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

How many horses(about)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 91stangy
  • Start date Start date Jun 6, 2007
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 6, 2007
#1
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #1
I've recently finished building my 302. In my 87 GT I am wondering if anyone maybe has a similar set up or has an idea of how much power I should create.

Here is the set up:
AFR 165 61cc
Anderson Ford Motorsports N41 Cam
Edelbrock Performer Intake Manifold
24lb Injectors
75 Mass Air
MAC Cold Air
BBK Pullies
70 Acufab Throttle Body
Mac shorties, MAC Pro-Chamber H pipe, and flowmaster cat back.

Only reason I ask is because I took it out on the road last night and lost to my budies' 2003 z28 Camaro, which was dynoed at 348 to the wheels, this passed saturday. Considering my car is lighter and I'd obviously have less power then him still, I would lose but not as badly as I did. Most likly keep up, at least. 1st to 2nd I had him, but then I hit third and he hit third and it was over, pretty badly. After all this I lose this badly still? ( I will mention I have 3.73 in the rear). What could be wrong still? I havn't dynoes or tuned it at all, do I need a tune??
 

cenok is family

15 Year Member
Jun 25, 2003
1,409
69
79
Norman, Ok
Jun 6, 2007
#2
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #2
well if he has a dyno tuned LS1 and you have a freshly built motor, i'd say get it tuned and see what happens. it'll probably get you most of the power you feel you are lacking.
 
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 6, 2007
#3
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #3
wasn't tuned, juts dynoed at 348
 

JustA5.0

Member
May 12, 2007
148
0
16
Toronto, ON
Jun 6, 2007
#4
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #4
If he has 348HP at the wheels that'd be about 410-415 flywheel hp.

As for weight, an 87GT isn't that much lighter than a Gen 4 Z28. AFAIK a Z28 is just under 3500lbs, and the 87GT is about 3200 stock (give or take some depending on power options, a/c).

I'd say your car if in good tune, would put about 270HP to the wheels, with that setup.

3500lbs/348WHP = 10lbs per WHP
3200lbs/270WHP = 11.8lbs per WHP (again I don't know what features your car has or any weight reduction done)

Not sure what your suspension mods are, but you also have to factor in 1987 suspension technology/geometry vs 2003. If your timing is not advanced that can be an area for some improvement.
 

90_Red_LX

Member
Sep 29, 2003
668
5
19
Asheboro, NC
Jun 6, 2007
#5
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #5
270 at the wheels? More liek 290 if not 300. The only restriction is the intake, and it's not a big one.
 

JustA5.0

Member
May 12, 2007
148
0
16
Toronto, ON
Jun 6, 2007
#6
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #6
90_Red_LX said:
270 at the wheels? More liek 290 if not 300. The only restriction is the intake, and it's not a big one.
Click to expand...

Here's how I looked at it:
H/C/I setup, full exhaust upgrade, maf conversion, a little bit from the U/D pullies, and the injectors not entirely necessary (though I myself have a similar setup with 24lbs lol). IMHO this is good for a 100HP(flywheel) increase over stock, in good tune.
That brings the car to 325HP(flywheel) lose about 15% to the the wheels and that's 276WHP.

Now, you have a similar setup to the poster, and if you have dynoed at 290-300HP I apologize. However, I just don't see 125+ flywheel hp there.
 
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 6, 2007
#7
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #7
I thought about the intake being restrictive after I did this set up. But the Intake was the first thing done and at that time, I never thought I'd go this far haha. Maybe sometime along the line I will change it up.

I guess we'll just leave it up to a good tune and see where I stand. I guess I expected more from it then I would actually recieve. Which is alright because it only gives me more knowledge about this.
 

ShortThrow50

Member
Oct 22, 2006
923
2
16
Pa
Jun 6, 2007
#8
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #8
heads and cam ls1's are no joke man
 

90_Red_LX

Member
Sep 29, 2003
668
5
19
Asheboro, NC
Jun 6, 2007
#9
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #9
I personally haven't dyno'd at 300whp, haven't ever been on the rollers. I've seen very similar setups dyno close to 300 at the wheels.
 
