What's more HP? H/C/I 5.0 or H/C/I 4.6 3V?

nidyanazo · Nov 17, 2006

Also posted at the corral-
Theoreticaly, (sp?) what should make more power, a h/c/i 302 pushrod motor, or a new 3 valve 4.6 with the same treatment. I'm going to say the 5.0, but the new modular motor may be more effecient-not volumetricaly, but the use of overhead cams and the other features to reduce internal friction and power loss.
A friend has heads cams and intake on an '06 gt, and I'm hoping to out power him with my 5.0. Trickflow intake, 70mm tb, 73mm maf, custom lunati cam, and pro topline 190cc alum heads l/t headers, u/d pullies, etc etc..I got n20 as a backup though. But I was wondering in general, is the 22cid extra displacment enough to make up for the 281's newer 3v/cyl technology?

:SNSign:

bryce93lx · Nov 17, 2006

the newer motor will make more power everytime, you know of course that the new v-6 is a 4.0 and has 240 horse more than any 5.0 offered in any fox car, so the replacement for displacment is technolgy or a turbo, in short you will lose

nidyanazo · Nov 17, 2006

I thought the v-6's had 210 hp

srothfuss · Nov 17, 2006

V-6 is 210 - I'm pretty sure of it.

If you did H/C/I on hte 3V motor you'd be pushing around 330 - 340 I would think. Their biggest restriction in the intake port so by opening that up.....

FastDriver · Nov 17, 2006

don't know why you think the newer tech is going to win every time. I'm sure you can build them fast, but stock '05-06 GTs run what, 13.8s? Big deal.

Remember, you don't have to outpower them, your car weighs a lot less.

I'd venture to say that a good h/c/i 302 will still outmuscle its non-DOHC counterparts (H/C/I). The technology is in the aftermarket, and the 302 still has the advantage there.

The question is, how far are you willing to go. A balls-to-the-walls H/C/I 302 solid-roller can make you well over 400 rwhp. If you really know what you're doing and you get premium parts, you can make 340+ rwhp from a mild street H/C/I. If you go the cheap route, you might only see 260.

The 3V motor is pretty strong, but it also has more mass to push around. You want to outrun it? Build it right.

Chris

Ps. this is a talk topic....moving

blackstang00 · Nov 17, 2006

the 6cyl is 210 h/p and 240 torq and weighs 3350 as per kbb. there is no way in hell it will even come close to a 5.0.even a fox gt will spank it.power to weight means alot.

building a 4.6 with h/c/i will prolly get about 320 -340 at the wheels but it still weighs 3500lbs.ur talking a 550- to 600 weight diff. the 5.0 will prolly get about 260 to 290 then add exhaust and other bolt ons.call it 290 and with a hatch weighing 2827 with an average weight driver will prolly be 3000lbs.it will beat the 05- 07 gt,but it will be close. 4.6 compared to 5.0. more displacement = more power (.)

nidyanazo · Nov 17, 2006

See, now why is it that a h/c/i 5.0 will make on avrage (hydrolic roller cam, twisted wedge/afr 165's etc) with popular heads and cam/intake choices around 300rwhp, but the 05-07 gt's will do 330-340rwhp? I don't get it....

I'm not worried about this car, just brought my personal situation into the topic for something to campare to, I have a ~8-900lb weight advantage, full drag suspension and nitrous so....shouldnt be a problem.....

Modular2v · Nov 17, 2006

bryce93lx said:
the newer motor will make more power everytime, you know of course that the new v-6 is a 4.0 and has 240 horse more than any 5.0 offered in any fox car, so the replacement for displacment is technolgy or a turbo, in short you will lose

This statement could not be any more false!!!!! And good luck finding a h/c/i package for a 3v 4.6!

nidyanazo · Nov 17, 2006

I don't know if it's a "package deal" like the trickflow top end kit for example, but this dude def. does have heads, cams and intake on his '06gt. His name is jordan and he started the board sbstangs.com I'll see if I can get more info...

grey5.0beast · Nov 17, 2006

I bet he has heads, cams and an intake

nidyanazo · Nov 17, 2006

Haha you know what I mean "aftermarket" h/c/i....

blackstang00 · Nov 18, 2006

nidyanazo said:
See, now why is it that a h/c/i 5.0 will make on avrage (hydrolic roller cam, twisted wedge/afr 165's etc) with popular heads and cam/intake choices around 300rwhp, but the 05-07 gt's will do 330-340rwhp? I don't get it....

