400 HP AT THE WHEELS ALL MOTOR,"YES"!!

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by ranger04, Sep 29, 2007.


  1. KMRACER

    KMRACER New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    you act like its a FEAT to get 525hp out of a 280+ cubic inch motor. plain and simple the head flow just ISNT there. bone stock 5.0 heads flow in the 160cfm range on the intake. same with the 2v 4.6 heads. ls1 heads flow around 240cfm stock. with the extra cubes sure its easy to take advantage of the flow, but REALLY? you cant blame it entirely on that. because really its like a 60 cubic inch difference. while its a decent amount, shouldnt the heads/cam N/A numbers be 450 rwhp? more better? again, perhaps if you 4.6 guys push the boundries and find out what these motors like, things like 400whp h/c might not be so unheard of. and PARTS to do it might be CHEAPER. thats my point. ls1 guys are always pushing the boundries. where are you guys at? EXAMPLE - a set of AFR heads USED TO be like what... 3.5 grand? only 2300 now. because things get cheaper with popularity.

    why are you guys afraid of compression again?? it seems funny the remarks you guys make about CR.
  2. Zora

    Zora Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    19
    I might have your answer....I work for FoMoCo. It's not that they can not keep up. The way they see it....Their product out sells the comps. The Camaro,Firebird is Dead. And Ford sells the **** out of the Mustangs. Why go with a bigger engine when your product out sells the comps 10 fold. More HP... more warranty. I remember seeing the #s on sells when the Camaro,Firebird,Trans Am,Z28,Corvette(still alive),etc....were still being built. The Stang out sold them combined.
    Company stand point.....Do not fix what is not broken.

    I personally wish the Stang had atleast 350HP stock.
  3. marsbar

    marsbar New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    CHITOWN
    I would love to put together a new Boss5.0 stroker 323ci. with a high CR like 15:1 and run it on E85. This would easily get 600HP at the crank and close to 500TQ. Sure it will cost more then FI but what an engine it would be. Could be done for about $8500 if you do alot of the work yourself such as removal and building of the engine. Block $1800, Heads $1500, rotating assembly $2500,
    Cams&Springs $800, Machine work and balancing $1000, Fuel $1000. Just a dream for now.
  4. o0Dan0o

    o0Dan0o Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2001
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    On these motors it is a feat to get 525hp safely, [​IMG]
    That's our stock rod...

    FYI, the stock 3v head flows around 240CFM, ported heads can be over 300 CFM (supposedly Livernois has ported a set to 350+ CFM).

    Yeah, 65 ci difference, thats 23% bigger, a **** ton.

    Like I said, I think 400RWHP on a stock short block should be possible with the new intake manifold coming out. 450 RWHP on the stock short block, I wouldn't rule it out but I don't think we will see it on anything other than a purpose built race engine that revs over 7k.

    Who said anything about being scare of compression, we just have 9.8/1 stock. A built short block with 11/1 or higher compression would give a decent jump in power. I think with the 323 ci short blocks coming out, add 11/1 compression and we could see 500 RWHP out of these engines N/A.

    But like I said, without adding cubes, compression or boost (or N2O) 400 is the soft ceiling.
    Dan
  5. UrbanRedneck

    UrbanRedneck New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree that a big part of it is displacement. The engine design is also awesome too though as older 350ish CI engines can't touch it and the amount of power you can make with one is more than proportionate to it's increased displacement. But the lack of displacement is the biggest problem with the Ford engine, I am sure it could make big power if it wasn't so small, but it is. And the N/A argument being irrelevant depends on your preference, I would love to be able to hit 400 at the wheels with bolt ons like an LS1 car, and could give a crap if it was with 281 CI or 400CI, power is power. Bolt on f-bodies running deeep 12s and faster are not hard to find, AND they're heavy pigs! As far as a lower displacement LS1, there are actually quite a few 5.2 and 4.8 truck motors that still make a LOT of power. For it's size and what it is, the 281 is a great engine and can make awesome power, and the 3 and 4 valve heads flow pretty good, but it simply is limited by it's size, and it's bore spacing doesn't really leave much room for improvement there either, and it is limited in camshaft options (but all overhead cam engines are) as well..

