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

What is the best H/C/I combo for a stock

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lyncher
  • Start date Start date Jun 25, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
First Prev 3 of 3
9

90Notch

Founding Member
Jan 31, 2002
1,046
0
0
Westwood, MA & yes it's killing me that I'm no
Jun 27, 2005
#41
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #41
Somewhere around 9psi should get you there.

Electric water pump, 1-3/4" LongTubes into mufflers
Click to expand...

Toss that motor into a car with accessories and a realistic exhaust and watch what happens to power numbers.

For reference the AFR185 motor above that made 305rwtq @ 2250rpm made 400 fwhp on an engine dyno like this test then 275rwhp in the car with exhaust and access.

5000rpm in a 10:1 stroker comes on extremely fast, I built mine to make power to 5500 and can say from experience that I wish I had more rpm. This was a car that was daily driven through city streets. Strokers have plenty of torque down low and I beat those who have actually owned one will probably agree to build it for HP. It seems those who have no experience with them think you should build for torque.
 

89CopCoupe

Banned
Feb 17, 2004
606
0
0
Post Count City
Jun 27, 2005
#42
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #42
90Notch said:
Toss that motor into a car with accessories and a realistic exhaust and watch what happens to power numbers .....

..... I beat (bet?) those who have actually owned one will probably agree to build it for HP. It seems those who have no experience with them think you should build for torque.
Click to expand...

-20 for accessories is a given

The 266 pulls to about 6K ... (like you said) it moves through the r's so fast that if it quits at 5500, I don't notice a great deal. Initially I had the 282 and swapped it due to an erratic idle issue that I knit-picked myself over.

To draw an "experienced" conclusion is f@gg-worthy ... many with experience prefer 3.55s to 3.73s and visa versa.

My experience from running these 2 grinds is very noticeable ... the throttle response down low (where I spend a lot of time) is way better. Not that the car was a slouch with the 282 ... but I did consume more fuel with it, even just cruisin' to the store and such. I also couldn't pass my state emissions with the 282 and now passes fine with the 266. I guess it made that big of a difference.

Experience does not make anyone intelligent ... otherwise you'd be wise as a box of rocks Personally, from my experience, I prefer to build any damn size engine with a broad curve ... not for torque, not for hp
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Jun 27, 2005
#43
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #43
90Notch said:
Installed the new 306 (afr 185's, ported stock intake, stock cam, 65mm tb, bolt-ons) in the '90. Put in a T5, still has stock 2.73's.
Here are the chassis dyno numbers (dynojet at Walsh Motorsports): rwhp/rwtq

2250 130/305 (initial reading)
2500 148/310
3000 188/328
3500 232/346
3700 /351 (peak tq)
4000 260/340
4500 272/320
4700 275/ (peak hp)
5000 270/282
5500 245/233
Click to expand...

This is VERY much like ndmp40s results - same 185 heads, and ported stock intake with a stock cam - notice the power falls on it's face at 5k due to the small intake.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Jun 27, 2005
#44
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #44
For a 302 bottomend (not really discussed anymore) get AFR 165's over the 185's.

For a 347 the 185's would be nice. Just remember when purchasing the 185's for the temporary 302 bottomend watch out for piston to valve clearance problems being more of a potential.

When looking at rwhp numbers by certain combos, get all the details you can. Accessory removal or rotating weight lightened (aluminum flywheel for example) can produce more significant gains for sure. At that cost for a street car you potentially get a harder turning car (power steering removed)/the driver being uncomfortable (a/c removal)/more trouble passing smog (smog pump removal)/etc.
 

Lyncher

New Member
Jun 14, 2005
434
0
0
Jun 27, 2005
#45
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #45
5spd GT said:
For a 302 bottomend (not really discussed anymore) get AFR 165's over the 185's.

For a 347 the 185's would be nice. Just remember when purchasing the 185's for the temporary 302 bottomend watch out for piston to valve clearance problems being more of a potential.

