Livernois Motorsports gets 415 RWHP / 399 RWTQ in the new 5.0!

[nmcgrawj]

Yeah, it's going to be like a brand new car. I think he's got like $10K in paint and body work. $1000 in seats, $2K in the cage, $3K in replacing all the rubber and trim, etc. But the turbo is the majority of that money. It was a Pro Turbo kit, which was like $9K at the time, for a 302 that was then recut for a 351. There is no such thing as a $500 turbo kit that runs 9s. You might have got the turbo for $500. But then there is plumbing, fuel pumps, engine management, engine mods, boost controllers, blow off valves, should I go on? A quality turbo kit is at least $4K. Now start adding up the rest of the stuff. A fuel system, a computer mod, it goes on.

The only thing I like about the GTO is the styling. The interior is mediocre. The seats aren't very comfortable on long rides. The seats in my Mustang are much better. If you are into that sort of thing, you can pick up a GTO dirt cheap. They are virtually worthless.

Kurt

Its absolutely hilarious sometimes on message forums....i think guys read what they want to be written. Im 100% positive i said $500 TURBO .

Plumbing and a boost controller are the only "turbo specific" mods. How do you say "turbos are retarded expensive" but then list mods that a supercharger needs....that a n/a motor needs? Is there a secret that i dont know about where high hp n/a motors and supercharged motors are using stock computers/fuel pumps/engine parts?

I can understand if you are talking about ON3 turbo kits...or generic ebay turbo kits...but you act like every homemade kit is trash. Rio95 (or is it 95rio) built his piping and looks damn good. If anything turbos have the chance to be the cheapest option depending on the owners skills. You cant build parts for a high hp n/a motor....you simply have to buy them. I've never seen a supercharger that was cheaper than a turbo head unit....and even on some superchargers you have cold side piping. You just cant make blanket statements like that because you cant back it up...its too easily proven wrong.

Making ANY high HP motor is expensive. Unless u can show me a way to make the same hp for less with a different technique?




And what do you consider "dirt cheap"? Seats for you probably arent the best for seats for me...so that doesnt apply. If it depends on your body/shape/height/physical condition than there is no point in comparing opinions. Please tell me what car has better than a "mediocre" interior? I already know it wont be a mustang....camaro.....or any chrysler product. Im not saying the GTO has the greatest interior of all time....im simply saying that its build quality is greater than the camaro and mustang.....its "competitors". If you prefer the styling of an oversized cavalier thats great....but i think the general consensus is that the styling sucks for what the car represents. It doesnt match the GTO name.



Anywho, everyone has their opinion....thats what makes this hobby so great

 

[nmcgrawj]

Don't look NOW, but it was YOU who said 10 Mustangs, sir laughsalot... But doesn't know why.

Yes, we see your point... Have you ever actually had a Mustang? You can't seem to not beg a way to knock them. My point was simpler still... While its "only" a Mustang, it outperforms most vehicles and while you could get a Corvette for 40K... It's going to be used. Meanwhile, you can get a brand new Mustang GT convertible for less than 40K, not to mention the standard GT for about 30K...

Ford isn't trying to change the basic premise of the Mustang, our government is and has. Ford is working with what they have and, what they have, is the BEST overall pony car ever. No, it's not a Corvette, but then, Corvette's don't seat 4. On the other hand, the Mustang GT is quite comparable in performance to the standard Corvette in daily use terms.

If this is stupid to begin with, why did you bring it back up? Hindsight, anyone?

Perhaps you think your house is a status symbol, I don't. Nor is my vehicle.

I haven't had a Mustang as long as I've been driving, just since June of 1986. I've never owned a Benz, but I've driven more than a couple. They're well appointed and comfortable, yet very much overpriced, which is why I'll never own one. Well, that and I honestly don't find them to be a bit better built than the average Ford.

PS Ford build quality has been rated higher than GM for a very long time. Yes, the GTO, made in Australia, is a nice car, but it's not better built than a Ford in general, just better than most other GM's. If they were built so well and not overpriced, why is GM removing the Pontiac moniker? Did you ever check the price of a new 2004-06 GTO? There's a reason they only made so many... I guess the quality was too good for the price...

