!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Coyotah vs ls
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 15
From: huntsville Al
you pointed out the selection of the engine vs the chevy. they picked a tiny coyote. not my choice to begin with. just being known for fords isnt ****. no pleasing whatever. who gives a **** what your opinion is? select the 5.8 and stroke it. use real heads for boost. gt500. im not a fan and have never been a fan of boosting coyotes. i have never considered boosting my coyote, and i did boost my 4.6 32v.
good stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 15
From: huntsville Al
Staging Lane
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 84
Likes: 42
From: Rent Free in Hio's Mind
Originally Posted by tech@WS6store
Maybe you haven't heard of the Northstar 4.6l but it handily made the same power as the 2v and 4v mod motors with less razzle dazzle ;-)
And that engine did exactly what it was designed to do. Win offshore boat racing. Where was ford for that?
Dont be mad you cant build cubic inch in a Mod you have to force the air into it to make anything of it.
And that engine did exactly what it was designed to do. Win offshore boat racing. Where was ford for that?
Dont be mad you cant build cubic inch in a Mod you have to force the air into it to make anything of it.
Where has GM been in competitive racing outside the US? Where are the 24h of Le Mans wins from GM? Not the little league **** the vette runs in, I mean the big boy race.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,128
Likes: 645
From: Winchester, VA
No you were crying and bitching....going off topic because your god got fucked in the ***. Still going to ain't ya. Tell ws6store how your 116 trap car got circles run around it by a 114 car if you want to go off topic. Tell him how my furd drags the living **** outta your furd and you cry your dumbass to sleep every night because of that.
The superior design broke 600lbft of tq short. Splain the superiorness of it please.
Not only can it not make as much power na it looses in boost to.....not as durable.....but so superior
You sure as **** don't know wtf you're talking about.
This guy does
Lol....he did tho
My furd faster than all the furd guys in here on their oe blowers......true ******* story to.
Furds pushrod motors were buckets of ****.
They're like serious cry babies dude.
You don't want that to happen the DOHC is a superior design which allows for more flow. If both engines where 5.0L with the same bore and same stroke the coyote would win by a land slide. Just like the WS6store guy already said more rpm = more hp. The only reason why the LS is so great na vs coyote na is for the simple fact you can easily change the cubic inches resulting in more trq when that happens and you still turn the engine the same rpms you will get more hp. Trq and rpms are inversely related. Coyote takes advantage of this and a simple push rod design takes advantage of ci. Is there a superior way sure it's DOHC bc you can do more with less in a sense of ci.
Not only can it not make as much power na it looses in boost to.....not as durable.....but so superior
You sure as **** don't know wtf you're talking about.
I said more rpm = more power on the same engine not across platforms. I made sure to make that distinction.
Gm was working on a 5.0l ls engine in one of their le mans cars a while back. Idk if it was DI or OHC or just pushrod. Been a while. When you can make the same horsepower and more torque from less rpm OR have a much better useable midrange or entire rpm range, then why wouldn't you?
Youve seen the 5.0 dyno graphs just like I have with cammed 5.0s where they lose massive power under 5k.
The dohc vs pushrod is clearly the issue in price. You can see that with this build. LME basically bought a brand new engine in parts and made one. MPR got a used engine (i assume) especially for 1800 then rebuilt it but reused alot of parts and still had to cut the parts short for budget from my interpretation.
IF you build them on the same budget the way a 5.0 guy would like, the ls would still "decimate all". Its straight facts since 2011 basically. The excuses get old and hanging your hat on 1 or 2 fast builds in chassis cars etc doesnt mean much.
You can like what you like, both are great engines but with ALL the parts and pieces that supposedly make the mod motors better 4 cams and phasers etc. they really aren't vs LS or LT. That conclusion is deeply rooted in Dyno graphs and track times.
Gm was working on a 5.0l ls engine in one of their le mans cars a while back. Idk if it was DI or OHC or just pushrod. Been a while. When you can make the same horsepower and more torque from less rpm OR have a much better useable midrange or entire rpm range, then why wouldn't you?