When looking at rwhp numbers by certain combos, get all the details you can. Accessory removal or rotating weight lightened (aluminum flywheel for example) can produce more significant gains for sure. At that cost for a street car you potentially get a harder turning car (power steering removed)/the driver being uncomfortable (a/c removal)/more trouble passing smog (smog pump removal)/etc.
Click to expand...


ty...not quite sure waht you mean by the last few sentences...I definatly want to keep the power steering and a/c. The car is going to be a dd and it can get damn hot here during the summer!
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Jun 27, 2005
#46
  • Jun 27, 2005
  • #46
Lyncher said:
ty...not quite sure waht you mean by the last few sentences...I definatly want to keep the power steering and a/c. The car is going to be a dd and it can get damn hot here during the summer!
Click to expand...

Sorry I was confusing. In short I mean, if you see the rear wheel horsepower numbers being given to you to try to persuade you to get a certain kind of combo and the numbers seem a bit higher than the "normal". Check into it or ask and see if/what accessories where deleted off of the car. Power gains can be made by that...

I am with you...I keep my accessories. I would rather ride like that (comfort) then get a few more ponies

For example, the difference between a 300rwhp car and a 320rwhp car could be because the latter has the powersteering/air conditioning unit/smog pump deleted. And maybe more with an aluminum flywheel for example. I wouldn't get an aluminum flywheel to obtain those higher dyno numbers. You will want better driving characteristics (iron or billet steel flywheel). It may be a bit heavier but will provide you with better driving characteristics. When you remove accessories it removes the belt driven drag on the engine (more torque/horsepower is gained).

Just make sure you know what is in a combo your looking at when someone trys you to persuade you with a part to make more power. There is often more than one variable in the reason why one makes more power than another in a similar combo'd car.

That 320rwhp car maybe "faster" but you will be more comfortable in your still nice 300rwhp.

That may have confused you more...sorry
 

Lyncher

New Member
Jun 14, 2005
434
0
0
Jun 28, 2005
#47
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #47
Yeah im definatly going to look into everything I get. I am not gonna get something because one person tells me they had good results. I will base my decisions upon my opionion as well as the feedback and reviews I get from other people. I can see why people would remove a/c and that stuff for like a weekend and track car, cause you can choose to not drive it when its hot n stuff...but for a dd...u gotta have the ac and power steering!
 

Lyncher

New Member
Jun 14, 2005
434
0
0
Jun 28, 2005
#48
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #48
..and no it didnt confuse me more lol...it actually cleared it up!
 

89CopCoupe

Banned
Feb 17, 2004
606
0
0
Post Count City
Jun 28, 2005
#49
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #49
5spd GT said:
..... I am with you...I keep my accessories. I would rather ride like that (comfort) then get a few more ponies .....
Click to expand...

Not me, I like to be full throttle, sweating like a pig in stop-n-go traffic with a wife-beater on

Exactly, you can't beat a reliable dd with cool a/c and enough juice to still scratch a few gears when you want.
 
9

90Notch

Founding Member
Jan 31, 2002
1,046
0
0
Westwood, MA & yes it's killing me that I'm no
Jun 28, 2005
#50
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #50
"The 266 pulls to about 6K ... (like you said) it moves through the r's so fast that if it quits at 5500, I don't notice a great deal. Initially I had the 282 and swapped it due to an erratic idle issue that I knit-picked myself over. "

Was this is in 302 or 347, different animals. Had a friend that ran a 266 in a 347, on dyno made power to 5000 and cam spent three weeks in car before it was pulled for something larger. Street diven car and he hated the small powerband.

"notice the power falls on it's face at 5k due to the small intake."

382fwhp @5000, 399 fwhp @5500, 382fwhp @5000. Not soo sure it was that it's a small intake or the length or the small cam for that matter. Still pretty damn impressive #'s in my eyes.
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Jun 28, 2005
#51
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #51
90Notch said:
382fwhp @5000, 399 fwhp @5500, 382fwhp @5000. Not soo sure it was that it's a small intake or the length or the small cam for that matter. Still pretty damn impressive #'s in my eyes.
Click to expand...

