What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Feb 14, 2003 | 05:54 PM

HP-GURU

Thread Starter

On The Tree

Joined: Jan 2002

Posts: 164

Likes: 0

From: Carrollton, TX

What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

Of 331-347 cubic inch strokers.

My thoughts are that there are too many of these fully built combo's that fall really short of the type of bar the LS1 has put up.

Built right, these cars could put down similar numbers in similar RPM ranges.

I remember when the bar for LS1 was 400rwhp, then 420, then 440 and now it appears to be in the 450-470rwhp range for hydraulic cammed, street cars that don't need to rev to 7000 rpm to make their power. The rwtq is phenominal too, looks like the really good combos are in the 400-430rwtq range. This is a true testiment to the EFFICIENCY of these combos.

Most of these ford 331-347's are putting down around 350-370rwhp and 350-370rwtq. This is a far cry from the current LS1 development.

On that side they are saying you guys spend ALOT of money to get the type of power.

My thoughts are is it costs in the $4000-$7000 range.

Heck some of the shops such as LG or MTI should put out ford packages for the ford guys so they can get a taste of real N/A power.

Feb 15, 2003 | 04:19 PM

HP-GURU

Thread Starter

On The Tree

Joined: Jan 2002

Posts: 164

Likes: 0

From: Carrollton, TX

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

No comments?

Feb 15, 2003 | 04:53 PM

Pro Stock John

LS1Tech Co-Founder

iTrader: (34)

Joined: Nov 2001

Posts: 45,280

Likes: 1,704

From: Chicago, IL

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

Only NA Ford stuff I follow is the big cube Windsor stuff.

Feb 15, 2003 | 08:57 PM

niphilli

TECH Fanatic

Joined: Nov 2001

Posts: 1,695

Likes: 9

From: Raleigh, NC

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

It is not uncommon for a 347 to go over 400 RWHP, not so bad for engines that have not had a whole bunch of development work in a decade.

Feb 16, 2003 | 10:29 AM

LS1derfull

TECH Addict

Joined: Dec 2001

Posts: 2,298

Likes: 2

From: new england

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

I feel same as Pro Stock John, Windsor is more interesting and better choice for builds. I will say from playing with TFS 5.0 heads that they have come a long way with SBF head flow and this makes great potential for making power. Anything can make good power with nice heads, now you need to fit longer rods in block and reduce main bearing diameters......

Feb 16, 2003 | 01:47 PM

Fenris Ulf

TECH Fanatic

Joined: Aug 2002

Posts: 1,566

Likes: 0

From: Objects in mirror no longer matter.

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

The LS1 stuff will just continue to get better and better. Ford only seems to have any chance on the street with power adders.

Feb 16, 2003 | 02:41 PM

Fly By

On The Tree

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 148

Likes: 0

From: in the air of course!

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

agreed! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Trending Topics

LT1 camero. Fastest stock NA pony car ever?

927

23.8k
650/700 RWHP how streetable is it with a PD Super Charger?

11

265
Conical air filters

8

167
Parts blow out!!! Ls1 ls2 ls3 ls7

9

450
Changing from a 2 bar to a 3 bar setup.

3

97

Feb 16, 2003 | 03:28 PM

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Fenris Ulf:
 The LS1 stuff will just continue to get better and better. Ford only seems to have any chance on the street with power adders. <hr /></blockquote>Apparently you have'nt meet up with any well thought out and well built 347 combos <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

[ February 16, 2003, 03:29 PM: Message edited by: danimal95 ]

Feb 16, 2003 | 03:31 PM

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

you must have over looked fords release of the mach-1 which is only 281 c.i. n/a and is running stock ls-1 times and mph <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Feb 16, 2003 | 03:44 PM

#10

SScam68

11 Second Club

iTrader: (20)

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 2,684

Likes: 3

From: Albuquerque NM - The Land of 8000ft DA

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />you must have over looked fords release of the mach-1 which is only 281 c.i. n/a and is running stock ls-1 times and mph <hr /></blockquote>That 281 is working harder than a 346 is <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> What I am referring to is power per cube.

Feb 16, 2003 | 04:20 PM

#11

Y2K2LS1

TECH Apprentice

Joined: May 2002

Posts: 338

Likes: 0

From: one step ahead of you

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by danimal95:
 you must have over looked fords release of the mach-1 which is only 281 c.i. n/a and is running stock ls-1 times and mph <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>Give us a 32 valve head and see what happens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:16 PM

#12

cantdrv65

TECH Junkie

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Nov 2001

Posts: 3,202

Likes: 0

From: TEXASS

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by danimal95:
 you must have over looked fords release of the mach-1 which is only 281 c.i. n/a and is running stock ls-1 times and mph <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>They are making LESS power, and running slower traps....Stock Mach1's are dynoing in the 260 to 270 rwhp range compared to the 310 to 320 rwhp range the stock 2002 Ls1s are laying down. Really no contest. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:26 PM

#13

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

Beacause ford came up with an idea of putting an overhead valve in the mustang when at the same time gm quits production of the f-body all together has to tell you some thing.And gm didint put 32 valves in their cars we can play the what if game all day long.And yes the f-bodys are making more power than the mach,s but you need to do alittle more reserch cause they are running identicle mphs mind you with 70 less cubic inches.

