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

Interesting article in MM&FF this month

  • Thread starter Thread starter NIKwoaC
  • Start date Start date Dec 7, 2010
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

BK_CAULEY

it's built for speed not longevity, woman
Dec 26, 2006
0
10
49
Thomasville, ga
Dec 21, 2010
#21
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #21
My heads are very street friendly. and they flow more than AFR 205's
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Dec 21, 2010
#22
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #22
Notchbck93 said:
Of course, I don't believe any real measurements are ever taken below 2500 are they? This is the area that most people spend the most time in on the street.
Click to expand...

Putting around town, I shift around 3-3.5K and cruise between 2200-2700. I think a starting point of 2500 is fair, but I guess everybody's driving habits are different.

Notchbck93 said:
Maybe a blind test like GM performed on the pushrod vs quad cam debate.
Click to expand...

I was not aware of this. Linky?

Notchbck93 said:
Have them do a classic road and track review and see which one would be more enjoyable as a cruiser.

I would put money on the milder combo to be more "street friendly."
Click to expand...

Eh, any test like that is so subjective. It really comes down to who is behind the wheel.

Also, I think you could cam that "hot" engine so mild, you could barely tell it was even running at idle, and yet with the "big" heads and intake it would scream past the GT40 combo. Think big lift, short duration, short overlap.

Notchbck93 said:
Now, seeing that I can't read the article yet, Did they simply swap cylinder heads and leave the same restrictive intake on?
Click to expand...

They used the Funnel web for the 363, but some junk ProComp dual plane for the 302.
 

Shaolin Crane

Banned
Oct 6, 2008
2,627
7
0
Kommiefornia
Dec 21, 2010
#23
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #23
When Ed Curtis was designing the cam for my old engine he actually recommended a set of Trick flow 260's. HE also guaranteed that the engine would make 600rwhp at 7000rpm with gobs of low/average power. He knew very well the car could NOT be lazy down low because I would be auto-crossing it. Cam grinders are hesitant to offer words like that unless they KNOW what its going to do, and Ed isnt the kind that is going to let his word be smeared for some random car.
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Dec 21, 2010
#24
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #24
Shaolin Crane said:
When Ed Curtis was designing the cam for my old engine he actually recommended a set of Trick flow 260's. HE also guaranteed that the engine would make 600rwhp at 7000rpm with gobs of low/average power. He knew very well the car could NOT be lazy down low because I would be auto-crossing it. Cam grinders are hesitant to offer words like that unless they KNOW what its going to do, and Ed isnt the kind that is going to let his word be smeared for some random car.
Click to expand...

Was that the supercharged 347 you were planning?
 

Shaolin Crane

Banned
Oct 6, 2008
2,627
7
0
Kommiefornia
Dec 21, 2010
#25
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #25
NikwoaC said:
Was that the supercharged 347 you were planning?
Click to expand...

No that was the N/A setup from before, supercharged would have been a much lower compression and in the woods of 900hp, but i haz no monies to complete it so i sold it
 

25thmustang

Mustang Master
Sep 5, 2003
2,021
85
99
Montgomery, NY
Dec 21, 2010
#26
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #26
This is probably why my father wants to dump the AFR 185s and swap on a set of 205s or bigger!!
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Dec 21, 2010
#27
  • Dec 21, 2010
  • #27
25thmustang said:
This is probably why my father wants to dump the AFR 185s and swap on a set of 205s or bigger!!
Click to expand...

Hell yes, and that car is already fast as hell!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NEW FOX IMPUT/ADVICE
  • Madness7645
  • Jun 22, 2019
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
12
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 25, 2020
Madness7645
C
98 V6 -> 289 engine swap
  • Cerdman
  • Dec 4, 2018
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
3K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Dec 10, 2018
Cerdman
C
Excellent Hagerty Article About The "kings Of The Street"
  • FoxMustangLvr
  • Sep 21, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Sep 21, 2017
NIKwoaC
R
Engine 1992 Mustang Hesitation/Cutting-Out
  • RTW0223
  • May 2, 2018
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
14K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 26, 2025
Noobz347
T
Fox No Boost And Stumped
  • TWEECD
  • Aug 12, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
13K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 31, 2017
TWEECD
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?