Bolt on 5.0, beats 4th gen 427 stroker camaro SS
02-25-2014, 12:30 AM
#162
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I did basically what Mike did, I specifically told you this was OFF THE SHELF parts in 1995... That's not the 60's, HoHo... It's the 90's... Same digits, upside down I suppose...
You proved yourself wrong, by saying one thing, then opposing yourself, then being led by the hand back to it by Irun11's and you got all uppity with him about it too, because you realized that you'd done it right in this thread, just like he told you...
C'mon... You really should find the proper pill... something needs to calm you because you're all upset over nothing... and we can always tell, because your posts get real short EVERY time you come around... It's hilarious because even though we tell you why it's so obvious, you do the same thing over and over, as if you're trying to prove your insanity...
02-25-2014, 12:33 AM
#164
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-25-2014, 12:35 AM
#165
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I won't argue that, it really is relative. The 2V ('99-'04) Mustangs really were the equivalent to (or VERY close to it) LT1 F-bodies, and the 3V cars sat nicely between the standard LT1s and Mach 1s. Not as fast as LS1 F-bodies, but with no competition...there was no point to go any further.
Shhhhh...you'll get called a Ford fanboi. 
02-25-2014, 08:00 AM
#166
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
I didn't have to prove you wrong, but I did it anyway. You just said again, I'm trying to go back to the 60's... You're the one who actually did that, bringing the "CAMMER" up, but I simply stated the fact that Ford built engines making over 400hp since the 1960's. We went over several "over 400hp Fords" after you said Ford couldn't do it... THAT proved you wrong, regardless your current claim. It just did, period, end of story.
When I did basically what Mike did, I specifically told you this was OFF THE SHELF parts in 1995... That's not the 60's, HoHo... It's the 90's... Same digits, upside down I suppose...
You proved yourself wrong, by saying one thing, then opposing yourself, then being led by the hand back to it by Irun11's and you got all uppity with him about it too, because you realized that you'd done it right in this thread, just like he told you...
C'mon... You really should find the proper pill... something needs to calm you because you're all upset over nothing... and we can always tell, because your posts get real short EVERY time you come around... It's hilarious because even though we tell you why it's so obvious, you do the same thing over and over, as if you're trying to prove your insanity...
When I did basically what Mike did, I specifically told you this was OFF THE SHELF parts in 1995... That's not the 60's, HoHo... It's the 90's... Same digits, upside down I suppose...
You proved yourself wrong, by saying one thing, then opposing yourself, then being led by the hand back to it by Irun11's and you got all uppity with him about it too, because you realized that you'd done it right in this thread, just like he told you...
C'mon... You really should find the proper pill... something needs to calm you because you're all upset over nothing... and we can always tell, because your posts get real short EVERY time you come around... It's hilarious because even though we tell you why it's so obvious, you do the same thing over and over, as if you're trying to prove your insanity...
Explained above. As far as the engines. Full bolt-ons it's close. I may even give the edge to the 5.0, but it would be a slim one.
02-25-2014, 10:19 AM
#168
Yea I know a lt would've out classed ya on out put. So know you want to back me up to the 80's and 90's..........lmao. I have no real experience with those cars other than what I know about sbc's and seeing a few run at my local track. You don't want ls1's involved and itdontrun wants to go back to the 60's........lmao.
here lets do it like this. What do you want me to hypathetically build by your rules to outrun you?
I have no problem with the new 5.0 stuff. It's a little over hyped but I can see the excitement coming from the furd camp after all these years of sucking *** n/a. Do I think it's better than current gm stuff???? No, but on par to a point power wise. Once it gets past bolt-on stuff it won't keep up very well. Against the new LT stuff???? I guess time will tell there. But that **** looks pretty good.
here lets do it like this. What do you want me to hypathetically build by your rules to outrun you?
I have no problem with the new 5.0 stuff. It's a little over hyped but I can see the excitement coming from the furd camp after all these years of sucking *** n/a. Do I think it's better than current gm stuff???? No, but on par to a point power wise. Once it gets past bolt-on stuff it won't keep up very well. Against the new LT stuff???? I guess time will tell there. But that **** looks pretty good.
In terms of my car which you brought up and had nothing to do with the thread-I simply stated why I went the blower route but also stated I could have stayed n/a with Ford parts non modified. Yes an LT1 could out do me-I stated that. Had compression and cubes over me not to mention it was newer. No biggy. Again if I choose to Ford had parts for me to use to compete staying n/a. The blower route was easier. That is not why I retorted to you and others stating Ford can't or didn't make n/a parts comparable.