I'm not worried about this car, just brought my personal situation into the topic for something to campare to, I have a ~8-900lb weight advantage, full drag suspension and nitrous so....shouldnt be a problem.....

thats b/c to start out with the new ones have 300 h/p to begin with. besides u can come close to that 330-340 rwl power with better flowing heads than 165's. i wouldn't waist my time or money on 165's. sorry to those who have them. u could do 195's and still be smog legal.that would put u at about 300-310 at the wheels in a 5.0. that will smoke an 05-07 gt when u figure the weight diff between the two cars. lets take what i have for example. 1990. in 3 1/2 years it will be an antique and in,well atleast my state, i won't have to bring it through state inspection anymore. at wich point i would throw 205 heads on her and have the pistons notched. now ur talkin prolly an extra 15-25 h/p. so then u would be at 330 or so. but instead of waitng for 3 some years. do the h/c/i and through 9 lbs of boost and u'll be runnin atleast 400 at the wheel all day long in a 2800 lb monster.

Maryland Stang · Nov 18, 2006

blackstang00 said:
building a 4.6 with h/c/i will prolly get about 320 -340 at the wheels but it still weighs 3500lbs.ur talking a 550- to 600 weight diff. the 5.0 will prolly get about 260 to 290 then add exhaust and other bolt ons.call it 290 and with a hatch weighing 2827...

I'm not sure where you get you weight stats from for the foxes but you're about 400+/- pounds low. I've been reading these and other Mustang boards for 4 years now and most GTs come in around 3250ish stock, LX hatches are around 3200 stock and the notches are around 3100. I had my LX hatch scaled on a certified scale and even with some weight reduction (removed AC etc.) it still scaled at 3180 pounds.

I looked round and round last spring trying to find a truely lightweight (under 3,000) stock Ford and about the only cars I could find were early 70s Pintos and Mustang IIs. The only reason they were lightweight was because they had 4 cylinder engines, light trannies and rears. By the time you ungraded these lightweight cars to V-8 specs they were just as heavy as a Fox.

nidyanazo · Nov 18, 2006

Here are the weight specs for 1986 fox's.
I have them for all years, so if you're interested ina specific one let me know.

notch lx 2,601lbs
hatch lx 2,661lbs
vert lx 2,908lbs
hatch gt 2,976lbs
vert gt 3,101lbs

now check out the 1984 weights:

hardtop l 2,538lbs
hatch l 2,584lbs
notch lx 2,559lbs
hatch lx 2,605lbs
vert lx 2,873lbs
hatch gt 2,753lbs
vert gt 2,921lbs

poneypower89 · Nov 18, 2006

nidyanazo said:
Here are the weight specs for 1986 fox's.
I have them for all years, so if you're interested ina specific one let me know.

notch lx 2,601lbs
hatch lx 2,661lbs
vert lx 2,908lbs
hatch gt 2,976lbs
vert gt 3,101lbs

now check out the 1984 weights:

hardtop l 2,538lbs
hatch l 2,584lbs
notch lx 2,559lbs
hatch lx 2,605lbs
vert lx 2,873lbs
hatch gt 2,753lbs
vert gt 2,921lbs

those are all so very very very very LOW.

If you take a stock mustang and put it on the scale you will never see any of those numbers.

perhapes they were taken from completely BONE DRY builds.

no gas, no oil, no washer fluid, no antifreeze, no tranny fluid, etc.

blackstang00 · Nov 18, 2006

Maryland Stang said:
I'm not sure where you get you weight stats from for the foxes but you're about 400+/- pounds low. I've been reading these and other Mustang boards for 4 years now and most GTs come in around 3250ish stock, LX hatches are around 3200 stock and the notches are around 3100. I had my LX hatch scaled on a certified scale and even with some weight reduction (removed AC etc.) it still scaled at 3180 pounds.

