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

How Much Hp/Tq Does My Combo Have?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joey5.0
  • Start date Start date Jul 20, 2006
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
D

DeVus1

Founding Member
Mar 29, 2002
400
2
28
P-Town, Va.
Jul 21, 2006
#21
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #21
FastDriver said:
No way! Don't touch those heads before you swap or port that stocker intake.
Click to expand...

Agreed. You should do mass air-->throttle body-->intake(upper and lower)-->heads.
 

STANGateURlilSS

Founding Member
May 2, 2002
716
0
16
USA & SANDBOX
Jul 21, 2006
#22
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #22
i would say 210hp -220hp at the wheels
 

88Stang331

New Member
Mar 30, 2006
239
0
0
Jul 21, 2006
#23
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #23
how many times is somebody gonna say "between 210-220" at the wheels?

Anyway i'm gonna break the mold....I'm gonna say 225rwhp
 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.
Nov 8, 2003
2,120
2
59
windsor, Canada
Jul 21, 2006
#24
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #24
I will give anyone who can show me 5HP gain with a CAI (anderson power pipe aside) over K&N panel filter....ain't gonna happen.
 

88Stang331

New Member
Mar 30, 2006
239
0
0
Jul 21, 2006
#25
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #25
DMAN302 said:
I will give anyone who can show me 5HP gain with a CAI (anderson power pipe aside) over K&N panel filter....ain't gonna happen.
Click to expand...


Give them what?
 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.
Nov 8, 2003
2,120
2
59
windsor, Canada
Jul 21, 2006
#26
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #26
20 Cash and a box of cherios.
 

Joey5.0

Member
Feb 13, 2006
313
1
16
Usa
Jul 21, 2006
#27
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #27
DeVus1 said:
Agreed. You should do mass air-->throttle body-->intake(upper and lower)-->heads.
Click to expand...


70MM Tb or 75? And also what size Maf should run? Will the stock fuel pump and injectors hold up for all these mods?
 

ninety15.0

New Member
Mar 10, 2004
1,336
0
0
Jul 21, 2006
#28
  • Jul 21, 2006
  • #28
65mm throttle body...dont go any bigger. That is one of the biggest mistakes people make. Air velocity is just as important if not more important that air volume. With stock heads and minor mods...a 70 or 75 might actually hurt you. In terms of the MAF a 75 or77mm Pro-M is the way to go. good luck man
 

FastDriver

I was uncomfortably high & wearing a helmet
SN Certified Technician
Sep 5, 2001
6,089
2,694
224
Vass, NC
Jul 22, 2006
#29
  • Jul 22, 2006
  • #29
TB size depends on the intake you choose. You don't want to run a TB that is bigger than the intake port or it will disturb airflow - you want a smooth transition from the TB into the intake. IMO, don't worry so much at air velocity at the TB.

You can increase air velocity there by running a smaller and smaller TB, but all you accomplish is choking the intake off. When that high velocity at the TB air moves into the upper plenum, it's going to slow way down because now the plenum is moving less air through the same cross-sectional area, i.e. a slower air velocity in the intake.

Where air velocity really counts is in the runners and most importantly in the heads' ports. That way, it helps to move air into the cylinder when the valve opens, and particularly, right before the valve closes.
 

ninety15.0

New Member
Mar 10, 2004
1,336
0
0
Jul 22, 2006
#30
  • Jul 22, 2006
  • #30
FastDriver said:
TB size depends on the intake you choose. You don't want to run a TB that is bigger than the intake port or it will disturb airflow - you want a smooth transition from the TB into the intake. IMO, don't worry so much at air velocity at the TB.

You can increase air velocity there by running a smaller and smaller TB, but all you accomplish is choking the intake off. When that high velocity at the TB air moves into the upper plenum, it's going to slow way down because now the plenum is moving less air through the same cross-sectional area, i.e. a slower air velocity in the intake.

Where air velocity really counts is in the runners and most importantly in the heads' ports. That way, it helps to move air into the cylinder when the valve opens, and particularly, right before the valve closes.
Click to expand...

Thats really not true man. I do agree with you that intake runners and most importantly the heads are greatly affected by the velocity vs. volume....but the air comming into the intake makes a huge difference too. You mentioned that the air slows down as soon as it enters the intake manifold...but if its going slower when it gets there b/c your TB and MAF are too big...then its going to slow down even more as it travels thru the intake and heads. Its not like the air can be drastically sped up as it travels through the heads without reducing the volume...thats a basic airflow principle. Flow rate/Area = Velocity...so reducing the area increases velocity. Engine builders today have found that they can achieve the same velocity with smaller ports and valves by controling the ports' shape and the air flows' path. the smaller the ports...the higher the velocity and thus more power. Your exhaust follows the same principles bigger is not always better. Its all about matching everything to work together. Oversizing everything will make good top end power if its not too oversized, but throttle response, driveability, and low end torque are going to seriously suffer. So on a street car, i think velocity is more important than volume in most cases.
 
T

Topdowncruise

New Member
Apr 7, 2005
207
0
0
Canada
Jul 22, 2006
#31
  • Jul 22, 2006
  • #31
ninety15.0 said:
Thats really not true man. I do agree with you that intake runners and most importantly the heads are greatly affected by the velocity vs. volume....but the air comming into the intake makes a huge difference too. You mentioned that the air slows down as soon as it enters the intake manifold...but if its going slower when it gets there b/c your TB and MAF are too big...then its going to slow down even more as it travels thru the intake and heads. Its not like the air can be drastically sped up as it travels through the heads without reducing the volume...thats a basic airflow principle. Flow rate/Area = Velocity...so reducing the area increases velocity. Engine builders today have found that they can achieve the same velocity with smaller ports and valves by controling the ports' shape and the air flows' path. the smaller the ports...the higher the velocity and thus more power. Your exhaust follows the same principles bigger is not always better. Its all about matching everything to work together. Oversizing everything will make good top end power if its not too oversized, but throttle response, driveability, and low end torque are going to seriously suffer. So on a street car, i think velocity is more important than volume in most cases.
Click to expand...

