Tech talk, 5.0 HO vs LSx...

[Stopsign32v]

That is encouraging.
How radical was that setup?
Was that through a manual tranny?
What heads?

Sorry for all the questions...

The setup was a Jay Allen custom cam, AFR 165 heads, and an Edelbrock Performer intake port matched to the heads. Yes it was through a manual. The car also made 404rwhp/444rwtq with a 100 shot.

If I had it to do over I would have someone notch the stock pistons and run some AFR 185 heads, Edelbrock RPM II intake, 75mm Accufab TB, and a Jay Allen custom cam. That would be a 350rwhp setup all day long.

 

[Stopsign32v]

:Zip2:


Whats the story on Mr. Blackout in the background? Hopefully some 600hp monster?

Pump gas numbers: 629rwhp on a Mustang dyno through a set of 4.30 gears and 15" ET Drags

Race gas numbers/Race gas numbers and nitrous: ...................alittle higher.........

 

[Stopsign32v]

Stopsign:
What the heck kind of upper is that???

Trickflow box

 

[ratio411]

WOW!
I knew AFR made good SBF heads, but to pull that kind of power with 165s!
That is awesome.
I would have thought you would have needed 185s just to pull the 328.

 

[Stopsign32v]

WOW!
I knew AFR made good SBF heads, but to pull that kind of power with 165s!
That is awesome.
I would have thought you would have needed 185s just to pull the 328.

No, you just need a good working combination.

 

[ratio411]

When did power come on and off, as in what rpms, on that 302?

 

[Stopsign32v]

Power seemed to be on tap as soon as 3,000rpms but it did seem to fall off at 5,000rpms. I always shifted around 5,500rpms.

Here is a video of the car with that setup. YouTube - CAMMED Turbo 5.0

In that video it did have a turbo on it but still the same H/C/I setup.

 

[HankyGT]

You're twisting it again though with the HCI in a fox, and the 100shot to top it^^ (pics from LS1tech)

I spent $$$ doing the h/c/i route to a near clean 300rwhp on a mustang dyno in a full weight sn95 with 4:10s (at the time)

vs. my brothers 160k LS1 z28, m6 car. Mods were a lid, and a catback.

The ls1 gets 30mpg, is DEAD consistant at the track with no heat soak issues, no nothing. ZERO drivability issues. It also would get my mustang damn near EVERY time.

I have now had to drop another 3k in an s-trim which I hope nets some decent #s. I would have much rather spent near half on the initial build, and PAYED a shop to do a cam only ls1 to give me similar #s and retain the drivability/milage

Theres alot more the argument than raw cubes. Confusing tuning/drivablity with the old eecIVs ablity to process vs. the LS1 computer is also apples to oranges.

I realize the pride thing, and some people just wont give up the goat, but a spade is a spade. The 5.0 is formidable in a fox due to weight. Can you make a 5.0 car fast vs. the LS1? Sure. Will it cost more? You bet. Will it have worse drivablity and economy? Absolutely.

Mustang guys will do their thing to build mustangs, and argue whatever else till their blue in the face. GM guys will do their one sided banter and most of them are because they have basic bolt on cars that wipe the floor with 'built' mustangs, and have done like nothing to them. I can see how the 'mustangs suck' attitude comes to be.

In all you just can't compare. Go hit your bolt on ls1 with that same 100 shot. See what car hooks harder on the street. They all have their ups and downs; ones alot easier to work on, both kinda tap out around 500rwhp for blocks and such. It's just alot easier to go faster with the little stuff in an fbody. Plus you get t-tops an a 6spd

*****.........I just got the blower on and running last night...you'd think I'd be more excited about my $19k money-pit slug. Yeah......do it all paying retail prices ......NEVER AGAIN.

 

[Black Stampede]

Pump gas numbers: 629rwhp on a Mustang dyno through a set of 4.30 gears and 15" ET Drags

Race gas numbers/Race gas numbers and nitrous: ...................alittle higher.........

Siiiiick.

 

[Nik_95Cobra]

I'm all for ford power and don't understand why someone would go through the trouble and not just buy a chevy to begin with, but just to stir your pot with a quick google search I did...

I could also almost swear someone in here did it a few years back.

LSX Stangs

Its build thread: 7 sec LSX Mustang - :: The SANDS Lounge ::

 

[final5-0]

No, you just need a good working combination.

Don't wanna hijack the original poster's thread here
but
Could you post up the dyno chart of that combo in another thread

Sounds very nice

I'd like to see it

Grady

 

[Stopsign32v]

Don't wanna hijack the original poster's thread here
but
Could you post up the dyno chart of that combo in another thread

Sounds very nice

I'd like to see it

Grady

In what other thread? ?

 

[The O.G.]