    I love my Mustang, how it looks, it's interior, it's ride, etc. And would take it over a previous F-body anyday, but I suuure would love it if Ford had put some more displacement in it, because I'll never be able to afford to fix that problem myself lol. I won't be trading it in for another car or anything because of that though.
  6. DiMora

    DiMora New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you are going to compare the LS1 to anything...you need an apples to oranges comparison. You had better compare it to a 5.4 liter 32 valve modular out of the GT500.

    At least displacement will be more fair. The Supersnake is making 540/510 with a Roush TVS blower and with a Kenne Bell you are making over 725. That is crank horsepower, not RWHP.

    Yes, that is forced induction. But again, that is where these modulars rule. If you want to make bug numbers in a modular, go forced induction. It is the cheapest, most economical way to make power in these cars.

    If you need more, Sean Hyland Motorsport makes a modified 5.4 modular long-block that makes 950.

    Who cares about normally aspirated with a nasty lopey cam and a soft bottom end when you can bolt on instantaneous boost with a supercharger.

    For those that say the belts break - you are dead in the water on a N/A modular if your belt breaks too since it drives your water pump.

    You could also build a normally aspirated 5.4 with high compression pistons if you wanted to. At least you would be comparing apples to apples when talking about the LS1.
  7. KMRACER

    KMRACER New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i understand the CID thing, but what about compression? you could easily get compresssion up to 11.5:1, and retain very streetable manners. the same thing with a "7k rpm race motor". the car i built is a stock long block ls1. it does it EVERY DAY. and you guys have OHC. he daily drives a camaro with a ms3 cam. thats 237/242 with .600" lift. the car idles great. its alittle tough below 1500 rpm when you're crusing, but a set of 4.11's or better yet 4.30's will take care of that. i mean REALLY, until you really get on the thing the only difference you notice from stock is how many people STARE at the car when its at a stop light throwing you huge thumbs up. it sounds like a ****ing beast. and rightfully so.


    but really, this isnt about the ls1 thing. its about me wondering where the hardcore mustang guys are at now adays. it seems like you guys have just stopped trying to do ANYTHING n/a?

    where are the guys with 5.4 swaps trying to make 475+whp? n/a? because you all KNOW thats possible. and that would be DIRTY!!!! AND since most you guys dont build fast n/a stuff no one would expect ANYTHING from an n/a mustang. :) break some ground guys! do some cool stuff! i've yet to see an n/a 05+ mustang that was bad ass. if there are any i wanna see! it would make me happy to be honest. i'd feel alittle more comfortable with the 5.0 tattoo i have on my arm.
  8. Gearbanger 101

    Gearbanger 101 Straight Outta Locash Super Mod

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,392
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    164
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I thought what I did with my Cougar was pretty ground breaking? Nobody expects a nearly 4,000lb luxobarge to be fast. Its not the quickest thing on tires, but Its got more than enough jam to put most lightly modded Mustangs and LS1's on the trailer at the track all the time?

    ...and it still retains stock cams (idle) and knocks down 25+mpg on the way too and from the track? :shrug:

    If you want to see some cool stuff done with N/A modular Mustangs, check out some of the combinations Al Papito from Boss 330 Racing puts together. He's built several 5.4L DOHC N/A engines well within the same footing of the famed LS1/LS2 power levels. :shrug:
  9. o0Dan0o

    o0Dan0o Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2001
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There isn't much relation between the LS1 and mod motors. A 346 LS1 doesn't have to worry about low end torque near as much as a 281 mod motor. I don't really feel like turning my mustang into a ricer, having no power bellow 4k RPM. If I was making a race motor I wouldn't gripe about it, but it's just not much fun to drive that on the street.