Two GM's and a Mercedes Benz... and look what we're comparing them to... the "cheap" Mustang... Which costs less than any of the three in new sticker pricing, including the one which hasn't been offered for nearly 4yrs. :Zip2:

You're right i did say 10 mustangs...brain fart.


My entire comparison is what the general public does....status symbols are beyond just $150k cars. You personally might not care about your house or car....but i have to say u are in the minority. Thats cool though.

The mustang seats 4 what? lol. I know its not 4 adults. Thats one thing the GTO is great at (and it pays for it on the scale) is seating 4 adults. The mustang is nothing more than 2 adults and 2 kids in the back....or 2 adults and 1 adult across the seats in the back. Yes 4 are possible....but its not highly advised to do so.

Im not comparing ford quality to gm quality. I simply said the build quality of the GTO is better than the mustang. Cool?


A mustang gt has no place being compared to a vette. Not today. Not tomorrow. Keep it with the camaro....the comparison works out much better for Ford.

At the end of the day its all personal preference. You might think its a great deal paying $40k for a new mustang. I'd never do that . Its cool to agree to disagree.


PS- Were u really asking if i have owned a mustang? That line in bold confused me :headscratch: Not begging to knock them....surely dont have to be all happy in the pants about the car though. The best combo in my opinion is still a mustang body with a LSX motor. I'll be a mustang fan boy when ford gets over this retro styling.

 

[revhead347]

Yeah, I get what you're saying, all high hp engines are expensive. Turbo setups do tend to cost more vs nitrous setups. The injector requirement is a little higher, and the fuel pressure. Engine management demands are a little higher too. There is nothing wrong with homemade turbo kits. Just that most people don't have the tools and the know how to make them, so it ends up costing more than just buying a kit.

I agree, there is no comparison between a Mustang and a Vette.

Kurt

 

[nmcgrawj]

My bad kurt, i did completely forget about nitrous. That is definitely the cheapest option...outside of the refills which would add up over the years.....if u used it that long lol.

 

[Pokageek]

I personally Like the GTO's and the interior. I also like the 05+ mustangs totally. I like them better than the new mustangs (2011) looks hands down. They look so much more retro to me. I figure the power is to be gotten from any of these engines, so it comes down to looks and drive at this point.

 

[revhead347]

My bad kurt, i did completely forget about nitrous. That is definitely the cheapest option...outside of the refills which would add up over the years.....if u used it that long lol.

I've found that if you have enough motor it doesn't add up. I have enough power to break the tires lose on motor. So the nitrous is just for the track. And sometimes I go and don't spray. I think in 10 years I may have filled up that bottle 10 times. If you are putting a nitrous kit on a stock car, it would get expensive though.

Kurt

 

[Gearbanger 101]

I guess I'm just used to seeing 300rwhp sn95's run 12s that 380rwhp should be faster if it really weighed the same as our cars :dunno:

Maybe the mph shows the power tho? Although being a second slower than a 03/04 cobra stat has me scratching my head.

Meh, its all realative. I've seen 300rwhp SN95's run high-12's on occasion, but most are still running low-13's at any track I've been to. The 2011 on the other hand has run 12.3X in stock trim with traction and some skill....which is relavent to its power output and weight.

the american muscle '11 launching off the idle was putting down 13.0s directly from the factory. They tried launching it at 4k but it just spun and was worse. still pretty impressive. This was at maple grove two fridays ago.

That car is an automatic from what I remember. The manuals seem to be considerably quicker.

 

[fivepointNO]

My entire comparison is what the general public does....status symbols are beyond just $150k cars. You personally might not care about your house or car....but i have to say u are in the minority. Thats cool though.