Youve seen the 5.0 dyno graphs just like I have with cammed 5.0s where they lose massive power under 5k.
The dohc vs pushrod is clearly the issue in price. You can see that with this build. LME basically bought a brand new engine in parts and made one. MPR got a used engine (i assume) especially for 1800 then rebuilt it but reused alot of parts and still had to cut the parts short for budget from my interpretation.
IF you build them on the same budget the way a 5.0 guy would like, the ls would still "decimate all". Its straight facts since 2011 basically. The excuses get old and hanging your hat on 1 or 2 fast builds in chassis cars etc doesnt mean much.
You can like what you like, both are great engines but with ALL the parts and pieces that supposedly make the mod motors better 4 cams and phasers etc. they really aren't vs LS or LT. That conclusion is deeply rooted in Dyno graphs and track times.
Lol....he did tho
You are the last person in the world who is any authority on boost
DOHC 4.6 built bottom end
Ported blower
swapped in a notchback
and you run ******* 11.5s
It still hurts your anus that it will always take more CI for a GM to win, even back when Fords used pushrod motors in Mustangs as well. Don't be mad at the truth
DOHC 4.6 built bottom end
Ported blower
swapped in a notchback
and you run ******* 11.5s
It still hurts your anus that it will always take more CI for a GM to win, even back when Fords used pushrod motors in Mustangs as well. Don't be mad at the truth
Furds pushrod motors were buckets of ****.
They're like serious cry babies dude.
Maybe you haven't heard of the Northstar 4.6l but it handily made the same power as the 2v and 4v mod motors with less razzle dazzle ;-)
And that engine did exactly what it was designed to do. Win offshore boat racing. Where was ford for that?
Dont be mad you cant build cubic inch in a Mod you have to force the air into it to make anything of it.
And that engine did exactly what it was designed to do. Win offshore boat racing. Where was ford for that?
Dont be mad you cant build cubic inch in a Mod you have to force the air into it to make anything of it.
Ecoboost is turbod so thats not a comparison. The 3.5 EcoBoost also has a failry large bore size nearly the same as the 5.0 so that also helps tq. Still not even a comparison.
Trying to bring any other engine into this conversation is ridiculous especially adding in a formula one engine.
This is coyote vs ls. Broader would be mod motor vs ls. Thats it. No straight race thoroughbreds.
Ford made a 5.8l. They could have left it NA and made better power vs the 5.0. They haven't yet. Since you're basically stuck around 5.0l for the coyote besides maybe a stroker setup? (Havent checked) then the only way to fix the lack of torque is with compression ratio and cams designed for it.
But that would really be working backwards as to what ford is doing.
The individual phaser has so much potential and the small ports help also. You get to change both icl and lsa and yet cant muster better power, something is way wrong. The engine and engineering is what limits itself. Especially the bore spacing. Not the fact that it is ohc/dohc alone. It lacks cubic inch. Kinda like a 5.3l. The 5.8l in 5.0 trim with higher cr etc would make much more impressive na power. But its not, so moot point.
As far as the pushrod for the trucks, its a very large engine which would make torque either way, but im guessing ford needed it to be economical for fleet use etc and pushrods are much much more economical than och/dohc. And they could use a lower CR on a pushrod and still make great power.
Trying to bring any other engine into this conversation is ridiculous especially adding in a formula one engine.
This is coyote vs ls. Broader would be mod motor vs ls. Thats it. No straight race thoroughbreds.
Ford made a 5.8l. They could have left it NA and made better power vs the 5.0. They haven't yet. Since you're basically stuck around 5.0l for the coyote besides maybe a stroker setup? (Havent checked) then the only way to fix the lack of torque is with compression ratio and cams designed for it.
But that would really be working backwards as to what ford is doing.
The individual phaser has so much potential and the small ports help also. You get to change both icl and lsa and yet cant muster better power, something is way wrong. The engine and engineering is what limits itself. Especially the bore spacing. Not the fact that it is ohc/dohc alone. It lacks cubic inch. Kinda like a 5.3l. The 5.8l in 5.0 trim with higher cr etc would make much more impressive na power. But its not, so moot point.
