Some time.. im no noob.. iv read countless posts of ppl saying they want to raise there redline because it was cool.
i answered the guys question, i just had to ask...cause u never know. so take it down a peg turbo.
Hoss, I'm sure you'd like to dazzle everyone here with your vast amounts of technical knowledge, but thus far in this thread you only seem to be pushing buttons and coming off as a "know it all", who actually seems to know nothing at all. If you're looking to gain any respect on the board, or make any friends here it wouldn’t hurt to take the volume and the attitude down a peg or two yourself. Nobody likes a smart mouth.....let alone one who claims to know what he’s talking about, but doesn’t back anything he says and only seems to have an opinion (usually negative) on what everyone else is saying. A touch of humility could go a long way here.exactly.. hence why i asked his reasonings for it. there is no point unless ur gonna go f/i
Hoss, I'm sure you'd like to dazzle everyone here with your vast amounts of technical knowledge, but thus far in this thread you only seem to be pushing buttons and coming off as a "know it all", who actually seems to know nothing at all. If you're looking to gain any respect on the board, or make any friends here it wouldn’t hurt to take the volume and the attitude down a peg or two yourself. Nobody likes a smart mouth.....let alone one who claims to know what he’s talking about, but doesn’t back anything he says and only seems to have an opinion (usually negative) on what everyone else is saying. A touch of humility could go a long way here.
.....and for god sakes, clean up your sentence structure, would ya? Trying to read your broken internet slag makes us all think we're talking to some uneducated 13-year old who got hold of his moms lap top when she was in the shower.
Not chastising you here, just a friendly warning.
The motor I built had stage 3 patriot heads, 5.1l stroker, 11:1 compression, custom cams, stock intake, and custom tune and it made 372rwhp. And was not streetable.
all iv done is comment on the subject. this is a forum, i can talk however i want to...
and when i read something that goes against everything i have ever come across for the 2v im going to call it out. i have not broken any rules., deal with it.
EDIT: and the funny part is in my first post i told him what he needs to do it, bottom end and the parts to bring power, cams n heads... did u even read that part before u went on your little rant?
yea those sub 400 cars are terrible to drive on the street. i think i'll go pick up some groceries on my 600HP 2V now............
yea those sub 400 cars are terrible to drive on the street. i think i'll go pick up some groceries on my 600HP 2V now............
all iv done is comment on the subject. this is a forum, i can talk however i want to...
and when i read something that goes against everything i have ever come across for the 2v im going to call it out. i have not broken any rules., deal with it.
EDIT: and the funny part is in my first post i told him what he needs to do it, bottom end and the parts to bring power, cams n heads... did u even read that part before u went on your little rant?
Your an idiot.
Let me guess you paid some guy to strap a supercharger to your engine and you have no idea how it works.
To build power like we were trying to build NA on a 2v the car becomes very unstreetable, it is a track car only. You would not be able to sit in traffic, or even take of smoothly from a stop light. Learn about engine building before you make smart ass remarks.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?