    Frankly, because people get the same power for less with FI. With the stock shortblock on these cars you're looking at around 400 RWHP, maybe a little more if you mill the heads for a little bit more compression. And it's going to run you about 6k to do it. Slap on a blower for 6k and your up to 450 RWHP (though with a questionable lifespan, see above rods). It's also easier, a TS supercharger install is a glorified intake swap, swapping heads and cams is much more complex.

    If you throw in a built shortblock with high compression, NA can jump quiet a bit, maybe 500 RWHP, but you're going to drop 10k+ on that motor. For close to the same price (12k+) you can get 600+ out of an FI motor. Some people, going a bit crazy, are getting 800+ RWHP out of their FI motors, though spending something like 15k+ to get there.

    3V on a 5.4 block is an idea, but you would need a custom intake for it. Possible, but expensive. Boss 330 does really cool 5.4 DOHC build ups, as Gearbanger said, and makes pretty good HP out of them. Actually, Livernois just released their 358 ci shortblock, a Ford GT block that has the bores re-sleeved and is stroked. That would be fun to play with, but the block on its own is probably close to 10k.
    Dan
  10. SlideWRX

    SlideWRX New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Westland, MI
    hehe. I smile when people talk about having 'no power' down low in a V8 engine. I drove a Turbo 2.0l with 8:1 compression for six years before getting the Mustang. There is your lack of low end torque!! All said it was geared from the factory similar to 4.30's on the GT, and it would bog below 1500 rpms. Most people would say it bogged below 2000, but they were wussies. With the Mustang, I can drive it all day below 1500 rpms. It doesn't bog at idle in fifth.

    There's lots of torque left before you're a 'ricer'. :)

    As for the LS1 etc., Of course it'll make more power N/A. not because it's bigger, but because the design has been evolving for 40+ years. Sure it isn't the same small block chevy it used to be, but evolving from it brought a lot of expertise with it. Not to mention the high end market for it in the Corvette. People who buy $50k cars are willing to drop a bit more cash on mods than people who buy a $30k car. It definitely gets the market going! Look at the Lightning, Cobra, GT500 & Ford GT; all boosted and $$, and that's where the modular market put its resources. Another thing is that the Modular motors have been switching heads a lot. It started with 2v, then got 4v for certain high hp applications, then went 3v, and now is going to a new 4v with the new Coyote 5.0l 4V.
  11. KMRACER

    KMRACER New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    but thats my point. dont you guys see the potential of these motors? with the right set of cams, and a set of 330+cfm heads (milled for good compression and quench.), a 5.4+ l motor would have some SERIOUS 550+ hp potential. and for pretty cheap too. how much is a JY 5.4? the things not gonna be entirely GUTLESS either. you guys make it seem so terrible. hell, the centrifugal superchargers put torque peak way up in the rpm band.
  12. o0Dan0o

    o0Dan0o Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2001
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fair enough, I still wouldn't want my car that way, but fair enough.

    A major part of the reason the LS1 makes more power is largely due to the extra displacement. They are excellent engines, I'm fairly partial to them myself, but a lot of the reason they make the power they do is because of 346 ci. Another part of it is the large bore centerline, it's easier to have heads that flow properly with the larger bore. As to which engine is "better," I'm not going there.

    As for swapping engines, I have a 4.6L 3V, for the time being I'm going to work with it. If you build a 5.4 3V I'd love to read about it.
    Dan
  13. chad9350

    chad9350 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lake Charles, LA
  14. Gearbanger 101

    Gearbanger 101 Straight Outta Locash Super Mod

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,392
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    164
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Really? What you call evolution, I call adding a set of high flow heads and intake to an engine that already sports a 65ci displacement advantage. You just didn't notice it so much before with the pre-LS series engines because the head/intake/cam combo was so poor by comparison. ;)

    If displacement had nothing to do with it, GM really wasted their time stroking and poking the LS7 to 427ci, huh? :D



    Sure, I guess you could do all that......I don't know about you, but I like the idea of turning up the wick at will and knocking down over 400hp, but backing off the throttle and still getting stock like drivability, emissions and fuel economy.

