• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

steer me in the right direction (engines)

  • Thread starter Thread starter DukeGnarley
  • Start date Start date Oct 31, 2010
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last

DukeGnarley

Member
Apr 2, 2003
597
2
19
Auburn/Ellensburg, Wa
Nov 3, 2010
#21
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #21
There were a couple of those brand new on ebay a few days ago. I don't know how well they work compared to the newer novi units. My guess is not as well, although they do have that cool old school look.
 

jonfor

New Member
Apr 20, 2009
59
0
0
Columbus, GA
Nov 3, 2010
#22
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #22
I’m not sure you would need equal power to keep up with a newer mustang because they are pretty heavy. Bolt-on 5.0 LX fox mustangs from the late 80’s would probably keep up with no trouble. One of my good friends (who unfortunately passed away this year) was very experienced at building race engines. He told me that due to small journals and stubbie rods, a stroked SBF was a grenade and any higher rpm’s or with power adders. It’s a thin wall cast block and will only take so much abuse.
 

woodsnake

15 Year Member
Jan 16, 2007
1,352
15
69
Hicksville, NY
Nov 3, 2010
#23
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #23
I'm sorry to hear your friend passed away, but
"He told me that due to small journals and stubbie rods, a stroked SBF was a grenade and any higher rpm’s or with power adders. It’s a thin wall cast block and will only take so much abuse."
Was he a chevy kind of guy?
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 3, 2010
#24
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #24
BubbaB1966 said:
If you are going to supercharge, all rotating assembly needs to be forged. Also need to let the machine shop that does your block work know, as there are tighter tolerances for supercharged motors.
Click to expand...

Tighter tolerances? They need looser clearances for pistons and ring gaps. For what the OP wants a stock 5.0 with stock forged pistons will work great. It is well proven that 5.0s will live unmodded at those levels.

DukeGnarley said:
I considered twin turbos for a little while, but then decided that i couldn't live with how the engine bay looked, and how crouded it would be, so if I go with boost it's going to be a supercharger.
Click to expand...

Crowded?

 

DukeGnarley

Member
Apr 2, 2003
597
2
19
Auburn/Ellensburg, Wa
Nov 3, 2010
#25
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #25
Don't get me wrong.. Turbos are cool and they make a ton of power, but I don't see any room in there for a power steering pump or an air filter.


unless that a ps pump on the top that I'm staring at.
 

blown65

Founding Member
Jul 7, 1999
1,938
4
39
Queen Creek Arizona
Nov 3, 2010
#26
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #26
What turbo are you running now? Any new times?

As for the tighter tolerances, I think he meant they were more critical.

As for the small journals comment, change the block and those small journals live just fine. Why do you think people change to the cleveland crank size over the windsor journals? 2.75" vs 3" Agree about the block though, spin them high or push too much power and they become a twin 4 cylinder.
 

blown65

Founding Member
Jul 7, 1999
1,938
4
39
Queen Creek Arizona
Nov 3, 2010
#27
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #27
DukeGnarley said:
Don't get me wrong.. Turbos are cool and they make a ton of power, but I don't see any room in there for a power steering pump or an air filter.


unless that a ps pump on the top that I'm staring at.
Click to expand...

wimp. LOL I haven't had powersteering for 23 yrs on my 65. Manual rack is a one handed operation.

I'm sure he has an air filter, or screen at the minimum since its pulling air out of the fender where the tire is. Unless he has it ducted somewhere else on the intake side of the turbo.
 

DukeGnarley

Member
Apr 2, 2003
597
2
19
Auburn/Ellensburg, Wa
Nov 3, 2010
#28
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #28
the other issue for me is running the exhaust under the convertible. there are less options with the subfloor bracing. I saw a couple of twin setups that I liked, but they ran the exhaust through the wheel wells and then under, but I really don't think I have space for that. The only way to run the exhaust really is straight down the middle
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 3, 2010
#29
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #29
I was just joking about it not being crowded. No new times yet. It is apart right now and waiting on a timing chain. I hope to get it out Sunday, but don't expect too much. I am starting all over with a different carb. It also makes 2 less psi now, but I will be disappointed if it does not go at least as good as before, 6.90s on pump. The only time it has been to the track with this turbo it ran slightly better MPH than the old turbo in similar weather.

Power steering is over rated IMO. I did not own a car with it for the first 11 years I had a drivers license. With skinnies on the front it definitely is not an issue. The air cleaner is tucked in front of the front tire.





This is two 3" pipes going under the steering. It is much less noticeable when it is on the ground. With a 302 block you can go over the valve covers and down by the fire wall. I would be easier at that point than long tubes.

 

blown65

Founding Member
Jul 7, 1999
1,938
4
39
Queen Creek Arizona
Nov 3, 2010
#30
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #30
What turbo is that Brian?
 

jonfor

New Member
Apr 20, 2009
59
0
0
Columbus, GA
Nov 3, 2010
#31
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #31
woodsnake said:
I'm sorry to hear your friend passed away, but
"He told me that due to small journals and stubbie rods, a stroked SBF was a grenade and any higher rpm’s or with power adders. It’s a thin wall cast block and will only take so much abuse."
Was he a chevy kind of guy?
Click to expand...

nope, just a genuine old school mechanic who built everything from flatheads to dirt track engines to diesels. He never let blind brand loyalty get in the way of seeing the limitations of a production engine designed +45 years ago. This is actually the first time I have ever heard anyone get defensive about the 347’s reliability in a boost or high rpm environment. I thought it was well documented?
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 3, 2010
#32
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #32
It is a Borg Warner S475. It has the big 96mm turbine and 1.32ar. It should be good for 800 or so horse power w/o pushing it too hard.
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Nov 3, 2010
#33
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #33
jonfor said:
This is actually the first time I have ever heard anyone get defensive about the 347’s reliability in a boost or high rpm environment. I thought it was well documented?
Click to expand...
Think they/we are talking more of what the stock rotating assembly will take. A stock bottom end and a few psi will get you high tens pretty damn reliably. The block will be the weak point in any short block combination.

This is a 351w, 225 heads,power steering rack and pinion, 3in down pipes. I pretty much hated life making this thing. You would need someone with patience to make it, or use cast iron manifolds. I like a single under the car look better. But with a rack, this is how you have to do it. But none of it is really worth the cost for 400 rwhp, for most.


 

blown65

Founding Member
Jul 7, 1999
1,938
4
39
Queen Creek Arizona
Nov 3, 2010
#34
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #34
Exactly. Lots of ppl make stock 5.0's live into the 10's either turning fair amount of rpms n/a or under boost. The block is the weak point in the build. You just don't hear much of stock cranks and rods breaking in stock motors under boost or revs, its typically the blocks that split. Not saying it doesn't happen, but its not typical.
 

blown65

Founding Member
Jul 7, 1999
1,938
4
39
Queen Creek Arizona
Nov 3, 2010
#35
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #35
10secgoal said:
This is a 351w, 225 heads,power steering rack and pinion, 3in down pipes. I pretty much hated life making this thing. You would need someone with patience to make it, or use cast iron manifolds. I like a single under the car look better. But with a rack, this is how you have to do it. But none of it is really worth the cost for 400 rwhp, for most.


Click to expand...


Looks like it. That's the great thing on my car, I'm going to dump the exhaust behind the front tire. What noise rules. LOL!!
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 3, 2010
#36
  • Nov 3, 2010
  • #36
10secgoal said:
Click to expand...

They will never know until it is too late. A flat hood would complete the sleeper status. Nice work and I will vouch for being no fun to make.
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Nov 4, 2010
#37
  • Nov 4, 2010
  • #37
Would have been soooo much easier without P/S and having to keep the sway bar. Hope to hear back from him soon. He was putting my IC in there a few months ago. Was looking for 1k out of a 408 in a 69. Should be tons-oh-fun with a ladder bar though
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 4, 2010
#38
  • Nov 4, 2010
  • #38
I think if I had it to do all over again mine would be in the back.
 
1

10secgoal

Active Member
Dec 1, 2003
2,801
3
49
San Diego
Nov 4, 2010
#39
  • Nov 4, 2010
  • #39
I didn't hate it that much
Mine has been pretty bad. 2in headers. P/S, AC, 3.5 in DP's. Even with the shaved towers and sn-95 serp it is still horrible. Only thing worse so far has been the GT500.
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Nov 4, 2010
#40
  • Nov 4, 2010
  • #40
I am thinking about all the weight up front. PS is no biggy for me, but A/C would be nice. I know I'll get mine to hook, but it would be easier with the weight of the turbo in the back. Have you ever tried T4s at the end of shorties like the compounded blower Hellion makes? How is you 67 comoing along? Got any pics posted anywhere?
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Considering widening my rear wheels, would like to verify my thoughts on fitment
  • 2000xp8
  • Jul 9, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
409
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 15, 2026
FastDriver
  • Poll Poll
Pull engine & trans together or just engine?
  • ShawnR
  • Jul 14, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
247
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- May 2, 2026
RaggedGT
Hard to start when engine is cold
  • 86_Capri
  • Mar 11, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
986
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 21, 2026
CAMTWO1070
S
Preparation for Holley Terminator X install – Foxbody 306 (electrical fan, alternator, MSD Ignition, etc)
  • So_Flo
  • Mar 1, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
22
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 4, 2026
General karthief
M
Too much for me to repair in my current housing situation
  • My Drama Magnet 04 Gt
  • Apr 1, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
8
Views
297
The Welcome Wagon Apr 14, 2026
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific 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?