The automotive magazine world compares the Mustang to Corvette. Most people, not given the idea, would never really pose the comparison beyond the seating capacity and the simple realization one is a true sports car and the other is not. Status symbols less than 150K are common, but even a home, at 150K, can look really nice. That said, people who care about their home need not spend hundreds of thousands on the initial purchase. The same applies to a car. Just because you care about your car doesn't mean you have to spend several times what a car costs. I could purchase the least expensive car made and still care about it. Nothing to do with cost or symbolism.

The mustang seats 4 what? lol. I know its not 4 adults. Thats one thing the GTO is great at (and it pays for it on the scale) is seating 4 adults. The mustang is nothing more than 2 adults and 2 kids in the back....or 2 adults and 1 adult across the seats in the back. Yes 4 are possible....but its not highly advised to do so.

I never said 4 comfortable adults, just 4 people... If your goal is to move 4 people 100 miles in 2 hours in a fairly economical manner, would you choose to do that in a Corvette or a Mustang? See the point? That said, how comfy would those 4 adults be in the Corvette all at once? My bet is, much less comfy than those in a Mustang. Sure you could get a used GTO and have 4 more comfortable people.

Then again, you could also get a used Mercury Marauder and they'd be more comfy still... at about the price of the GTO, which cost as much(more really) in base form in 2004,5 and 6 than a 2011 Mustang GT costs today. Does the GTO perform better than the Mustang GT? No, indeed the opposite is obvious. The GTO does better than the Marauder though...

Im not comparing ford quality to gm quality. I simply said the build quality of the GTO is better than the mustang. Cool?

How can you say that? The GTO is(was) built by GM... The Mustang is built by Ford. Saying that the quality of the GTO is better than the Mustang is a direct comparison, not just some generalization. It pits one car against the other specifically in quality. How could it not be viewed as a comparison when it clearly is. For the record, having been inside both I can say, I definitely like the GTO. In fact, I prefer the layout for comfort. I don't base "build quality" on comfort alone and overall, it seems not one bit better in quality than the Mustang. To me, comfort has little to do with quality and much to do with size and layout.

Get out and take a look around each. Can you see obvious advantages in the GTO for fit and finish? I can't. When you get inside, the GTO looks more "plush" and feels nice, thanks in large part to room. Will it outlast the Mustang? No, it doesn't seem to do that. Ford quality in general is, even though GM picked up the ball in the 90's, better than that of GM based on countless comparisons over the past 30yrs(before which each was bad throughout the 70's).

A mustang gt has no place being compared to a vette. Not today. Not tomorrow. Keep it with the camaro....the comparison works out much better for Ford.

True. Since the Camaro was designed to be direct competition and the Corvette was and is Chevrolet's "flagship" car, which the Mustang never has been for Ford, it only makes sense.

At the end of the day its all personal preference. You might think its a great deal paying $40k for a new mustang. I'd never do that . Its cool to agree to disagree.

For the person making a purchase, that along with practicality is really all it comes down to ultimately. Is the car worth the money to him/her... I not only don't think 40K is a great deal on the Mustang GT, I believe anyone foolish enough to pay that deserves the ripoff they get.

I don't even want it at the 30K price, where it starts. The fact is, for 40K, you can have a well equipped convertible GT and you need not spend within 8 thousand of that for a well equipped GT. Excluding TTL, you can purchase a Mustang GT with the Brembo brake package for under $32,000 including destination AT STICKER PRICE... 40K is the running internet joke in my book, considering Ford advertises the real pricing at far less even without haggling or incentives.

PS- Were u really asking if i have owned a mustang? That line in bold confused me :headscratch: Not begging to knock them....surely dont have to be all happy in the pants about the car though.

It seemed you were being very sarcastic, so I was.

The best combo in my opinion is still a mustang body with a LSX motor. I'll be a mustang fan boy when ford gets over this retro styling.

Since Ford doesn't offer a Mustang with any LSx engine, that combo is not in question. You may as well say the Camaro would be better if they used "Brand X" body with their own engine. They don't, that's that.

All indications are, aside from the ACTUAL "LSX block" GM has no overall advantage over the Modular Ford builds. The real LSX is a race block, not used in any production vehicle.

