2011 Mustang 5.0L V8 Dyno Test
02-12-2010, 03:50 PM
#41
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kevin, You have way to much time.
In case you didnt notice this is LS1 tech so of course most people are biased.
Seriously. Ever thread that turns into a bitchfest starts with YOU!
In case you didnt notice this is LS1 tech so of course most people are biased.
Seriously. Ever thread that turns into a bitchfest starts with YOU!
02-12-2010, 03:58 PM
#42
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It shouldnt matter if Ford or whoever puts a "blower" on their car to make it faster. Its about revenue and public interest. Ford makes a good product, my Camaro rides like *** compared to a GT. Every car of different manufacturers has its strong and weak points. The 'premium' 10bolt rear end chevy put in its camaros are junk compared to the 8.8 and the 9". We spend money to upgrade rear ends to racing capacity as others spend money on pulleys, headers, etc to mod their 'blown' cars to racing capacity.
What im not getting is that I see alot of these replies talking about compression, compression. Adding forced induction does not change the static compression of an engine, what you are referring to is dynamic compression.
A modern STOCK V8 sports car is still and always will be a modern stock V8 sports car. If your one who thinks in theory of relativity, if you pull up at a stop full of every day cars with a 03+ (example) GT, chances are you are going to be the fastest car at the stop light with everyone else. From what I recall the terminator is still faster than an ls1 f-body in its stock form. When you start applying mods to both then game over on the stock vs stock race.
With every car manufacturer there is a base to premium lineup. During those times a Cobra was the premium and the SS/Firehawk was the "345hp" SLP cars. See where im going with this...?
What im not getting is that I see alot of these replies talking about compression, compression. Adding forced induction does not change the static compression of an engine, what you are referring to is dynamic compression.
A modern STOCK V8 sports car is still and always will be a modern stock V8 sports car. If your one who thinks in theory of relativity, if you pull up at a stop full of every day cars with a 03+ (example) GT, chances are you are going to be the fastest car at the stop light with everyone else. From what I recall the terminator is still faster than an ls1 f-body in its stock form. When you start applying mods to both then game over on the stock vs stock race.
With every car manufacturer there is a base to premium lineup. During those times a Cobra was the premium and the SS/Firehawk was the "345hp" SLP cars. See where im going with this...?
unless you are really really bored and have money to throw away 
02-12-2010, 08:15 PM
#45
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mooresville, Indiana
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................... god the fight over this rivalry is boring and stupid sounds like alot of people are scared of this new engine though, im excited to see what it does, im all for it
02-12-2010, 11:13 PM
#46
TECH Enthusiast
BTW john mihovetz is using a race teksid block, not an iron block. basically the same setup im running, but with billet rods/pistons.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
02-13-2010, 04:22 AM
#47
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good points.
Just because the LS1 cars were so exceptionally fast (in stock or modded trim) it doesn't automatically make everything else slow. Even the high 13 second 1999-2004 Mustang GTs were still relatively fast cars in the grand scheme of things, especially when compared to the average family car/truck of the time.
Today we have Z06s and ZR1s that can run high 10s
in stock trim...but that still doesn't suddenly make a high 11/low 12 second C5 Z06 slow in my opinion. In it's day (and even still now) it was among some of the fastest cars in the world. 
Just because the LS1 cars were so exceptionally fast (in stock or modded trim) it doesn't automatically make everything else slow. Even the high 13 second 1999-2004 Mustang GTs were still relatively fast cars in the grand scheme of things, especially when compared to the average family car/truck of the time.
Today we have Z06s and ZR1s that can run high 10s
in stock trim...but that still doesn't suddenly make a high 11/low 12 second C5 Z06 slow in my opinion. In it's day (and even still now) it was among some of the fastest cars in the world. "Too" and it doesn't take me as long to post these posts as you obviously think it does. I was a typesetter for 5 years at a newspaper in the early 90s before I got into graphic design.
In case you didnt notice this is LS1 tech so of course most people are biased.
Seriously. Ever thread that turns into a bitchfest starts with YOU!
If you haven't noticed, there have been LSx owners agreeing with me in this thread. Not everyone that owns a GM is a fanboy. Actually most aren't.
Agreed and AWESOME post.
Last edited by Ke^in; 02-13-2010 at 04:52 AM.
02-13-2010, 09:09 AM
#48
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW john mihovetz is using a race teksid block, not an iron block. basically the same setup im running, but with billet rods/pistons.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
02-13-2010, 01:09 PM
#49
TECH Enthusiast
What makes John's power and speed so impressive is the small displacement and stock source for major portions of his engine program. Displacement is 282 ci--call it a stock 4.6 liters--using a stock aluminum Cobra block; stock old-style, "B" dual-port, Four-Valve cylinder heads, as found in a '95 Lincoln; and a stock 4.6 Cobra crankshaft.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec.../photo_07.html
there is the article of using a teksid.
this is johm talking about iron blocks breaking at 700rwhp. which is common. using iron is a disaster.