As far as the pushrod for the trucks, its a very large engine which would make torque either way, but im guessing ford needed it to be economical for fleet use etc and pushrods are much much more economical than och/dohc. And they could use a lower CR on a pushrod and still make great power.
you pointed out the selection of the engine vs the chevy. they picked a tiny coyote. not my choice to begin with. just being known for fords isnt ****. no pleasing whatever. who gives a **** what your opinion is? select the 5.8 and stroke it. use real heads for boost. gt500. im not a fan and have never been a fan of boosting coyotes. i have never considered boosting my coyote, and i did boost my 4.6 32v.
good stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
good stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Youre working with an unlimited budget there then boss? Maybe that much boost on a stroked 5.8l wouldn't work? I mean they had to sleeve the 5.0 to handle it they didnt do it for fun.
No you were crying and bitching....going off topic because your god got fucked in the ***. Still going to ain't ya. Tell ws6store how your 116 trap car got circles run around it by a 114 car if you want to go off topic. Tell him how my furd drags the living **** outta your furd and you cry your dumbass to sleep every night because of that.
The superior design broke 600lbft of tq short. Splain the superiorness of it please.
Not only can it not make as much power na it looses in boost to.....not as durable.....but so superior
You sure as **** don't know wtf you're talking about.
This guy does
Lol....he did tho
My furd faster than all the furd guys in here on their oe blowers......true ******* story to.
Furds pushrod motors were buckets of ****.
They're like serious cry babies dude.
The superior design broke 600lbft of tq short. Splain the superiorness of it please.
Not only can it not make as much power na it looses in boost to.....not as durable.....but so superior
You sure as **** don't know wtf you're talking about.
This guy does
Lol....he did tho
My furd faster than all the furd guys in here on their oe blowers......true ******* story to.
Furds pushrod motors were buckets of ****.
They're like serious cry babies dude.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo You're not in this section really ever so I guess you don't know that Hio has a termi swapped fox and runs 11.5s. I wasn't **** talking any GM engine but since you brought it up, the northstar was among the worst, least reliable motors to ever curse the world with its presence. Those things blew.
Where has GM been in competitive racing outside the US? Where are the 24h of Le Mans wins from GM? Not the little league **** the vette runs in, I mean the big boy race.
Where has GM been in competitive racing outside the US? Where are the 24h of Le Mans wins from GM? Not the little league **** the vette runs in, I mean the big boy race.
Also maybe offshore boat racing is a LIIITLE more extreme than whatever road race youre thinking of. MAYBE :-) And youre trying to compare a stock engine in your grandmas el dorado vs a race engine? Thats even richer than the Cadillac tax!!
Last edited by tech@WS6store; Mar 31, 2019 at 12:19 AM.
I see what you're saying but the what I'm saying is rpms and trq ate inversely related that's a fact. So regardless of what engine it is the more rpms you turn the less trq you make. So to bring this full circle again the only way to have a fair comparison as to hio wants to stip is both engines need to have the same bore, and same stroke and since the new coyote is limited from factory for stroke kits then both need to be 5.0L with same bore and stroke. Then build from there once that happens the coyote will destroy the LS
As far as your other part...adding stroke to an engine REALLY only increases torque. Maybe some hp but since torque is force x a distance you are changing the distance and adding torque there BUT it also increases piston speed and trying to wrap a stroker to 8k would take MUCH more money than this budget had in the first place.
Everyone bringing in their unicorn builds when the facts are hard to swallow. Too many IFs.
Ford limited the engines and the aftermarket is like "meh just boost it and make sure to tell the ls guys they are using 1960s tech HAHAAAA"
This thread is all in good fun, but im not being whimsical in the actual facts.
Now maching an ls1 to a 5.0 would be about right. Or maybe a 4.8 crank with an ls1 bore. Thats VERY close. Thats a 311 or so. That would be very close on bore and stroke.
Then what? Make the heads flow the same?
Then same cr or?
Then what about cam(s) and intake?
I mean im building a 312 so it could be in the ballpark there. That would be interesting.