I looked round and round last spring trying to find a truely lightweight (under 3,000) stock Ford and about the only cars I could find were early 70s Pintos and Mustang IIs. The only reason they were lightweight was because they had 4 cylinder engines, light trannies and rears. By the time you ungraded these lightweight cars to V-8 specs they were just as heavy as a Fox.

i got those from edmunds.com

and i never heard of a fox lx,hatch or notch coming any where near 3100.unless it was a gt or worse a gt conv.
u must be fat.

also when u weigh a car on a scale u should have it as close to race weight as poss.i.e. no spare or jack and about 1/4 tank of gas. what did u do when u had urs weighed. the foxes are much lighter than u think. especially compared to the 1999 - 07 models.

poneypower89 · Nov 18, 2006

wow, some dreamers in here

Maryland Stang · Nov 18, 2006

blackstang00 said:
i got those from edmunds.com

and i never heard of a fox lx,hatch or notch coming any where near 3100.unless it was a gt or worse a gt conv.
u must be fat.
also when u weigh a car on a scale u should have it as close to race weight as poss.i.e. no spare or jack and about 1/4 tank of gas. what did u do when u had urs weighed. the foxes are much lighter than u think. especially compared to the 1999 - 07 models.

I wasn't in the car, it had a full tank of gas (subtract 50 pounds for 3/4 tank of gas) and the spare (40 pounds). We're still at 3090 pounds. What I was telling you is what I have read posted by the members of various Mustang boards and what I know my LX weighs. Here's a website to back up what I have read...

http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/history_50vs46.htm

A lot of the curb weight figures I'm seeing couldn't be more wrong if they tried. For example I'm seeing a lot of 3,300 pound numbers for the V-8 S-197. It is well known and even acknowledged by Ford that the S-197 weighs in excess of 3500 pounds.

blackstang00 · Nov 18, 2006

Maryland Stang said:
I wasn't in the car, it had a full tank of gas (subtract 50 pounds for 3/4 tank of gas) and the spare (40 pounds). We're still at 3090 pounds. What I was telling you is what I have read posted by the members of various Mustang boards and what I know my LX weighs. Here's a website to back up what I have read...

http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/history_50vs46.htm

A lot of the curb weight figures I'm seeing couldn't be more wrong if they tried. For example I'm seeing a lot of 3,300 pound numbers for the V-8 S-197. It is well known and even acknowledged by Ford that the S-197 weighs in excess of 3500 pounds.

well i'm from jersey.the other show me state. i can't see how a car that is 3.5" shorter in width and 2.4" in wheel base only going to be,to hear u say it;i150 lbs leighter than say a 2002 gt.the math won't support it. oh and btw.
15.4 gal tank is what we have in our foxes. that is a total of 123.2lbs. so its 92.4lbs for a 3/4 tank.so now u can subtract 92 for 3/4 of a tank and ur 40lbs for the spare and guess what? 2958. i don't care what u've read. its about what is real and the math to back it up. we all know that the new gt weight rating is b/s. when i looked a kbb and saw that,i almost puked. for one thing that car is on the lincoln ls frame. there is no way that the ls is anywere near 33oolbs. the gt is alot closer to the 3700 mark than they want u know. why? b/c 300 in a 3700lb sled is an obimnation to performance. make sure before u go up against someone u have all ur facts.b/c i'm afraid u lost this one bro...

Aliate X · Nov 18, 2006

If you can hook up, you will kill him from a dig every time. Roll is his territory. Pushrods make more torque at much less rpms.

What's more HP? H/C/I 5.0 or H/C/I 4.6 3V?

Banned

Member

Banned

Last night I stabbed the same guy 7 times in a row

I was uncomfortably high & wearing a helmet

New Member

Banned

Banned

Cookies should never be DUNKED!!!

Banned

New Member

Active Member

Banned

Now everyone in the world will know I wanna bang t

New Member

Now everyone in the world will know I wanna bang t

Active Member

New Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency