Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This might sound like a strange question but there is logic to this madness...

Need to find a cost effective way to get to 260hp/310tq with long tube headers on a DOHC block.

So far, it seems swapping heads is the best way to do it.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
ported 4v heads will do it but out of the box tfs heads will far surpass that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
youll never get 260rwhp out of a 2v using completely stock parts

youd have to cnc port the heads and intake then cut the base circle down on the cam while praying to whatever god you believe in to make that happen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
thats really weird because other guys in the race group are getting that with just long tubes


youll never get 260rwhp out of a 2v using completely stock parts

youd have to cnc port the heads and intake then cut the base circle down on the cam while praying to whatever god you believe in to make that happen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
no they arent

Ive dyno'd several hundred 2v's and they are all 195-205 rwhp all day long.

What your saying is impossible and your peers are feeding you lies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTO44

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Well, at the end of the day, I dont have any information for the argument, or against.

I am just going off of what the race regulations state.

here is the ho/tq table with the minimum weight requirement(s).

The 260 figure is coming from other competitors and race direction. It wouldnt be an advantage to inflate the dyno numbers here, it would be a disadvantage.

This class is designed to allow Mustangs and Camaros to race together, achieving equal power to weight ratios with minimal mods.

What gives?
different dynos- mustang vs. dynojet?
How much do proper long tubes add?

I am interested to know what it would take to get to the minimums at elast.

1064701




no they arent

Ive dyno'd several hundred 2v's and they are all 195-205 rwhp all day long.

What your saying is impossible and your peers are feeding you lies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
thats a pretty crappy class

a bone stock ls1 puts down over 300 to the wheels

apparently their target is older 302 fords vs older 305 gm's

my all original 2000 lincoln ls with stock manual 5 spd trans would dominate in that class
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I mean the class is what it is.

LS1 with over 300 would have to be much heavier and they are not allowed long tubes.

So going back to the original question - what would it take to get a 4V to put down 260/310?

thats a pretty crappy class

a bone stock ls1 puts down over 300 to the wheels

apparently their target is older 302 fords vs older 305 gm's

my all original 2000 lincoln ls with stock manual 5 spd trans would dominate in that class
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
see the 2nd post
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
So basically, you're looking at the combo that requires the smallest weight. The 4V heads still will be your best bet, as they flow much better. So, looking at factory numbers, you got 305/300 fwhp/tq w/ B heads, 305/320 fwhp/tq Mach 1 trim. Assume 18% driveline kill, you should have 250/246 w/ B Heads, 250/262 03 heads. You're just about at the hp mark, but you need more torque. Long tube headers should give you a good bump, but not necessarily up to 310 rwtq. If you can bump the compression a hair, that will get closer. Then, to make sure you didn't go over on hp, you can advance the overall cam timing. Starting 2V, you have 260/302 fwhp/tq in PI trim. Compared to the Mach1 trim, you already penalized yourself, even on torque. It's a bigger hill to climb at 20 ft-lb deficit using mostly factory bits. Remember, you have a 281 ci engine regardless, trying to make over 360 fwtq.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
There probably is no way to get a DOHC engine with only 4.6 liters of displacement to make more torque than HP

Maybe custom grind some tiny cams? Then a custom short runner intake.

You’re going to just have to accept the physics at play here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I think you meant to say long runner intake.

I am fully aware of the physics here, that's why I'm reaching out to people more familiar with these than I am.


I cant do cams, but any combination of oem stuff is allowed...

There probably is no way to get a DOHC engine with only 4.6 liters of displacement to make more torque than HP

Maybe custom grind some tiny cams? Then a custom short runner intake.

You’re going to just have to accept the physics at play here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Very good reply.

Thank you.

Well, it doesnt say anything about milling heads... as long as it's under 11.0:1

So looks like the Mach1 heads might be the way to go??

I was thinking about advancing the cams, and maybe doing a smaller throttle body?

Also, I am allowed to play around with timing (but full tuning is not allowed :rolleyes:)

Maybe a combination of all those will get me there?


So basically, you're looking at the combo that requires the smallest weight. The 4V heads still will be your best bet, as they flow much better. So, looking at factory numbers, you got 305/300 fwhp/tq w/ B heads, 305/320 fwhp/tq Mach 1 trim. Assume 18% driveline kill, you should have 250/246 w/ B Heads, 250/262 03 heads. You're just about at the hp mark, but you need more torque. Long tube headers should give you a good bump, but not necessarily up to 310 rwtq. If you can bump the compression a hair, that will get closer. Then, to make sure you didn't go over on hp, you can advance the overall cam timing. Starting 2V, you have 260/302 fwhp/tq in PI trim. Compared to the Mach1 trim, you already penalized yourself, even on torque. It's a bigger hill to climb at 20 ft-lb deficit using mostly factory bits. Remember, you have a 281 ci engine regardless, trying to make over 360 fwtq.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
You might be better off focusing more on suspension and getting the car to launch. At that close of power to weight ratio whoever can come out first is going to be the winner. Your certainly not running anyone down at them power levels.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top