Ford can compete with GM n/a to using Factory parts designed by said manufactor and that includes LS1 and up to now. And Ford has modern stuff again that does it too.
I actually give the LS3 the edge compared to the Coyote stuff and actually prefer it if you stay n/a. The LS7 has a big edge
02-25-2014, 11:25 AM
#169
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
You built a hypothetical engine and said what you thought it would make. No proof of nothing. Then wanted to dumb down my comparison to the point I couldn't even have a airlid. I brought up gmpp heads. A factory production head that they commissioned linginfelter to cnc to gmpp spec. It is a production head unlike what you were trying to compare.
The ls7 has it all over the coyote/roadrunner stuff. In n/a form they are not even a worthy competitor. So then you agree Chevy has it all over ford in the n/a world?
The ls7 has it all over the coyote/roadrunner stuff. In n/a form they are not even a worthy competitor. So then you agree Chevy has it all over ford in the n/a world?
02-25-2014, 12:00 PM
#171
You can't do it with stock cats either so stop putting stipulations on me w/o putting them on yourself.
It's easy to get 450whp out of a ls1. GMPP cnc'd ls6 heads and the grand am cup cam. Actually knowing what I know today it would make about 480whp.
Good luck with 351....you'll need it. Now I bet your talking carb'd **** to. You're everywhere tonight.
It's easy to get 450whp out of a ls1. GMPP cnc'd ls6 heads and the grand am cup cam. Actually knowing what I know today it would make about 480whp.
Good luck with 351....you'll need it. Now I bet your talking carb'd **** to. You're everywhere tonight.
ALLLL......ooookkkk..... Now I see you want to stroke that pos to keep up with a 347. Understandable. Do it using production parts.....that's what I like any way. Now you want to use pre 01 **** and catalog ****.......Not a ******* problem. SB2 coming up. I mean if you're goin to use the cream of the furd crop expect the same from me.
You built a hypothetical engine and said what you thought it would make. No proof of nothing. Then wanted to dumb down my comparison to the point I couldn't even have a airlid. I brought up gmpp heads. A factory production head that they commissioned linginfelter to cnc to gmpp spec. It is a production head unlike what you were trying to compare.
The ls7 has it all over the coyote/roadrunner stuff. In n/a form they are not even a worthy competitor. So then you agree Chevy has it all over ford in the n/a world?
The ls7 has it all over the coyote/roadrunner stuff. In n/a form they are not even a worthy competitor. So then you agree Chevy has it all over ford in the n/a world?
02-25-2014, 12:10 PM
#172
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could give a **** less what any of them made back then. We are not living in that time and if you think that **** is so great from back then you should have bought something from that time to drive instead of a *** *** escape.
Seriously HoHo... PAY SOME ******' ATTENTION!!! You're making yourself look either like a total moron or... quite high on illicit drugs.
You lost by not putting your money where your mouth is.
Does that mean I'll be allowed to tell everyone how they should build what I like instead of what they like, or tell them their car is slow because they didn't build as I would have?????
02-25-2014, 12:33 PM
#173
In your mind you win by default, but not the real world. Here in the real world, we require proof. Go back and read it again and perhaps you'll figure this out.
If you could give a **** less, which makes NO SENSE in reality, why did you take up the debate when Mike said THAT'S EXACTLY the builds we'd be starting with???? Did you fail, AGAIN, by not noticing what he said before you told him you'd win???
Seriously HoHo... PAY SOME ******' ATTENTION!!! You're making yourself look either like a total moron or... quite high on illicit drugs.
Was there a bet? I didn't think so. However... I just decided on an 87 Fox body coupe. I suspect I'll slap together a 408 and you and I will be around the same engine size... Then we can compare time slips and see how far behind your car is... I'm guessing AT LEAST 1/2 second, N/A and probably well over 1 second, both using nitrous.
Does that mean I'll be allowed to tell everyone how they should build what I like instead of what they like, or tell them their car is slow because they didn't build as I would have?????
If you could give a **** less, which makes NO SENSE in reality, why did you take up the debate when Mike said THAT'S EXACTLY the builds we'd be starting with???? Did you fail, AGAIN, by not noticing what he said before you told him you'd win???
Seriously HoHo... PAY SOME ******' ATTENTION!!! You're making yourself look either like a total moron or... quite high on illicit drugs.
Was there a bet? I didn't think so. However... I just decided on an 87 Fox body coupe. I suspect I'll slap together a 408 and you and I will be around the same engine size... Then we can compare time slips and see how far behind your car is... I'm guessing AT LEAST 1/2 second, N/A and probably well over 1 second, both using nitrous.
