GT Performance Mods 2005+ Mustang GT Performance and Technical Information

05GT w/KB 1/4 mile video!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 24, 2005 | 08:34 PM
  #1  
stang9325's Avatar
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 25, 2005
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
11.3 with some traction issues....wonder how long the motor will last. Enjoy!

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...d.php?t=235997
Old Nov 25, 2005 | 05:18 AM
  #2  
TURBO 05's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: December 14, 2004
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Originally posted by stang9325@November 24, 2005, 9:37 PM
11.3 with some traction issues....wonder how long the motor will last. Enjoy!

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...d.php?t=235997
this is a repost #1 an #2 if it has a good tunner then it will last for ever if it has a bad tunner then a couple runs
Old Nov 25, 2005 | 06:02 AM
  #3  
Dubai's Avatar
V6 Member
 
Joined: May 3, 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
damnnnn!!! that kb rocks
Old Nov 25, 2005 | 07:36 PM
  #4  
daniels2005's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: November 24, 2005
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
It will do fine with a good A/F ratio and if the motor is kept under the factory rev limit. Almost every supercharger company is showing dyno numbers in the 6400-6750 range, these motors are toast at that RPM even in N/A form.
Old Nov 25, 2005 | 07:44 PM
  #5  
dhof303's Avatar
 
Joined: December 18, 2004
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Nice, but a little slow for 11psi. Here is what a single turbo (67mm) with 11psi can do on a hot September day. 10.65 @ 131mph on the factory long block.

http://169stang.2005stang.com/powerhouse0510.67.mpg
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 09:10 AM
  #6  
stang9325's Avatar
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 25, 2005
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
i thought x psi with a SC vs the same psi with a turbo wasn't the same. i don't think you can compare the two
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 09:12 AM
  #7  
stang9325's Avatar
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 25, 2005
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Originally posted by TURBO 05@November 25, 2005, 7:21 AM
this is a repost #1 an #2 if it has a good tunner then it will last for ever if it has a bad tunner then a couple runs
could you provide the link for the original post? i search through these forums a lot and never saw the video for this car. saw the show, not the video. second, there is already one guy on here that had a safe tune running around 9 psi i think. he blew his motor. so your theory doesn't hold water...sorry
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 09:55 AM
  #8  
don_w's Avatar
 
Joined: June 21, 2005
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 1
Originally posted by stang9325@November 26, 2005, 8:15 AM
could you provide the link for the original post? i search through these forums a lot and never saw the video for this car. saw the show, not the video.
There are two previous threads in the Drag Racing Forum (where this thread may end up too):

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=39496

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=39470
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 09:59 AM
  #9  
don_w's Avatar
 
Joined: June 21, 2005
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 1
Originally posted by stang9325@November 26, 2005, 8:13 AM
i thought x psi with a SC vs the same psi with a turbo wasn't the same. i don't think you can compare the two
IMHO, I don't think you can compare equivalent psi ratings even between different superchargers, let alone turbos. A car running 10psi on a twin screw SC will perform differently than a car running 10psi on a centrifugal SC.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:03 AM
  #10  
stang9325's Avatar
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 25, 2005
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Originally posted by don_w@November 26, 2005, 12:02 PM
IMHO, I don't think you can compare equivalent psi ratings even between different superchargers, let alone turbos. A car running 10psi on a twin screw SC will perform differently than a car running 10psi on a centrifugal SC.
That is my point exactly. dhof303 posted that is was slow for 11psi. he was comparing a SC to a turbo.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:07 AM
  #11  
don_w's Avatar
 
Joined: June 21, 2005
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 1
Originally posted by stang9325@November 26, 2005, 9:06 AM
That is my point exactly. dhof303 posted that is was slow for 11psi. he was comparing a SC to a turbo.
Yep.. I agreed with you; just expanded a little.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:10 AM
  #12  
max2000jp's Avatar
Shelby GT500 Member
 
Joined: September 2, 2004
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Originally posted by don_w@November 26, 2005, 12:02 PM
IMHO, I don't think you can compare equivalent psi ratings even between different superchargers, let alone turbos. A car running 10psi on a twin screw SC will perform differently than a car running 10psi on a centrifugal SC.
Turbos are more efficient, therfore you are correct. That's why I like turbos, but they are slightly more costly.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:16 AM
  #13  
stang9325's Avatar
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 25, 2005
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Originally posted by don_w@November 26, 2005, 12:10 PM
Yep.. I agreed with you; just expanded a little.
that's what i figured, just wanted to make sure
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:41 AM
  #14  
dhof303's Avatar
 
Joined: December 18, 2004
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Originally posted by max2000jp@November 26, 2005, 11:13 AM
Turbos are more efficient, therfore you are correct. That's why I like turbos, but they are slightly more costly.
MMR 68mm Turbo kit $4999.99 Release date 12-2004
KB Twin screw $Probably over 5K, Release date originally 01-05 then 02-05 then 05-05 then 08-05 then 10-05 now? Still waiting.

