Hey CMac89... heres your 747!

[Blown 91 Bird]

LOL. Heres a quick vid from when i had the old blower on my 94 GT... my buddy who was doing the video said it sounded like a 747 was taking off on the street Can kinda hear the blower screamin in the video.. but it was definetely alot louder in person!

http://s53.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0...C0LFS83IDEPUVM

[XR7 Dave]

Originally Posted by Blown 91 Bird

LOL. Heres a quick vid from when i had the old blower on my 94 GT... my buddy who was doing the video said it sounded like a 747 was taking off on the street Can kinda hear the blower screamin in the video.. but it was definetely alot louder in person!

http://s53.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0...C0LFS83IDEPUVM

pshaw, only 475rwhp? friggin weak for a V8.

[Blown 91 Bird]

Originally Posted by XR7 Dave

pshaw, only 475rwhp? friggin weak for a V8.

lol.. yep, only 476whp with a mild setup with a blower that most have a hard time making 400whp with

now it makes close to 600whp.. but i agree, thats still weak for a v8!

[CMac89]

That was cute, but wasn't no airplane...that was a weak Mustang...

Get a car with a motor that has good heads and you get this....

[dirtybird91]

Originally Posted by CMac89

that was a weak Mustang...

That was a weak Mustang huh? No, actually that was somone's hard earned effort that netted a power gain of nearly 300hp. LOL!
The firebird is impressive, but it damn sure has more displacement than a tiny 4.6L in comparison to a 5.7L. IT IS SUPPOSED TO MAKE MORE POWER!
Quit hating on Mustangs! Firebirds are nothing special. (Especially on a thunderbird forum.)
I think the Mustang was absolutely STUNNING for a 1994 and especially if it has stock heads!

[CMac89]

Originally Posted by dirtybird91

The firebird is impressive, but it damn sure has more displacement than a tiny 4.6L in comparison to a 5.7L. IT IS SUPPOSED TO MAKE MORE POWER!

The most illegitimate, ignorant, uneducated hypothesis EVER about an ls1 vs 4.6 or any other motor comparison. (even though that mustang was was a 306.) Cheby's 4.8 liter truck motors mops up all 4.6's. I can guarantee that I could EASILY get a 4.8 out of a truck and build it to rape every NA 4.6. All they is are mini ls1's.

HEAD FLOW is the main reason for ls1 making more power/potential than a 4.6/5.0. If cubic inches is the reason for making all the difference in the horsepower then why do the little 4.0 liter honda v8's in the indy cars make 750hp? Why do the 455's in the 75-76 Trans Am's make 210hp? Why do 454's in motorhomes make 290?

You have to match the head flow with the cubic inches to cut cylinder head flow choke at low rpms to make the HP. And since GM likes to make heads that do this and Ford doesn't then GM takes the cookies. If the 4.6's heads flow around 240 or so they would make about the same HP/potential to a certain point and then it would matter to CI, but not at this low of HP ratings.

By the way, 306 from 346 cubic inches isn't enough to have a 400rwhp interval is it?

[Blown 91 Bird]

you are also comparing my car which had a old technology blower that doesnt flow nearly the CFM that the turbo on that T/A does.

Like i said.. with my setup, i made the power most people with Paxton SN89/SN93/VR4's have a hard time making..on a stock tune with only 24* of total timing, on pumpgas. With more boost (which is when the VR4 actually wakes up)..im sure i could have dipped into the 500RWHP range. For only 8lbs of boost, the power produced was great..and the torque was even better. To boot my combo isnt really even a 'high power' making combo.. but it all works well together which is what building a motor to make good #'s is all about. (performer 6037 heads, performer RPM intake, f-cam at +2*).

posting that T/A vid was supose to put me down or something? If i post the vid of Dan Millen pegging the dyno making 1000+RWHP, it would show that the T/A didnt have nearly enough either to be a "747"






just a question, but do YOU have a street car that makes 600+hp?

[Blown 91 Bird]

Originally Posted by CMac89

Why do 454's in motorhomes make 290?

because they are torque motors. Have you ever seen the ports and chambers on a motorhome 454 head? You couldnt fit a golf ball in the ports!

[CMac89]

Originally Posted by Blown 91 Bird

because they are torque motors. Have you ever seen the ports and chambers on a motorhome 454 head? You couldnt fit a golf ball in the ports!

I know this, but it doesn't mean it's efficient. Obviously this was my point. The motorhome motors don't have good head flow, so it doesn't make much top end.

Whenever I said it was a weak Mustang I was playing jokes with you. I was just talking about 4.6 vs. ls1. Sorry if it came off of me the wrong way.

I drive the SuperStocker around and it makes about 720hp.