Does that mean I'll be allowed to tell everyone how they should build what I like instead of what they like, or tell them their car is slow because they didn't build as I would have?????
Yep....most don't like it if I tell them their **** is ****. Doesn't change the fact that most people do **** like **** and get offended when you tell them. Nothing idiotic about it though. You may be surprised at the ones who have pm'd me to chat about there stuff and how's and why's of my stuff.
Spewing the stupid **** you do is very idiotic. And if I remember correctly in the AN&P section there was a move to ban your dumbass.
You stupid weak bitch.
Spewing the stupid **** you do is very idiotic. And if I remember correctly in the AN&P section there was a move to ban your dumbass.
You stupid weak bitch.
02-25-2014, 12:37 PM
#174
You should stick to LS stuff because you clearly don't know squat about Fords.
The "BOSS 429" wasn't the "CAMMER" at all. The BOSS 429 was called a "semi-hemi" because Chrysler had trademarked the "HEMI" name. The "CAMMER" was a SOHC 427(actually 425ci), based on the same engine that was the "side oiler" and 427 wedge and was indeed used in production cars... at least the records show Ford sold enough to homologate them. More were sold over the counter, I'm sure. The issue with knowing what's what with THAT engine is the variations. W/O seeing one, you may not know which is in an old Galaxie, since they offered 2 other 427's at the same time, EACH of which was rated at over 400hp.
Talk about a laughable comment... THAT was laughable!
The "BOSS 429" wasn't the "CAMMER" at all. The BOSS 429 was called a "semi-hemi" because Chrysler had trademarked the "HEMI" name. The "CAMMER" was a SOHC 427(actually 425ci), based on the same engine that was the "side oiler" and 427 wedge and was indeed used in production cars... at least the records show Ford sold enough to homologate them. More were sold over the counter, I'm sure. The issue with knowing what's what with THAT engine is the variations. W/O seeing one, you may not know which is in an old Galaxie, since they offered 2 other 427's at the same time, EACH of which was rated at over 400hp.
Talk about a laughable comment... THAT was laughable!
Last edited by R6cowboy; 02-25-2014 at 12:46 PM.
02-25-2014, 02:54 PM
#176
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It'llrun, are you meaning the 427 "Cammer" came in production vehicles from the factory? Or do you mean the engine was installed in production vehicles by a dealer? From what I understood Ford never installed the 427 SOHC "Cammer" into any factory vehicle, as in they never installed the engine into a vehicle at the factory but it was an available "over-the-counter" production engine. And Ford did sell enough of them over-the-counter to have the engine homologated. My father among other friends who grew-up in the '60s and '70s knew people who would purchase the engine over-the-counter and have it installed in a vehicle via a Ford dealer.
Now then... TASCA Ford did several installations over the years(probably still does) and those may have been their cars... On the other hand, I found absolute info claiming the T-bolt specifically, went to a fab shop after Ford built them including their engines, for roll cage work or the like... Again, I personally thought that got the Side Oiler. The Comet Cyclone... I can't get enough info.
I did just find a story about a drag racer and the guy in charge of factory supported motors at Ford... Fran something. According to that, the ended up with what raced in the A/FX class with a factory supplied Comet with a 427 SOHC... I know these cars existed, no question.
The only question is, how would we classify their sales... They were built and were sold, but basically nobody who bought one ever drove it on the street... They did get a factory VIN though, apparently. With that, we also know the engine was built STRICTLY for NASCAR, where it dominated until Chrysler threatened to do what it ultimately did... pull out, if NASCAR didn't ban the engine, which it did.
I've never bought one so... I have seen at least 1 at a car show. It was a Mercury and the guy had signs around it with various information. He definitely claimed that he bought it new in 1965, from a Mercury dealer and he was old enough and wealthy enough that it seemed to fit.
02-25-2014, 03:02 PM
#178
On the road course... id imagine the Z28 will dominate. The Boss is great around the twisties for what it is and to be honest, is definately a better handling car then most enthusiasts have driven. But if GM put the time and money in (and hopefully they did for a 75k base price), it should roll out around the twisties and put a strong gap on the Boss.
02-25-2014, 03:40 PM
#180
You have to understand that TIVCT completely throws the lack of cubes concept that everyone is used to right out the window. Logic says to make that power NA from a 302... you would have to spin such insane RPM...not with honda technology!
But regardless of all that... My original statement was aimed more at using what the factories gave us (Stock heads, stock cams) and keeping the cars relatively close to their original production model.