3.898 x 3.268. Thats as close as you'll get without blowing a crap ton on custom pistons etc.
Lets talk about this seriously. Since im building one thats close its pretty easy and feasible to make a REAL budget build out of it. If everyone can agree on it. If i were to guess it would likely be a stock 5.0 vs the 312...i mean if you want to have everything near exactly equal then basically that would be it. Cyl head flow etc etc.
Ford guys, im going to make a thread and keep is civil and not theoretical internet unicorn builds ls guys too. Maybe we can have a decent conversation and some real theory instead of id build this with a bazillion dollars.
Ill post the thread Tomorrow (today) and link it here. See what happens.
Then what? Make the heads flow the same?
Then same cr or?
Then what about cam(s) and intake?
I mean im building a 312 so it could be in the ballpark there. That would be interesting.
3.898 x 3.268. Thats as close as you'll get without blowing a crap ton on custom pistons etc.
Lets talk about this seriously. Since im building one thats close its pretty easy and feasible to make a REAL budget build out of it. If everyone can agree on it. If i were to guess it would likely be a stock 5.0 vs the 312...i mean if you want to have everything near exactly equal then basically that would be it. Cyl head flow etc etc.
Ford guys, im going to make a thread and keep is civil and not theoretical internet unicorn builds ls guys too. Maybe we can have a decent conversation and some real theory instead of id build this with a bazillion dollars.
Ill post the thread Tomorrow (today) and link it here. See what happens.
This is how it seems to me...
The Coyote was designed to have 4 valves heads, 4 cams and like what a 17 foot long time chain. That's a lot of moving parts adding complexity and cost. To make the wide 4 valve heads of the DOHC COYOTE fit in a vehicle the engine ended up with limited potential for displacement increase. The problem with DOHC Is the power produced vs the physical size of the engine. It's a power density Issue. The real question isn't hp per liter or any of that. It's hp for the volume of space the engine takes up and the weight of the engine.
GM got the POWER density (shoehorn max power in small package for a low cost with reliability) design correct and Ford got yet another epic fail in basic engineering design. First Ford V8's spit sparkplug out then the Ford's break the plugs in the head. - All very bad design and typical of Ford's lack of engineering ability for the last decade and a half
That's the difference in engineering excellence between the two companies and why LS destroyed Coyote again on the same $15,000
An equal and fair test factors in inferior the Ford power density design.
Coyote budget $16,500
LS budget $15,000
$900 more to the Coyote for 4 cams
$500 more for doing head work due to the extra 16 valves.
Either engine can make fantastic hp for a street car.
Of course if money and budget isn't an issue the Coyote is definitely a very capable engine.
The Coyote was designed to have 4 valves heads, 4 cams and like what a 17 foot long time chain. That's a lot of moving parts adding complexity and cost. To make the wide 4 valve heads of the DOHC COYOTE fit in a vehicle the engine ended up with limited potential for displacement increase. The problem with DOHC Is the power produced vs the physical size of the engine. It's a power density Issue. The real question isn't hp per liter or any of that. It's hp for the volume of space the engine takes up and the weight of the engine.
GM got the POWER density (shoehorn max power in small package for a low cost with reliability) design correct and Ford got yet another epic fail in basic engineering design. First Ford V8's spit sparkplug out then the Ford's break the plugs in the head. - All very bad design and typical of Ford's lack of engineering ability for the last decade and a half
That's the difference in engineering excellence between the two companies and why LS destroyed Coyote again on the same $15,000
An equal and fair test factors in inferior the Ford power density design.
Coyote budget $16,500
LS budget $15,000
$900 more to the Coyote for 4 cams
$500 more for doing head work due to the extra 16 valves.
Either engine can make fantastic hp for a street car.
Of course if money and budget isn't an issue the Coyote is definitely a very capable engine.
This is how it seems to me...