I'd prefer a Mustang with the 351W based engine, at 408ci, aluminum block with all forged components, I-beam rods and 9:1 compression with TFS Twisted Wedge R heads, a Spyder intake and an electric water pump... They don't make it... That's up to us if we really want it, regardless the cost.

As for the retro styling, it isn't for everyone, same as with the Camaro... But Mustangs and Camaros are selling like hotcakes to an early morning construction crew! I haven't seen the latest numbers, but I suspect the 2011 GT is already outselling the Camaro, along with the other competition it's been outselling forever. The 2010 Camaro outsold the Mustang for 2010(and possibly 2009)... with retro styling.

Thanks to companies like Livernois Motorsports, the Mustang is only getting better in performance. Thanks to Ford, it's already the best in class. One need not be a fan boy to see these realities. I have NO intentions of owning a new Mustang GT, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great car any more than it means it's under priced.

Fun conversation... Seriously.

 

[nmcgrawj]

Holy post/multiquote batman!




Where do i start here...

The automotive magazine world compares the Mustang to Corvette. Most people, not given the idea, would never really pose the comparison beyond the seating capacity and the simple realization one is a true sports car and the other is not. Status symbols less than 150K are common, but even a home, at 150K, can look really nice. That said, people who care about their home need not spend hundreds of thousands on the initial purchase. The same applies to a car. Just because you care about your car doesn't mean you have to spend several times what a car costs. I could purchase the least expensive car made and still care about it. Nothing to do with cost or symbolism.

My basic point was status symbols are relative. Status symbols arent just for millionaires in 150k cars. Middle class people have and care about status symbols. My point was that we all arent driving/wearing/etc the cheapest stuff. So if you have the money for a $100k+ car...why not get it if thats your "thing". Every car is over priced in its own way.

I never said 4 comfortable adults, just 4 people... If your goal is to move 4 people 100 miles in 2 hours in a fairly economical manner, would you choose to do that in a Corvette or a Mustang? See the point? That said, how comfy would those 4 adults be in the Corvette all at once? My bet is, much less comfy than those in a Mustang. Sure you could get a used GTO and have 4 more comfortable people.

Then again, you could also get a used Mercury Marauder and they'd be more comfy still... at about the price of the GTO, which cost as much(more really) in base form in 2004,5 and 6 than a 2011 Mustang GT costs today. Does the GTO perform better than the Mustang GT? No, indeed the opposite is obvious. The GTO does better than the Marauder though...

I think the corvette comparisons come because the corvette is the "bar" people compare things to with american sports cars. But on a car site...we know better than to honestly try to compare a vette vers a mustang gt. Atleast respect GM enough to throw up the top of the line mustang

I love marauders....and at the same time i hate them lol. But you're getting into 4dr territory...so at that point, give me a G8. Or a taurus sho. Over a mustang GT.

How can you say that? The GTO is(was) built by GM... The Mustang is built by Ford. Saying that the quality of the GTO is better than the Mustang is a direct comparison, not just some generalization. It pits one car against the other specifically in quality. How could it not be viewed as a comparison when it clearly is. For the record, having been inside both I can say, I definitely like the GTO. In fact, I prefer the layout for comfort. I don't base "build quality" on comfort alone and overall, it seems not one bit better in quality than the Mustang. To me, comfort has little to do with quality and much to do with size and layout.

Get out and take a look around each. Can you see obvious advantages in the GTO for fit and finish? I can't. When you get inside, the GTO looks more "plush" and feels nice, thanks in large part to room. Will it outlast the Mustang? No, it doesn't seem to do that. Ford quality in general is, even though GM picked up the ball in the 90's, better than that of GM based on countless comparisons over the past 30yrs(before which each was bad throughout the 70's).

I can say that because im not trying to compare the GM line up vs. Ford. Im just comparing the 2 cars. Im much more impressed by the GTO than the 05-09 (and previous year mustangs) when i look at the interior. The panels, the stitching...all look better to me. Just 1 man's opinion.

