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

My new combo--opinions please

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deths91Gt
  • Start date Start date Oct 14, 2004

Deths91Gt

Founding Member
Sep 30, 1998
1,394
3
39
KS
Oct 14, 2004
#1
  • Oct 14, 2004
  • #1
I just finished last night and i'm like a new daddy all over. Its a 11:1 347 with a 4340 crank, H-beam rods , JE pistons with a main girdle. The heads are Stage 3 Canfields and a TFS stage 2 cam, Pro-products EFI intake and 70 MM TB and 1 3/4 inch headers. Unfortunately i'm still using the Speed density comp and 19 lb injectors. It doesnt idle too bad but its rich as hell--the stock computer is prob going WTF??? The stock ECU will be **** can for a Fast system soon. Do you think 400 RWHP is possible with this motor? Its make great power from 3500 to 6000 but then i have to shift cause of the stock rev limitor.
 
H

Highbredcloud

Active Member
Mar 4, 2003
1,075
1
36
Palos Hills, IL
Oct 14, 2004
#2
  • Oct 14, 2004
  • #2
you need more injector...VERY soon...before you blow things up...lol. I would step up to a bigger intake like the Holley or the RPM II
 
D

Daggar

New Member
Jul 19, 2004
3,902
5
0
Oct 14, 2004
#3
  • Oct 14, 2004
  • #3
Your SD computer will handle 24s just fine. With a custom chip it will handle much more. I imagine that you're running an aftermarket cam???? If so then that's probably the source of your rich condition. You don't have the vac pressure you once did and the stock computer and fuel tables think you're accelerating much faster than you actually are. It should eventually make adjustments for idle and part power but doesn't adapt well to lower vac cams without a custom chip. On another note... I would steer you away from the FAST setup. Everything I've heard, they are nothing but trouble. Look into the AEM system. You'll be able to tune using either SD or MAF regardless of cam and combo.
 

Deths91Gt

Founding Member
Sep 30, 1998
1,394
3
39
KS
Oct 15, 2004
#4
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #4
I'm going to try some 24's for now but running this motor with the SD system was always a temp thing. I do like that SDS system from Western motorsports to.
 

5.0 HOtrain

Founding Member
May 20, 2001
2,247
0
47
New Hampshire
Oct 15, 2004
#5
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #5
Daggar said:
On another note... I would steer you away from the FAST setup. Everything I've heard, they are nothing but trouble.
Click to expand...

Stan Pearson who built my 418 has the FAST system and loves it. His is a 306 single turbo, makes about 925fwhp in race trim, ran a best of 140.1mph in a 3500lb 89gt through a c6 w/gearvendors od and a 9" rear. In street trim on pump gas runs mid 10's. 7800 street miles last year and 30 passes at the track. Did I mention the 16-18mpg he gets too. He is happy.
mike.
 

5.0 HOtrain

Founding Member
May 20, 2001
2,247
0
47
New Hampshire
Oct 15, 2004
#6
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #6
I would also loose the 19lb injectors, go with some 30's. What are you running for a fuel pump??
mike.
 
S

Sir Hacksalot

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2001
363
0
0
Ankeny, IA
Oct 15, 2004
#7
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #7
Dude, look at at least 30 lbers...there are two guys in my club that have had or do have FTI HCI 306's and they are running 30 lbers...so you may need more than that to support the HP you're looking for.

Hax
 

Deths91Gt

Founding Member
Sep 30, 1998
1,394
3
39
KS
Oct 15, 2004
#8
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #8
I am running a 190 pump right now--i do have a set of 38lb injectors that i will use with the new Managment system but i'll think i'll just try them this weekend. I havent tried them so far cause i didnt know how the SD ecu would react to such a bigger injector but it runs pig rich at idle cuase of the cam overlap anyways. I'm sure it will run out of fuel with the 19 lb'ers under a heavey load/ High RPM.
 

houstonstangguy

Founding Member
Mar 16, 2002
979
0
0
Houston, Texas
Oct 15, 2004
#9
  • Oct 15, 2004
  • #9
personally I don't think you will hit the 400 rwhp number you want. your cam is too small (should have gone stage 3) and your intake is ok but you should have gone either systemax II or RPMII. injectors are WAY too small, I would NOT hammer on it until you put in some 30's. you also need a decent in tank pump at least 190, but I would probably just do it right and run a 255.

You should put up some pretty nice numbers, especially with those stage 3 heads, and had you gone with a bigger cam I think that 400 would be definite.

I know a guy with a big solid roller cam, ported victor jr. heads and a ported victor 5.0 intake on a 347 and he makes 420rwhp.

I think you have a very nice set up but you sold yourself a little short on your intake and cam. You will get good numbers though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
847
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
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
P
Thoughts on this odd (smog legal) combo?
  • PJV9126
  • Feb 8, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
22
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 16, 2023
91AOD5.0LX
Long Tubes Worth it for my build?
  • ACSPONY
  • Nov 8, 2021
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
30
Views
6K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 11, 2021
RekeHavoc
C
Stock stroke 351w 11r combos/dyno results?
  • Cclaro
  • Nov 21, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
5K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 21, 2020
nickyb
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?