The Coyote was designed to have 4 valves heads, 4 cams and like what a 17 foot long time chain. That's a lot of moving parts adding complexity and cost. To make the wide 4 valve heads of the DOHC COYOTE fit in a vehicle the engine ended up with limited potential for displacement increase. The problem with DOHC Is the power produced vs the physical size of the engine. It's a power density Issue. The real question isn't hp per liter or any of that. It's hp for the volume of space the engine takes up and the weight of the engine.
GM got the POWER density (shoehorn max power in small package for a low cost with reliability) design correct and Ford got yet another epic fail in basic engineering design. First Ford V8's spit sparkplug out then the Ford's break the plugs in the head. - All very bad design and typical of Ford's lack of engineering ability for the last decade and a half
That's the difference in engineering excellence between the two companies and why LS destroyed Coyote again on the same $15,000
An equal and fair test factors in inferior the Ford power density design.
Coyote budget $16,500
LS budget $15,000
$900 more to the Coyote for 4 cams
$500 more for doing head work due to the extra 16 valves.
Either engine can make fantastic hp for a street car.
Of course if money and budget isn't an issue the Coyote is definitely a very capable engine.
The Coyote was designed to have 4 valves heads, 4 cams and like what a 17 foot long time chain. That's a lot of moving parts adding complexity and cost. To make the wide 4 valve heads of the DOHC COYOTE fit in a vehicle the engine ended up with limited potential for displacement increase. The problem with DOHC Is the power produced vs the physical size of the engine. It's a power density Issue. The real question isn't hp per liter or any of that. It's hp for the volume of space the engine takes up and the weight of the engine.
GM got the POWER density (shoehorn max power in small package for a low cost with reliability) design correct and Ford got yet another epic fail in basic engineering design. First Ford V8's spit sparkplug out then the Ford's break the plugs in the head. - All very bad design and typical of Ford's lack of engineering ability for the last decade and a half
That's the difference in engineering excellence between the two companies and why LS destroyed Coyote again on the same $15,000
An equal and fair test factors in inferior the Ford power density design.
Coyote budget $16,500
LS budget $15,000
$900 more to the Coyote for 4 cams
$500 more for doing head work due to the extra 16 valves.
Either engine can make fantastic hp for a street car.
Of course if money and budget isn't an issue the Coyote is definitely a very capable engine.
On The Tree
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 176
Likes: 71
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,128
Likes: 645
From: Winchester, VA
I see what you're saying but the what I'm saying is rpms and trq ate inversely related that's a fact. So regardless of what engine it is the more rpms you turn the less trq you make. So to bring this full circle again the only way to have a fair comparison as to hio wants to stip is both engines need to have the same bore, and same stroke and since the new coyote is limited from factory for stroke kits then both need to be 5.0L with same bore and stroke. Then build from there once that happens the coyote will destroy the LS
I don't give 2 ***** about the coyotah displacement deficiency. That's in the way the engines are designed.....it is what it is.
Your idea is only restricting the ls design. But to be 100% honest here a coyotah can't make the power a 4.8 does. The coyotah block simply cannot handle it.
No need to get big mad. I mean they are only professionals so what do they know right?
Youre working with an unlimited budget there then boss? Maybe that much boost on a stroked 5.8l wouldn't work? I mean they had to sleeve the 5.0 to handle it they didnt do it for fun.
Youre working with an unlimited budget there then boss? Maybe that much boost on a stroked 5.8l wouldn't work? I mean they had to sleeve the 5.0 to handle it they didnt do it for fun.
You mean the fact that they bought 4 new cams and that's a round 1300 total just for the came themselves vs a 400 cam for the LS.... Yea kinda hard to upgrade the components when **** cost more to do it correctly. And the LS engine was done correctly more so than the coyote which I hope even you can agree on that. But we can also talk about how coyotes have made 700+ stock long block vs LS stock long block... Oh wait the coyote wins that too wow
YYYAAAWWWNNNNN......sounds like your a professional excuse maker for the coyotah.
How many coyotahs do you own mac?
How many ls do you own?
You need to study dynos more. Like the graphs. Engine dynos. Why do you think that heavy hitters spend days and thousands on one engine just in a dyno cell? The longer you can carry the torque the faster you can go. It will go down, but doesnt have to so quickly.