We dont have enough data to show which will outlast due to the big 3 stepping up their quality in the recent years. But if u mean simply outsell like ford did the f body in the 90s....then i hope ford knows what they are doing with these expensive mustangs. Maybe we just need to accept the fact that cars are more expensive and the "cheap stang" days are over. Its just weird though

Since Ford doesn't offer a Mustang with any LSx engine, that combo is not in question. You may as well say the Camaro would be better if they used "Brand X" body with their own engine. They don't, that's that.

Except the wonderful aftermarket of the mustang has a huge following for the LSX swaps that make it almost a drop in deal. Its because you can spend less money than it takes to buy an old explorer 5.0 motor with gt40p heads, buy a lsx from the junkyard and be in the neighborhood of 400rwhp. And thats with the "dirt cheap" lsx motors.

All indications are, aside from the ACTUAL "LSX block" GM has no overall advantage over the Modular Ford builds. The real LSX is a race block, not used in any production vehicle.

Well im a noob in the modular world, but GM's factory cylinder heads = fords aftermarket

I'd prefer a Mustang with the 351W based engine, at 408ci, aluminum block with all forged components, I-beam rods and 9:1 compression with TFS Twisted Wedge R heads, a Spyder intake and an electric water pump... They don't make it... That's up to us if we really want it, regardless the cost.

And show me the build cost on that lol....which is exactly why the LSX swap is so popular. You get all of that, including the aluminum block, for the same price as a "basic" 351w build. (minus the forged components)


If only i could call an engine builder and say "hey, i want this that and this...regardless of the cost"

As for the retro styling, it isn't for everyone, same as with the Camaro... But Mustangs and Camaros are selling like hotcakes to an early morning construction crew! I haven't seen the latest numbers, but I suspect the 2011 GT is already outselling the Camaro, along with the other competition it's been outselling forever. The 2010 Camaro outsold the Mustang for 2010(and possibly 2009)... with retro styling.

Thanks to companies like Livernois Motorsports, the Mustang is only getting better in performance. Thanks to Ford, it's already the best in class. One need not be a fan boy to see these realities. I have NO intentions of owning a new Mustang GT, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great car any more than it means it's under priced.

Fun conversation... Seriously.

The camaro had the hype from being on a hiatus for 8 years. I'd like to see the numbers say in 2014....to see if they are still pushing units like the are now.

And dont get me wrong, the mustang is a great car. Just like the taurus sho is a great car. Its just we have to get used to these price tags and understand that the big 3 are building quality cars. We are trained to think....ok $40k and up, im getting something foreign...something with a little luxury. I know the value in the taurus sho....and even i have to remind myself that the $40k is worth it. taurus and 40k just dont match. Mustang GT and 40k dont match. Mustang cobra or shelby for $40k would be ok...."naturally".


Im patiently waiting to see what the mustang will be in 2015.

 

[fivepointNO]

My basic point was status symbols are relative. Status symbols arent just for millionaires in 150k cars. Middle class people have and care about status symbols. My point was that we all arent driving/wearing/etc the cheapest stuff. So if you have the money for a $100k+ car...why not get it if thats your "thing". Every car is over priced in its own way.

I suppose they're relative... but I think only to those who can afford the high end. To everyone who can't, they're not at all relative. That's why they're called "status symbol," no?? Anyway, rather than responding to the rest... even though I typed it all... we've hi-jacked the thread enough and we're not really in disagreement on this stuff so I'll let it go.

I'm still happily surprised to see the new Mustang responding so well to "simple" changes to the tune and bolt on parts... It makes me think anyone paying 30K for this car is EASILY going to be able to see smiles for years to come.

Over on LS1tech, there are still guys claiming that there's NO WAY anyone will make 400+hp with this new 5.0L using just bolt-on parts... It's THAT serious to some, to the point it's already done and they're still claiming it cannot happen... Sad, really. There have even been tuners posting results for all to see and STILL, the comments roll in... That said, most people over their are absolutely level-headed about it. Now if only we could get through to the handful of morons...