These are not the numbers above though.
 
9

90Notch

Founding Member
Jan 31, 2002
1,046
0
0
Westwood, MA & yes it's killing me that I'm no
Jun 28, 2005
#52
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #52
No the numbers above are rwhp numbers notice the difference between running on an engine dyno and in a car with accessories and realistic exhaust...the point I'm making here. On engine dyno it was still holding its own upto 5500rpm where they shut it off.
 

89CopCoupe

Banned
Feb 17, 2004
606
0
0
Post Count City
Jun 28, 2005
#53
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #53
90Notch said:
....Was this is in 302 or 347, different animals. Had a friend that ran a 266 in a 347, on dyno made power to 5000 and cam spent three weeks in car before it was pulled for something larger. Street diven car and he hated the small powerband....
Click to expand...

It's in a 10.5:1 331, 1-5/8" & 2-1/2" exhaust, no a/c w/3.55s. Your friend might have different tastes
The cam does not provide a "small" powerband ... I can feel around 6 grand it's pretty much done though, but the thing pulls from about 1800 'til then and hard ... a lot harder 'down low (then the larger 282) I usually shift around 2700 while cruising and the pull (throttle response) below that is much better ... just my taste. Of course the 282 went better up top, but I prefer practical to a car that is always beckoning you to mash it, because down low isn't real grunty.
 

Scott_95GT

New Member
Oct 8, 2004
387
0
0
Sacramento
Jun 28, 2005
#54
  • Jun 28, 2005
  • #54
Heads: AFR 165's
Intake: Eddy Perf. / Gt-40
Cam: Custom w/matching rr's, springs

LT's, Bassani mid-pipe, dyno-tune.
 

PrimerdFury

New Member
Feb 26, 2003
139
0
0
Fountain Hills, Arizona
Jul 18, 2005
#55
  • Jul 18, 2005
  • #55
"For reference the AFR185 motor above that made 305rwtq @ 2250rpm made 400 fwhp on an engine dyno like this test then 275rwhp in the car with exhaust and access."

275rwhp seems horrible for an AFR185 headed 347...
 
I

IntenseBlue

Member
Jul 10, 2005
946
0
16
Jul 18, 2005
#56
  • Jul 18, 2005
  • #56
Everything sounds good but stay away from the BBK X. I'm not gonna say it's bad, but Bassani/Magnaflow would be better. I'm sure the performance is the same, but I've only heard negative stuff on them, especially soundwise.
 
D

Dohc32vMarkVIII

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
58
0
0
Jul 18, 2005
#57
  • Jul 18, 2005
  • #57
What are thumper ported heads?? Does someone here port out E7s and sell them?? This sounds perfect for my winter budget build.
 

_jb_

New Member
Mar 4, 2004
808
0
0
Michigan, Berrien County
Jul 19, 2005
#58
  • Jul 19, 2005
  • #58
IntenseBlue said:
Everything sounds good but stay away from the BBK X. I'm not gonna say it's bad, but Bassani/Magnaflow would be better. I'm sure the performance is the same, but I've only heard negative stuff on them, especially soundwise.
Click to expand...

You haven't looked at exhaust threads then.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
First Prev 3 of 3
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine Themostat
  • Mindseye007
  • Jan 30, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
775
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Feb 1, 2026
86HO5.0
8
4
Drivetrain Wilwood Clutch and Brake Pedal Combo Installation - Help
  • 427stang
  • Jul 8, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
0
Views
55
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 8, 2026
427stang
4
X
Engine Brackets for Gt40 heads with ac and ps?
  • Xavierg208
  • Nov 14, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
9
Views
394
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 16, 2025
limp
F
Best plugs for carb'd roller
  • forango
  • Nov 21, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
52
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 2, 2025
HotFox
H
Forced Induction On3 Turbo Kit- Parts list NEEDED - 302 Stock Motor
  • Hirothecool1
  • Feb 27, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 7, 2026
slow84lx
S
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?