S

slappy9090

New Member
Apr 20, 2007
40
0
0
marion, iowa
Jun 6, 2007
#10
  • Jun 6, 2007
  • #10
I say you send back the motor, get it stroked to a 347 with afr 225's and then go race your buddy, I wouldnt even rebuild my 302 stock or even close
 
J

jballa

Member
May 17, 2007
32
0
6
Jun 7, 2007
#11
  • Jun 7, 2007
  • #11
While my setup is significatly different than yours and mine choked @ 4500, your can use your imagionation (or a straight edge) to see what I's working to.





I personally think you'd be looking at about 270 RWHP and 290 torque.



92 Mustang coupe, 331 stroker w/ 10.4:1 compression. 30#injectors, 190 lph fuel pump, msd coil, bbk ssi intake, cold air, cc 1.6 roller rockers, World Windsor Jr. iron heads, Diablosport chip, shorty headers, deleted smog, high flow cats, flowmasters, 70 mm TB, 73mm MAF, SRP forged pistons, 5.4” H-beam rods, 4340 steel crank, balanced @ 28 oz, billet steel flywheel, Kevlar clutch, etc.

Lunati Custom Cam 110/118 lobes, .548" lift, 230/237 dur. @ .050
 
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 9, 2007
#12
  • Jun 9, 2007
  • #12
What's the reason for it choking @ 4500. I had a friend who had his stuff tuned also and his did the same, but he was told it was because of his fuel pump. Speaking of which should I also look into replacing mine, do I have to just yet?
 

Cwalk

New Member
Sep 25, 2006
78
0
0
Virginia Beach, Va
Jun 9, 2007
#13
  • Jun 9, 2007
  • #13
are you still running stock gears?
 
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 9, 2007
#14
  • Jun 9, 2007
  • #14
nope 3.73
 

Chietala

New Member
Sep 21, 2006
111
0
0
Sacramento
Jun 9, 2007
#15
  • Jun 9, 2007
  • #15
Sounds like you need a 75 shot.
Theres no substitute for cubic inches.

02 Is the last year of the ls1 F-Body
 
D

Daggar

New Member
Jul 19, 2004
3,902
5
0
Jun 9, 2007
#16
  • Jun 9, 2007
  • #16
View attachment 382174
 

blackened88lx

Active Member
Aug 9, 2006
0
4
28
Connecticut
Jun 10, 2007
#17
  • Jun 10, 2007
  • #17
ShortThrow50 said:
heads and cam ls1's are no joke man
Click to expand...

That ls1 making 348 is no h/c car. It would be upwards of 450 no problem. Sounds like it probably doesn't even have a cam, maybe a very small one, but seems like just a full bolt-on car making those numbers. The OP's car should be damn near 300 to the wheels with a good tune, but obviously something's a little off if he's beating you that bad with 50 more hp and a couple hundred pounds.
 
9

91stangy

Member
Jun 11, 2003
116
0
16
Jun 11, 2007
#18
  • Jun 11, 2007
  • #18
The ls1 is not a heads and cam car. It just has true duel exhaust and a fuel pump and it has never been tuned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 1994 Cobra Supercharger install
  • from6to8
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 20 21 22
Replies
420
Views
9K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
M
Progress Thread mnky99 2001 V6 evap core, ac compressor, heater core replacement
  • mnky99
  • Sep 5, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
459
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Sep 5, 2025
mnky99
M
Place to Avoid: Jamison Auto Group in Gulfport, MS
  • D Durden
  • Oct 20, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 4, 2026
nickyb
B
'03 GT Fuel Pump/Pressure/Delivery Issue
  • Brodach
  • Oct 21, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
8
Views
850
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 31, 2025
gkomo
T
Newbie here with an odd story
  • thequadfather
  • Jul 20, 2024
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
3
Views
610
The Welcome Wagon Jul 22, 2024
thequadfather
T
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?