Oh... 1 more thing... The LS series has proven no more capable than the 4.6L 4V or the 351W so, for me, there's simply no consideration to go through the hassle required for that swap. When I see an LS powered Camaro using any version short of the actual LSX block, actually posting 6.40's or quicker on the 1/4 mile... I still won't make the change. I'll be happy for them though. Until then, the 4.6, 5.4, 351W and now the 5.0L are better in my book. Aside from the 5.0, all the others have seen better performance than any LSx Camaro I'm aware of... I suspect it will stay that way forever, honestly. At that range, it hardly matters. For 4K I can build a 351W to compete with basically and street car I'll ever come across at the track.

Tuners like the aforementioned, Livernois... will have a 5.0L car into the 8's by the end of the year... I HAD said 9's, but that's done. I said 8's by next yr, but I'm now convinced it will happen this yr. If they go "all out" on one, I think 7's might happen THIS YEAR... Maybe even 6's, but that's truly pushing the barriers... Take care.

 

[nmcgrawj]

Ha yes sir it's officially hijacked. Bit now a days....any traffic through this section of Stang net is good traffic.


In terms of lsx vs 351w and 4.6 dohc.....it depends on where u r starting. It takes a lot of money to make a 351 compete with a stock lsx + a cam. So if u are starting from scratch either route will bring upon necessary changes to the car. And 4.6s are great if u want to be blown....but if not...


Even then....the lsx package is smaller than the 351w. It has all the cubes of a 351 with the size of a 302. Which means it's half the physical size of a dohc



It's all just personal preference and what your wallet wants to do. With enough cash....anything is fast.

 

[fivepointNO]

Honestly, I don't feel the LS series is the best choice for ANY FOX body or 94/95 Mustang. I've seen some, but realistically, they're not showing us anything people didn't do with a FOX years ago using Ford power and the swap cost much more because so many additional changes are needed.

The LS series has clear advantages over the 4.6 4V in N/A form. Beyond that, all is lost. Sure, they can and do perform, but all out vs all out, you're not building either for just a little and the Ford engines have proven, so far, to be the better choice for drag racing.

I think it was a 5.4L, but didn't someone go 9.20's with a Modular some time ago, N/A? Not the best ever, but gettin' it done. Speaking of that, I'm wondering how long it will be till someone breaks out a 2V 6.2L Ford engine in a Mustang... I'd rather 4, but hey... That will be a GREAT indicator as to what a matched size Ford "Modular" can do vs. the LS pushrod engine. It will also indicate what differences we may see with a 4V version.

To each his own. The LS is a great engine. For me though, there's just no chance I'm purposely seeking to swap into LS power unless I have some specific goal in mind, like WANTING just to use the LS engine for whatever reason. Swap kits may be cheap, but ultimately, they just never include every needed item, not even for Ford engines. You'll always have to get something not included in a kit or sacrificing somewhere else along the way.

When I see an LS swap that runs as well as 351 or 4.6L DOHC power on the drag strip, I'll not only be surprised, but I'll quickly offer congratulations and try to learn what was done. With a 351W based engine(my choice) I know what I've got and what it takes to do the swap. Plus, I know Ford offered all the pieces I needed along the way and that the 351 can really crank it up.

So far, on the drag strip, the quickest "LS" cars I've seen are actually iron blocks (LQ) and even those aren't beating the quickest Mustangs out there even in Camaro's. That car ran 6.8's and that's outstanding... But 4.6 DOHC cars have gone quicker than 6.5's and 5.4's have apparently reached 6.19... That's a BIG power difference. The LS engine also had twin turbos and I've seen quicker Ford's using only 1, which simply isn't as good as 2.

There's already a 5.0 DOHC project car too... FOX BODY... I'm betting on 11's in basic form with little more than a flash and slicks beyond general FOX chassis/suspension upgrades and, when built like the EVO car, mid 10's N/A. I'm also betting we start seeing plenty of these in the near future once that one(or whichever is 1st) makes a few passes. That type of build can surely make some heads turn.