[ February 16, 2003, 06:30 PM: Message edited by: danimal95 ]

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:34 PM

#14

DailyAluminumBlock

TECH Apprentice

Joined: Dec 2001

Posts: 314

Likes: 0

From: Salisbury, Md

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

What kind of times?

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:36 PM

#15

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:40 PM

#16

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DailyAluminumBlock:
 What kind of times? <hr /></blockquote>I've seen more than 2 in the 106-109 range factory stock.I'm not trying to get into some ford vs chevy thing here but the original post of a 331/347 not making similar power to a ls-1 is completly ludacris.Just want recognition where it is do.

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:44 PM

#17

LS1derfull

TECH Addict

Joined: Dec 2001

Posts: 2,298

Likes: 2

From: new england

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by danimal95:
 Beacause ford came up with an idea of putting an overhead valve in the mustang when at the same time gm quits production of the f-body all together has to tell you some thing.And gm didint put 32 valves in their cars we can play the what if game all day long.And yes the f-bodys are making more power than the mach,s but you need to do alittle more reserch cause they are running identicle mphs mind you with 70 less cubic inches. <hr /></blockquote>Here we go again..... GM has been building 300 hp 4.6 liters since 1993 in its Northstar v-8, years before Ford desined convoluded design "300 hp" motors. GM's dont come apart likes Fords either FACT. Fords engines have been behind in engineering since before you were born, FACT.
GM continues to prove more power and reliability comes with basic designs than crappy ohc no flow designs even with 4 valves im not impressed! Lets see you work on a 4 valve 4.6 Mustang car, believe me they need lots of work wether pursuing more power or putting it back together after trying to keep up with stock fbods! Thats all.

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:46 PM

#18

DailyAluminumBlock

TECH Apprentice

Joined: Dec 2001

Posts: 314

Likes: 0

From: Salisbury, Md

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

106-109 traps are impressive. However, there are factory freaks out there which include ls1s that have run 111-112 traps stock.

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:49 PM

#19

LS1derfull

TECH Addict

Joined: Dec 2001

Posts: 2,298

Likes: 2

From: new england

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by danimal95:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sscam68:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />you must have over looked fords release of the mach-1 which is only 281 c.i. n/a and is running stock ls-1 times and mph <hr /></blockquote>That 281 is working harder than a 346 is <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> What I am referring to is power per cube. <hr /></blockquote>Power per cube is explained by your original post when you stated that the 331/347 made 350-370 hp take into consideration a steele headed small emisions cam 331/347 would put down #'s to a similar modded ls-1 with the better heads. <hr /></blockquote>Wrong, iron headed small cammed 347 will not put out same rwhp as modded LS1. Not even close,you better look around here awhile before you come out with statements like that.

Feb 16, 2003 | 06:59 PM

#20

danimal95

Banned

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: northern illinios

Re: What do you think of N/A Ford Engine development?

. [/qb][/QUOTE]Here we go again..... GM has been building 300 hp 4.6 liters since 1993 in its Northstar v-8, years before Ford desined convoluded design "300 hp" motors. GM's dont come apart likes Fords either FACT. Fords engines have been behind in engineering since before you were born, FACT.
GM continues to prove more power and reliability comes with basic designs than crappy ohc no flow designs even with 4 valves im not impressed! Lets see you work on a 4 valve 4.6 Mustang car, believe me they need lots of work wether pursuing more power or putting it back together after trying to keep up with stock fbods! Thats all. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Take your prozac,FACT I've seen more ls-1's with rods hanging out the side of blocks that any ford motor,FACT Where not talking about caddy motors were talking about motors put in mustangs and f-bodys,FACT You dont know when I was born,FACT The 03 cobra motors dont put down reliable power?They've used the same basic desighn in the lightnings for over 5 years RELIABLY,FACT and I have worked on several dohc&ohc mustangs and they are easier than most would think and are way easier than GM,s lt-1 I have also done motor swaps on DOHC cobras,FACT Seriously dude you need to relax,FACT with that being said I've said my piece and I'm out,FACT <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Reply Share

First
Prev
1 / 8
Next
Last