As far as your other part...adding stroke to an engine REALLY only increases torque. Maybe some hp but since torque is force x a distance you are changing the distance and adding torque there BUT it also increases piston speed and trying to wrap a stroker to 8k would take MUCH more money than this budget had in the first place.
Everyone bringing in their unicorn builds when the facts are hard to swallow. Too many IFs.
Ford limited the engines and the aftermarket is like "meh just boost it and make sure to tell the ls guys they are using 1960s tech HAHAAAA"
This thread is all in good fun, but im not being whimsical in the actual facts.
As far as your other part...adding stroke to an engine REALLY only increases torque. Maybe some hp but since torque is force x a distance you are changing the distance and adding torque there BUT it also increases piston speed and trying to wrap a stroker to 8k would take MUCH more money than this budget had in the first place.
Everyone bringing in their unicorn builds when the facts are hard to swallow. Too many IFs.
Ford limited the engines and the aftermarket is like "meh just boost it and make sure to tell the ls guys they are using 1960s tech HAHAAAA"
This thread is all in good fun, but im not being whimsical in the actual facts.
The coyotah crowd thought they had some magical advantage with boost......but they didn't.
Btw i did a little rough math on the tq per/L because hp/L simply makes no ******* sense since hp is just a calculation. The ls came in at about 200tq/L.....the coyote 160tq/L
You need to study dynos more. Like the graphs. Engine dynos. Why do you think that heavy hitters spend days and thousands on one engine just in a dyno cell? The longer you can carry the torque the faster you can go. It will go down, but doesnt have to so quickly.
As far as your other part...adding stroke to an engine REALLY only increases torque. Maybe some hp but since torque is force x a distance you are changing the distance and adding torque there BUT it also increases piston speed and trying to wrap a stroker to 8k would take MUCH more money than this budget had in the first place.
Everyone bringing in their unicorn builds when the facts are hard to swallow. Too many IFs.
Ford limited the engines and the aftermarket is like "meh just boost it and make sure to tell the ls guys they are using 1960s tech HAHAAAA"
This thread is all in good fun, but im not being whimsical in the actual facts.
As far as your other part...adding stroke to an engine REALLY only increases torque. Maybe some hp but since torque is force x a distance you are changing the distance and adding torque there BUT it also increases piston speed and trying to wrap a stroker to 8k would take MUCH more money than this budget had in the first place.
Everyone bringing in their unicorn builds when the facts are hard to swallow. Too many IFs.
Ford limited the engines and the aftermarket is like "meh just boost it and make sure to tell the ls guys they are using 1960s tech HAHAAAA"
This thread is all in good fun, but im not being whimsical in the actual facts.
11 Second Club
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 15
From: South Florida
Whats up tech@ws6. Welcome to the **** storm. Lol.
Get good laughs at hihos comments. "well but but my furd is faster than everyone with an OE blower" Lol. Yea well just remember no one in here has a termi swapped fox either. What a *** post from you. Lol.
You so dumb hiho. Guess what more tq & more rpm equals? More horsepower idiot. So as you only believe in tq. Rpm must mean nothing to you as you don't believe in horsepower. If you speak of rpm, with tq, you are speaking of horsepower tard. Duh duh
So if your tq is not calculated. Is it NM or LB/FT? Cause one shows different numbers than the other. Since you must know which one is real & which calculated. Or just tighten the bolt to just before it snaps is your real measurement. Lol.
Get good laughs at hihos comments. "well but but my furd is faster than everyone with an OE blower" Lol. Yea well just remember no one in here has a termi swapped fox either. What a *** post from you. Lol.
You so dumb hiho. Guess what more tq & more rpm equals? More horsepower idiot. So as you only believe in tq. Rpm must mean nothing to you as you don't believe in horsepower. If you speak of rpm, with tq, you are speaking of horsepower tard. Duh duh
So if your tq is not calculated. Is it NM or LB/FT? Cause one shows different numbers than the other. Since you must know which one is real & which calculated. Or just tighten the bolt to just before it snaps is your real measurement. Lol.