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/s...133#post467133
i guess ill ask john what he uses.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec.../photo_07.html
there is the article of using a teksid.
this is johm talking about iron blocks breaking at 700rwhp. which is common. using iron is a disaster.
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/s...133#post467133
i guess ill ask john what he uses.
Last edited by assasinator; 02-13-2010 at 02:17 PM.
02-13-2010, 03:20 PM
#50
9 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW john mihovetz is using a race teksid block, not an iron block. basically the same setup im running, but with billet rods/pistons.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
lightly modded 96-98 cobra DOHC B heads, billet rods, race deburred teksid block, stock cobra race prepped kellogg crank, piston, proprietary cams. BIG turbos.
4.6 liters = 2300hp.
thats right, the block in my car can handle 2300 hp when prepped. and i paid 165.00 for the core motor i rebuilt. my ported heads flow as more than enough to make that kind of power out of only 4.6 liters. john doesnt do anything super special wi tht eh heads. they are killer when modded.
02-13-2010, 05:38 PM
#51
TECH Enthusiast
sure, here is champion john mihovetz's 4.6 liter, big block killer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAnB6LzdYNQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOY1IfPFzd0&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RskH8wXqgkY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATMFl...eature=related
is that enough vids of his car? He owns accufab. lots of people run his parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAnB6LzdYNQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOY1IfPFzd0&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RskH8wXqgkY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATMFl...eature=related
is that enough vids of his car? He owns accufab. lots of people run his parts.
02-13-2010, 05:58 PM
#53
11 Second Club
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um those 13 second cars are apples to Aircraft Carriers compairing the two. Not sure what your point is. Stock for stock the LSX engine is better than the 4.6.
02-13-2010, 06:30 PM
#54
Staging Lane
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: King of Prussia PA
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For some reason I read this whole thread, its the worst. bottom line....in like 2 minutes ima go for a drive and love it
02-13-2010, 07:38 PM
#55
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What makes John's power and speed so impressive is the small displacement and stock source for major portions of his engine program. Displacement is 282 ci--call it a stock 4.6 liters--using a stock aluminum Cobra block; stock old-style, "B" dual-port, Four-Valve cylinder heads, as found in a '95 Lincoln; and a stock 4.6 Cobra crankshaft.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec.../photo_07.html
there is the article of using a teksid.
this is johm talking about iron blocks breaking at 700rwhp. which is common. using iron is a disaster.
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/s...133#post467133
i guess ill ask john what he uses.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec.../photo_07.html
there is the article of using a teksid.
this is johm talking about iron blocks breaking at 700rwhp. which is common. using iron is a disaster.
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/s...133#post467133
i guess ill ask john what he uses.
02-13-2010, 07:39 PM
#56
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-13-2010, 08:02 PM
#57
Did I say anything about price? The guy clearly doesn't understand the capability of a small cube 4.6. It doesn't matter at all that it's Ford either.
The whole "there's no replacement for displacement" debate is what I was referring to and it's an archaic argument given the technology we have
today. My point was that Mihovetz has gone 6.30's with a small cube engine and we have people here with 13 second cars calling the 4.6 junk, which
is ironic in itself.
The whole "there's no replacement for displacement" debate is what I was referring to and it's an archaic argument given the technology we have
today. My point was that Mihovetz has gone 6.30's with a small cube engine and we have people here with 13 second cars calling the 4.6 junk, which
is ironic in itself.
Today we can have smaller engines put out more power due to FI / different designs etc, but if you make the EXACT same motor but one 6 liters and one 5 liters, the 6 liter will make more output.
I know you already know this, but then again I don't know why this argument always comes up, lol.
02-14-2010, 12:49 AM
#59
Don'l look into this too deeply man haha. Keeping everything else equal, the large displacement the more power.
Today we can have smaller engines put out more power due to FI / different designs etc, but if you make the EXACT same motor but one 6 liters and one 5 liters, the 6 liter will make more output.
I know you already know this, but then again I don't know why this argument always comes up, lol.
Today we can have smaller engines put out more power due to FI / different designs etc, but if you make the EXACT same motor but one 6 liters and one 5 liters, the 6 liter will make more output.
I know you already know this, but then again I don't know why this argument always comes up, lol.
02-14-2010, 01:26 AM
#60
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: oviedo, FL
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im a chevy guy for sure, but absolutely love the sound of a mustang over an fbody.
on topic, the new 5.0 is sick, glad to see it back.. and looks like it will make some nice power, but hell everything these days comes with an assload of crank hp... **** even my moms maxima has "290 hp"