All said, I'm still one to keep factory engines under hood... If I'm building an F-body, you BET my choice will be LS based. Just the same, I'll choose Ford power for my Fords. I know a knucklehead who's planning to swap to a Cummins in his F-350... which came with a 7.3L PowerStroke... Not me. Can't see removing one of the best rated engines ever just to have a Cummins.

 

[ProKiller]

anybody have a cliffs note of the last 10 posts? i'm so not reading all that....

 

[fivepointNO]

anybody have a cliffs note of the last 10 posts? i'm so not reading all that....

Which is your better choice?

351W, 4.6 4V, LS ...all in a Mustang... That's about it.

 

[nmcgrawj]

lol exactly. You didnt miss much by not reading. Just fivepointNO(by the way whats your name?) and I entertaining ourselves going back and forth

I vote for a 351w or a LSX.


And the LSX is only a "equal" option $ wise with someone who is going to buy a k-member/engine management/etc. Most "built" cars buy what is necessary to swap it in....so really there is no extra cost compared to staying with ford. Especially if you have a 96-04 cause then you dont need a new k-member. Only thing is if you are a "ford in ford, gm in gm" kinda guy.


More than 1 way to skin a cat!

 

[revhead347]

Well im a noob in the modular world, but GM's factory cylinder heads = fords aftermarket

Actually the 32 valve Cobra heads WAAAAY outflow factory GM heads. Factory Cobra heads flow like 310 cfms. The power difference has very little to do with the heads.

Kurt

 

[nmcgrawj]

Actually the 32 valve Cobra heads WAAAAY outflow factory GM heads. Factory Cobra heads flow like 310 cfms. The power difference has very little to do with the heads.

Kurt

Try again Kurt. Your math is off sir....the cobra heads arent "waaaaaay" outflowing anything. As a matter of fact....they are behind just like every 302/351w head

Anyway, my comparison was mainly based off of 302/351w heads since i wouldnt compare a 4.6 dohc to a LSX unless we are talking forced induction...and at that point the flow of heads isnt as critical.

News to me that killer heads dont make power


Just for good measure....factory L92 heads:
4.030” test bore
Lift ___.100 _.150_.200_.250_.300 _.350 _.400 _.450 _.500 _.550 _.600 _.650_.700_.750
#1 Int. 74.9 109.4 154.4 193.5 225.3 252.8 274.6 292.7 308.8 321.0 328.7 326.6 310.0 316.6
#1 Exh. 63.6 97.9 126.1 148.7 162.3 178.6 189.6 197.6 205.5 210.7 214.6 217.8 221.2 223.5


That 310 from the cobra looks mighty impressive!

 

[Black95GTS]

The flow of heads isn't that critical anyway...

Ever take a look at the head of a Japanese sport bike? They are making way over 2HP per CI, revving to 15K, and its not because their heads have amazing flow numbers....

Adam

 

[nmcgrawj]

The flow of heads isn't that critical anyway...

Ever take a look at the head of a Japanese sport bike? They are making way over 2HP per CI, revving to 15K, and its not because their heads have amazing flow numbers....

Adam

well with an engine that small...do u need amazing flow numbers? But within motorcycle engines...are the flow of the heads improving relative to their own competition? ANd not engines that weigh as much as the entire bike itself lol.

Just not to be confused....are you guys saying you would advise someone with a 351w not to get a head with great flowing numbers? Are you saying they arent necessary? I think anyone with experience knows it takes a package that works well together to make great power....but i get the feeling you are downplaying the quality of heads necessary in that package. Otherwise....why are guys buying AFR 205/225 heads?

 

[nmcgrawj]

anyway....to get this back on track:

are these the factory headers

and livernois has a new piston....high compression 11.5 and low coming in at 10:1.

Wonder how soon, if at all, it will be to break 500rwhp n/a. Or even 450rwhp. Guys are saying "the lsx is touched by god, but he dreams of the coyote" If they can hit that 500rwhp without needing more than 5 liters.....the lsx boys wont have ***** to talk about.


I just want them to put a version of this motor in every truck/suv so we can buy them in junk yards for cheap for swaps!