    You also have to consider....the 5.4L is not a square engine. It doesn't like to rev out much beyond the 5,800RPM mark. Its got long rods, small pistons and by default a heavier rotating mass which doesn't fair well when you spin them hard. I'm not saying making decent N/A power levels isn't possible, but its not as inexpensive or simple as you're trying to make it sound....and certainly not as practical for most when you consider all of the major blower kits are bolt on and go. They don't even require the owner to crack open a valve cover. :shrug:

    As far as N/A goes, knocking a pile of material off the deck height and throwing a set of high volume capable cylinder heads onto the engine sounds great in theory, but you've still got tight bore spacing limiting the bore to work with. Which means that milling for any major compression is pretty much out of the question since valve shrouding becomes an issue. Not to mention despite all that, you've got sensitive cam timing to consider when you change the geometry that much. If you're trying to increase compressing greatly with a mod motor, you're only real option is to do it with pistons....which yes, is going to require you getting into the short block I'm afraid. :(

    Its much easier (and more practical) to work the engine within the limits of its intended RPM range and make up the difference by force feeding the air into the intake where low speed lift and flow isn't an issue.
  15. danGtheTman

    danGtheTman New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Messages:
    24
    Showcase:
    32
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl

    :nice:

    Yep, I believe Chevy overdid it. I would feel kinda weird driving around in that thing. Kind of like those black guys that drive around in those outrageous looking rides with the wheels that look like a garbage can lid with a rubber band around it. On the other side of the coin, it looks like a mid life crisis machine.
  16. chad9350

    chad9350 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lake Charles, LA
    With GT500 tb and C&L ill be close enough, close enough to get me a couple ticks into the 11's in a daily driver w/ over 60K and stock bottom end.


    Good enough... for now :ninja:
  17. ufnavy06

    ufnavy06 New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    If you get the TVS, I might take that RC off your hands. :nice:

    Anyways, on topic. The 5.4 vs 5.7 would be a more legit comparison. Even then, there's still a displacement difference, (15 cc I think). We know in 2000 Ford had the 5.4 making 385. I really am curious to see what that 5.4 makes without the S/C. It's gotta be around 400+ for the '10 GT500s. You take the cost of the S/C off the car, then it costs less than the SS and makes similar numbers and weighs a little bit less. :nice: Then the Mustang with less cubes and no F/I runs with the 'Maro.

    That is the key matchup there.
  18. SlideWRX

    SlideWRX New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Westland, MI
    Well, a quick look says the 1992 LT1 made all of 300 hp out of a 5.7l. Are you saying a displacement increase of .5l (9%) to 6.2l made and extra 130 hp? That's an extra 30% more power compared to the base 09 'Vette. I'd guess that a 10% displacement increase might give 10% more power, except that it doesn't without improving the breathing of the engine. More than two thirds of that performance improvement comes from evolution of the design; better breathing, lower friction, lighter reciprocating parts, etc.
  19. Gearbanger 101

    Gearbanger 101 Straight Outta Locash Super Mod

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,392
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    164
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Its really a combination of both, but the car wouldn't be nearly as powerful without the displacement. You can have great flowing heads and intake, but if you're not pushing the volume through them, they're not much good now, are they. Case in point....that's why us Modular guys tend to gravitate towards forced induction. The head/intake configuration of these engines is quite good, but since the displacement isn't there to move the air through them, we've got to find another way to increase the volume of air entering the engine.
  20. rpguru

    rpguru New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "The V6 coupe will cover the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds with an auto and 14.7 seconds with a manual, both at 97 mph. Camaro SS outfitted with the 422-hp 6.2-liter LS3 V8 six-speed manual hits 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and runs a 13.4-second quarter-mile at 108 mph. Automatic-equipped SS Camaro, which is rated at 400 hp, runs from zero to 60 mph in just 4.6 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 13.3 seconds."

    Some bolt ons and a tune will get you to those numbers with a good tune on the 4.6.

Share This Page