I agee.I see so many crappy running modified street Stangs because of committing the cardinal sin...."Bigger is Better".It is all about balancing/matching components if you want to retain streetability (good throttle response,low end torque) while getting good power and torque increases at higher rpm.I'll give up a little power at 6000+ rpm.
 

FastDriver

I was uncomfortably high & wearing a helmet
SN Certified Technician
Sep 5, 2001
6,089
2,694
224
Vass, NC
Jul 22, 2006
#32
  • Jul 22, 2006
  • #32
ninety15.0 said:
You mentioned that the air slows down as soon as it enters the intake manifold...but if its going slower when it gets there b/c your TB and MAF are too big...then its going to slow down even more as it travels thru the intake and heads.
Click to expand...

You're on the right track, but it's not the velocity of the air at the throttle boddy that counts. You'll actually slow the air down more in the runners where it does count because by restricting the TB you will move less volume of air into the manifold. Then, in reference to your formula, you will have a lower flow rate moving through the same cross-sectional area in the intake which results in a lower velocity where that velocity actually counts.

If you stick a straw on the intake instead of a TB, you'll get huge air velocity at the straw, but since so little air will be getting into the intake, the air inside is going to be stagnant.

Its not like the air can be drastically sped up as it travels through the heads without reducing the volume...thats a basic airflow principle.
Click to expand...

and by volume you mean, cross-sectional area... gotcha

Flow rate/Area = Velocity...so reducing the area increases velocity.
Click to expand...
You're not reducing the area in the intake or heads... you're talking about the TB. You've got the right ideas, but you're applying them incorrectly.

Engine builders today have found that they can achieve the same velocity with smaller ports and valves by controling the ports' shape and the air flows' path.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the lesson. Smaller ports and valves already have a higher velocity, but a lower flow rate, generally, than a larger port/valve. In the quote above replace "velocity" with "flow rate" and it makes more sense.
the smaller the ports...the higher the velocity and thus more power.
Click to expand...
No. Velocity is only one part of the equation. The other part is actual flow, i.e. CFM.

Your exhaust follows the same principles bigger is not always better. Its all about matching everything to work together. Oversizing everything will make good top end power if its not too oversized, but throttle response, driveability, and low end torque are going to seriously suffer. So on a street car, i think velocity is more important than volume in most cases.
Click to expand...



Chris
 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.
Nov 8, 2003
2,120
2
59
windsor, Canada
Jul 22, 2006
#33
  • Jul 22, 2006
  • #33
That hurt my eyes....
 

Joey5.0

Member
Feb 13, 2006
313
1
16
Usa
Jul 23, 2006
#34
  • Jul 23, 2006
  • #34
Im now confused on what combo to get lol.
 

onefstsnake

New Member
Nov 25, 2005
792
1
0
Northern VA
Jul 23, 2006
#35
  • Jul 23, 2006
  • #35
well my 93 put down 220rwhp and 284rwtq

With only the following:
-Crank/WP underdrive pulleys
-O/R H pipe (kinda smashed from speed bumps)
-Flowmaster 2 Chamber catback
-FRP 9mm wires
-MSD cap/rotor

Stock Timing, super dirty air filter, 87 octane gas, and leaky headers.




 

Attachments

  • graph4.webp
    38.7 KB · Views: 112
  • graph2.webp
    9.7 KB · Views: 124

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.
Nov 8, 2003
2,120
2
59
windsor, Canada
Jul 23, 2006
#36
  • Jul 23, 2006
  • #36
Decent numbers for a near stock mustang, but every car will be different, as will every dyno session.
 

Joey5.0

Member
Feb 13, 2006
313
1
16
Usa
Jul 23, 2006
#37
  • Jul 23, 2006
  • #37
onefstsnake said:
well my 93 put down 220rwhp and 284rwtq

With only the following:
-Crank/WP underdrive pulleys
-O/R H pipe (kinda smashed from speed bumps)
-Flowmaster 2 Chamber catback
-FRP 9mm wires
-MSD cap/rotor

Stock Timing, super dirty air filter, 87 octane gas, and leaky headers.




Click to expand...

Very Nice what headers?
 

Attachments

  • graph4.webp
    38.7 KB · Views: 108
  • graph2.webp
    9.7 KB · Views: 114

onefstsnake

New Member
Nov 25, 2005
792
1
0
Northern VA
Jul 23, 2006
#38
  • Jul 23, 2006
  • #38
at that point stock headers. I now have 1-3/4" MAC Big Tube shorties.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Which one of these 3 intakes make the most sense for my 331 combo
  • from6to8
  • Jul 25, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
7
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jul 26, 2024
AeroCoupe
For Sale 3-owner 1987 Mustang GT, $18K obro, Lancaster CA
  • Bill Cool
  • Oct 6, 2024
  • Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93)
Replies
4
Views
2K
Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93) Oct 13, 2024
nickyb
F
1993 Cobra flooding
  • FireFoxCobra_SVT93
  • May 20, 2022
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
5K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 11, 2023
nickyb
A
1991 5.0 with HCI - started car, running for a few minutes, started pushing coolant into the overflow tank and then puking out from there. I'm lost
  • AmericanMuscle4.6GT
  • Oct 16, 2022
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
4K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 30, 2022
CAMTWO1070
New to me Fox body. Looking for Rough HP and compression ratio
  • Halford4491
  • Oct 30, 2021
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 3, 2021
General karthief
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?