In what other thread? ?

i think he is saying start a new thread with your combo and dyno graph
so it doesnt interfere with this thread

i would like to see also

 

[Stopsign32v]

Ok I'll make a new thread in the Talk section. And my mistake, it was 408rwhp.

 

[1995GTStang]

I see that I got into this conversation a little late. I am very familiar with the LSx engines. I have had two Camaros and I did an LS1 swap into my 2000 silverado that came stock with an LS- based 5.3 (5.3 is a smaller bore LS1). You guys hit it right on with the technology. The technology is in the heads. These heads are designed similiar to Vortec heads, but completely different than any other head on the market. The are designed with tall runners and fast burn combustion chambers. No not mention they use aluminum heads and blocks blocks.

One of the biggest reasons I wanted a Mustang prior to 96 is it still uses the 302 cast iron block and heads. There is just something about its appeal that I find fun to work on and own.
And they are not godly expensive to get naturally aspired HP.

On another note....I owed and worked on many different cars and trucks. I just sold a 99 R/T Dakota that was making over 370 RWHP. It came stock with a 250hp 5.9 (360) cast iron push rod v8. And the biggest kicker....Mopar still used a distributor on these until 2003. Technology has made leaps forward since these motors were designed. The difference.....well I think its preference. What appeals to you more??

Oh yeah and btw. Mustangs are a smaller and lighter car than camaros/firebirds. A stock 225hp mustang can hold its own against a stock 300hp camaro. It really depends on what aftermarket mods you use that will change this difference.

 

[rd]

This should be obvious. I don't know why these threads stick around, but I'll bite into this one.

The 302 was designed in 1960 or so, and in most common form was a cast iron headed pushrod motor for normal passenger cars. The Chevy motors were designed recently with the benefit of huge advances in the capability to model and design for air flow, and was initially designed for efi and puter control. Note that even Chevy heavily updated from the Gen 1 small block to get where they are at.

There were no computers when the Ford was originally designed. Just Autolite two barrels and points. It is a tribute to the soundness of the design that it was able to live into the puter age and be effective. I'll take one anywhere, any time.

However, the Mustang has been priced better than Camaro for 20 years, and has sold enough to keep it going. Thats why I have a 79, 82, 89 and 08 Mustang.

If you want a Ford comparo, start looking at 3 and 4 valve 4.5 and 5.4 motors. Totally different class and world. Much better comparision to the LS motors.

And, yes, an old 302 can be made to stay with all of them.

 

[ratio411]

Mustangs are a smaller and lighter car than camaros/firebirds.
A stock 225hp mustang can hold its own against a stock 300hp camaro.
It really depends on what aftermarket mods you use that will change this difference.

I don't really see it...
A Stang might be 200# less than a Z28.
Stang = ~3400#
Z = ~3600#

Also, you probably are well aware that the LS1 was underrated.
A Stang will have 225 at the engine, while a stock Z will have 300 at the wheels.
(a 6 speed will, autos are a bit less)

Even if you give the Stang 225 at the wheels, you end up with:

Stang: Each HP is pushing 15.1# (Reality is more like 17#)
Z: Each HP is pushing 12.0#


On the LSx Stangs...
THAT'S JUST WRONG!

I love the LSx, I love the Stangs, but they just shouldn't be mixed up.
If you got a Stang, then make a rip-snortin' Ford engine.

 

[thethirdeye88]

one of my mechanics has a 416W that ran 6's in the 1/8th on motor...its set up for bottle but never ran it...its also for sale...

 

[Stopsign32v]

one of my mechanics has a 416W that ran 6's in the 1/8th on motor...its set up for bottle but never ran it...its also for sale...

That was so random.


Oh and setup for nitrous or not I would hope a 416cid motored car would run 6's in the 1/8th.

 

[Pokageek]

Oh, I'd also like to mention that the kid that bought my last Z28 that dynoed
at 318 rwhp did some mods to the car and dynoed it before and after.

When he bought it from me, it had a lid, muffler, and TB coolant bypass.
That gave him 330 rwhp. Then he put headers, ORP, full cat-back, and
had it dyno tuned. He left the dyno with 375 rwhp! 80k miles, the engine
has never been cracked open, and it still uses the stock TB for cryin' out loud.
Do you realize what kind of HP that is at the crank?

#1 Dyno's are HIGHLY subjective and the LSx has been internet hyp'd out the door.

#2 Thats same for same ratio to the 302 rwhp to c.i.. So why is that so amazing?

#3 Here's the real insight ---> The ls1 heads from the factory are easily as good as AFR's or Trick Flows. So consider it already having a H/I and just needs the cam.

#4 You can also get radical with the lsx and post up more numbers .. but so can you with the 302. THAT being said, the 350 will still put out up to 50rwhp more.

Hope that puts it into perspective.