[Blown 91 Bird]

Originally Posted by CMac89

I know this, but it doesn't mean it's efficient. Obviously this was my point. The motorhome motors don't have good head flow, so it doesn't make much top end.

Whenever I said it was a weak Mustang I was playing jokes with you. I was just talking about 4.6 vs. ls1. Sorry if it came off of me the wrong way.

actually the heads flow just fine..its just the port and chamber design which make the heads work for what they are intended to do..make lots of torque!



no problem man. I know today those #'s are weak.. but if you knew anything about the old school paxton blowers (SN89, SN93, SN95, SN2000, VR4) you'd know there arent many people going beyond the 400RWHP mark with them.. which i did by 70+hp with a combo that is very simple and cheap. I also didnt have a 'typical' centrif blower power curve either. I made 400+whp for over 2000rpm and made 500+tq which most dont do! That torque made for burnin the tires through 3rd gear on 315/35/17 DR's a breeze! Hell today with it making just about 600 to the wheels with the new blower (14psi) and small shot (50 shot) its still a bit weak to me.. but at that power level you rarely find something roaming the streets that will walk away from it with ease.

[oldschoolmuscle]

kudo's for havin a mustang that can make decent power. cmac89 wasnt bashing you, i also get a little tired of the cid excuse, get a good set of heads and a custom ground blower cam not some abc cam from ford. and if your blower isnt up to par then go out and get a new one. I just about ready to build a 4.8 ls1 truck motor, instead of my 408. just to post every where that its possible to make awesome power with little cid, just look at 3liter v-10s in f1.

[dirtybird91]

Originally Posted by CMac89

The most illegitimate, ignorant, uneducated hypothesis EVER about an ls1 vs 4.6 or any other motor comparison.
HEAD FLOW is the main reason for ls1 making more power/potential than a 4.6/5.0.

I hope you don't believe this load of ****!! Fart and clear out your mind man! Ford could have easily made a mainstream engine to compete with anything Chevrolet can dream of with the 5.4L. If i'm so wrong then why the hell dosn't chevy use the wimpy @$$ 4.8L engine in the Camaro's and Trans Ams????? BECAUSE THEY WOULD GET OWNED THAT'S WHY!!!
You are pissing in the wind man and making no sence to me. There is no replacement for displacement OK! Go sell this crap to the Bowtie boys while I pick my nose!

[CMac89]

Originally Posted by Blown 91 Bird

actually the heads flow just fine..its just the port and chamber design which make the heads work for what they are intended to do..make lots of torque!.

Well, I know that 300cfm on a 454ci motor sets cylinder head choke at about 5500. My SS has 470ci the heads flow 330cfm and cylinder head choke is at 6200rpm.

It has a 4.21 stroke so All it makes is torque.

[oldschoolmuscle]

Originally Posted by dirtybird91

I hope you don't believe this load of horse S#!&!!! Fart and clear out your mind man! Ford could have easily made a mainstream engine to compete with anything Chevrolet can dream of with the 5.4L. If i'm so wrong then why the hell dosn't chevy use the wimpy @$$ 4.8L engine in the Camaro's and Trans Ams????? BECAUSE THEY WOULD GET OWNED THAT'S WHY!!!
You are pissing in the wind man and making no sence to me. There is no replacement for displacement OK! Go sell this crap to the Bowtie boys while I pick my nose!

Well, y in the wild wild world of sports would chevy put the smaller cid motors in there cars when then can run cleaner (EPA) get better mpg, and make more power more efficiently. I think you have 16 extra valves stuck up your ~~~. so go take a big ~~~~, and read some before making a ~~~ of yourself. any body can put a blower on a car and make 390hp on a 4valve motor.

[CMac89]

Originally Posted by dirtybird91

I hope you don't believe this load of horse S#!&!!! Fart and clear out your mind man! Ford could have easily made a mainstream engine to compete with anything Chevrolet can dream of with the 5.4L. If i'm so wrong then why the hell dosn't chevy use the wimpy @$$ 4.8L engine in the Camaro's and Trans Ams????? BECAUSE THEY WOULD GET OWNED THAT'S WHY!!!
You are pissing in the wind man and making no sence to me. There is no replacement for displacement OK! Go sell this crap to the Bowtie boys while I pick my nose!

Wow, nice reasoning (sarcasm). I like how you just make this statement without any type of reason at all. I can do it too. Chevy didn't put the 4.8 in there because, unlike Ford, they want to use something different and not put a 4.6 in EVERYTHING.

Ford can put as many valves as they want to in a head, it still doesn't matter because the head flow/potential is already there for an ls1. You want to bring in another motor that we weren't talking about then lets bring in the 6.0 liter (ls2) motor or the ls7. The ls7 heads flow 370cfm (2valves).

You got it wrong, i'm pissing with the wind on the 4.6. You can say what you say, but it is what it is.