Someone explain this
#1
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Landrum,SC
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone explain this
Before I got my SS I had a 96 GT Conv. Both cars charged with V-9 Vortech systems. The SS is aftercooled the GT was not. Here is the thing why could I get away with 10psi on the stock Stang internals with nothing more than a Hypertech tune an all the LS1 will stand is 6.5-7psi with a custom dyno tune. Neither car is/was daliy driven. Im just curious my tuner kept my tune safe an stongly urged me not to go down on the pulley size an I read alot on this board an other sites not to go more than 7psi on stock bottom ends. Is this just the way it is or was I pushing my luck in the Stang with a ticking time bomb? Im not complaing though the GT mode 262rwhp an the almighty LS1 made 475
Thanks guys
Thanks guys
#2
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (19)
Originally Posted by Vols Fan
Before I got my SS I had a 96 GT Conv. Both cars charged with V-9 Vortech systems. The SS is aftercooled the GT was not. Here is the thing why could I get away with 10psi on the stock Stang internals with nothing more than a Hypertech tune an all the LS1 will stand is 6.5-7psi with a custom dyno tune. Neither car is/was daliy driven. Im just curious my tuner kept my tune safe an stongly urged me not to go down on the pulley size an I read alot on this board an other sites not to go more than 7psi on stock bottom ends. Is this just the way it is or was I pushing my luck in the Stang with a ticking time bomb? Im not complaing though the GT mode 262rwhp an the almighty LS1 made 475
Thanks guys
Thanks guys
#4
Staging Lane
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as mentioned, static compression makes a big difference. However, there's a ton more to it. The additional displacement and flow of the LS1 heads verses the stock GT make a big difference. Cam stats as well...
some of that should explain the HP difference.
As far as the difference in boost you ran, that depends on the strength of internals and compression ratio
some of that should explain the HP difference.
As far as the difference in boost you ran, that depends on the strength of internals and compression ratio
#5
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Landrum,SC
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I mentioned before it was stock stang internals an what ever the compression is on those cars. What is the stock compression on a 98 LS1? The stang did have 30lb/hr injectors an T-rex feul pump.
#7
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lebanon, OH
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think of it more in terms of horse power or flow (CFM). A stock shortblock can only take so much before having to go forged. Boost is not nessesarely (spelling?) a good thing. It is merely a measurement of restriction. If you take an engine such as the LS1 which has superior flow cababilities vs. the 4.6 GT you won't need near as much boost to make the same HP. Assuming both motors could handle the same RWHP level before they let go, An LS1 may only take 8lb's boost to reach 550rwhp where as a GT may require 12-15lb's for the same rwhp level.
Trending Topics
#10
I know a car that ran 12psi on a stock ls1. Boost #'s are for ricers. Imagine the amount of air flow if you put 10psi on a straw, compaired to 10psi on a 2.5" pipe. CFM is the only true measurement that counts.
#16
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Landrum,SC
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by slow
96-98 mustang heads SUCK.
I've been in 12# vortech cars, that make less than 300 rwhp.
Plus a hypertech tune on a blown mustang is asking for trouble...
Ryan
I've been in 12# vortech cars, that make less than 300 rwhp.
Plus a hypertech tune on a blown mustang is asking for trouble...
Ryan