Heater

Just a guess without me looking it up:

Without Meth; I would think around 750.

DiscerningZ32

I thought I remembered reading 800whp in a mustang magazine, but can't find it now.
I just thought someone might have hit 1000whp. I'm pretty sure they have with the 5.4l and pump gas.

assasinator

they will make 700rwhp on pump with a blower, a little more with a turbo.

DiscerningZ32

Oh yeah? That's the only thing that I'm not so keen on about the mod motors.
The teksid 4.6 weighs about as much as an LS1 and is only a little taller, but it's just a little limited on 93.
Then again, it's not like 700whp isn't enough.

ilovechevy1

iTrader: (4)

if anyone forgot that the BBC is more of an engine than an LSX anything then they are dumb...it does'nt matter what the platform is really...the larger CI engine WILL have more overall power potential..as a huge LS anything fan, even i know better than to say an LSX has an advantage over a BBC..because it does'nt lol

ilovechevy1

iTrader: (4)

yeah..i agree with you there...if anyone thinks the only reason there are no LSX cars in Pro stock is because they cant' make the power then they are HIGHLY mistaken. there are some bad *** 4.6's out there running 6's in full tube chassis cars..that's cool...but if someone is trying to argue there is no way an LSX can run those times then they are just ignorant..that's very cools that Ford owners push thier lil 4.6's that far..but if a 4.6 can do that..imagine what a 5.7 L and larger LSX's can do if someone who had the money really..i mean REALLY pushed them..this is no real test of what these engines can really do..there are too many weight differences and restrictions in those classses of cars..making it to where the person with the most powerful engine may not be the fastest car..i'd rather stick to more streetable car's in an argument like this..where car's have a closer selection of tires and simialr weights

automach1

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

How come its always an excuses when the little 4.6 ran faster then the LSX engines. Well we could do that but we just didn't want to. No one has did it yet. I am sure many have tried just not got there yet. You guys wanted the fastest car using a modular engine and now its faster then ya'll you make excuses. HAHAHA!!!!!

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

Dude my 2500hd 6.0 runs with sn95 4.6 gt's. There not that great.

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

So your 2500HD has went 6's? I mean we already established that no LS has. But a 4.6 has.

Heater

LS's are now the bench mark for all other engines; so admiting another engine is faster is like admiting defeat.
Also remember what site your on.

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

LOL...Ya I know. They will come up with every excuse for them to be on top.

jetaws6

iTrader: (3)

You guys are like the pot calling the kettle black

DiscerningZ32

Uh... No one HAS done it yet. It's an excuse, but it's a valid one. And no, no one has tried it that I know of, unless you know of anything otherwise.

Let me put it this way. John's car makes 2300hp. Do you really think a twin turbo LSX can't make that power? Well it has made more (try close to 3000). It's just never been put into a Pro Stock car.

BTW, I've always known about John's car. I asked nothing about the quickest mod motor but provided the "excuse."
The 4V Mod motor's and the LS engines have always been on equal ground. Some may deny it, but it's the truth.

Just to be a dick, since that's what I'm getting from others... What's the quickest full weight, non tube chassis, 4.6l mod motor? You know, apples to apples, since there are no tube chassis ls cars. If we're going to compare quickest times, might as well do it on equal ground. The quickest I could find was Sandy Wold, and they went high 7's. I'm sure it could go quicker, but NO ONE HAS DONE IT, they all went with the 5.4l (like MMR). Hey, that sounds awfully familiar, doesn't it?

Just because some of the members on here swing hard from GM's nuts doesn't mean everyone else has to come off as a complete douche. This thread went to **** days ago.

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

WHAT?! WHo is a black kettle. I am not even a kettle.

I haven't made any excuses of races I lost yet. Then again I haven't lost none in the 5.0. YET.

I got spanked twice in the G8 once to a C/H/I 02 Z28 before I had spray. Then once to a 400whp EVO when I wasn't using spray.

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

I honestly can't tell y ou fastest car without tube chassis. I came from teh LS world to the mustang. SO I know all about LS engines. But when I went to buy a new car the camaro was just to heavy. The 5.0 was doing great with responding to mods. Only other option was a EVO X. But they want to much for them if ask me 35+ new. They weigh more then the older evo's also. I could got best deal on Camaro since I get multiple discounts. Military, USAA, Rebates, Employe discount. But it came down to the car isn't going as fast as it should for the power they are making. Plus the 5.0 was all around cheaper to mod.

DiscerningZ32

I don't blame you for going with the 5.0 at all. If I was going for a pony car I'd do the same in a heart beat. As far as the EVO, the price isn't the only issue I have with them. Mitsubishi never should have added the weight they did (like in the camaro) or replaced the M6 with the semi-auto that explodes with anything more than 300awhp. Yeah, they offer the m5, but the M6 should have still been an option. For the price range, the 5.0 is probably the best car option.

LT/LS Guy

Nice way to change the subject.

Again, what's the fastest non-tube 4.6? You seem to be able find answers to everything else.

ohioborn80

iTrader: (2)

No change in subject. We was having a conversation. As far as the non tube 4.6 I don't really care. You have google just like me.

jetaws6

iTrader: (3)

Every thread if its a mustang that loses you guys share your light on the subject if its a lsx that loses (even though thats impossible ) we share our light thus the pot calling the kettle black aka hypocritical.