I know comparing psi between different forced induction methods is different, and yes turbos usually cost more, but not always. We originally wanted a supercharger, a KB, until being lied to by the company and then badmouthed on the internet by the owner. A supercharger is a great mod, but at boost levels needed to run those times there will be some serious repair and maintenance in the future. If you aim to race then maybe this is a good choice. If you drive your car on the street, I would suggest a SC a little more conservative/less costly/better support, or get a turbo.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 10:58 AM
  #15  
max2000jp's Avatar
Shelby GT500 Member
 
Joined: September 2, 2004
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Originally posted by dhof303@November 26, 2005, 12:44 PM
MMR 68mm Turbo kit $4999.99 Release date 12-2004
KB Twin screw $Probably over 5K, Release date originally 01-05 then 02-05 then 05-05 then 08-05 then 10-05 now? Still waiting.

I know comparing psi between different forced induction methods is different, and yes turbos usually cost more, but not always. We originally wanted a supercharger, a KB, until being lied to by the company and then badmouthed on the internet by the owner. A supercharger is a great mod, but at boost levels needed to run those times there will be some serious repair and maintenance in the future. If you aim to race then maybe this is a good choice. If you drive your car on the street, I would suggest a SC a little more conservative/less costly/better support, or get a turbo.
MMR's kit sounds pretty good, but personally I'd want to somewhat upgrade it, which would raise the price. Are you planning on running a Electronic Boost controler in your car? Does the kit come with a BB turbo? I have been eyeing the Hahn Racecraft 05' twin turbo system. They are local and are well known in the turbo scene.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 11:03 AM
  #16  
dhof303's Avatar
 
Joined: December 18, 2004
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
max200jp: I don't want to totally hijack the thread, just my 0.02 toward KB so PM me and I can give you specifics.

donw: Hey, I am coming out to San Diego from Dec 26th through Jan 2nd and my wife and I want to stop by some good speed shops, do you know of any besides JBA?
Thanks,
Derek
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 11:32 AM
  #17  
don_w's Avatar
 
Joined: June 21, 2005
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 1
JBA Racing is the only one here I have visited personally... they did a good job on my rear gears, but I wasn't impressed with their dyno abilities. I also have heard mixed reactions about DPR (some good, some not so good), but have no first hand knowledge myself. rrobello has dealt with them I believe.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 12:00 PM
  #18  
daniels2005's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: November 24, 2005
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
second, there is already one guy on here that had a safe tune running around 9 psi i think. he blew his motor. so your theory doesn't hold water...sorry


I don't think you can make the case that these motors won't handle 9lbs of boost. If you are talking about the 9lb Procharger car that recently croaked, the car was running pretty poor numbers for a supercharged car with a custom tune. You need to know more about the tune to say it was safe (and in this case it doesn't sound like a good tune or a safe tune).
Second, the RPMs must be kept under control. The big lie right now is "500hp @ 6750rpm" with the new XYZ supercharger. The engine will not handle those RPM, the valvetrain cannot do it, even if the rotating assembly can. You trash the motor revving it that high for any period of time. The factroy rpm limiter is not an arbitrary number. The only supercharger company I've talked to over the last few months that even has come clean about this tidbit is Whipple. Whipple makes the power without upping the RPM limiter, and if you build the motor later, you can rev it higher at that point. 522hp with the 10lb kit under 6100rpm. I have this kit on order, but it looks like January for delivery. One engineer at a supercharger company told me that the engine had a 3 minute lifespan over 6400rpm, and Whipple said that they are running their chargers for 100 hours straight with no failure because the the dealer will carry the kit in the SVO stores.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 12:19 PM
  #19  
dhof303's Avatar
 
Joined: December 18, 2004
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Finally, a supercharger that has some respect from me. I knew that Ford favored the Whipple and it does make good, reliable horsepower as seen on the Ford GT. Furthermore, it is not only the RPM that limits the engine's life, it does depend on the tune quite heavily in the 24 valve motor specifically because of the piston design being thin in the valve relief area. Whipple is a good choice IMO, likely to have Ford backing and warranty if left alone.
Old Nov 26, 2005 | 12:31 PM
  #20  
mr-mstng's Avatar
GTR Member
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 4,743
Likes: 4
From: NE PA
Closing....Repost.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
09-gt/cs
GT Performance Mods
9
Oct 15, 2015 10:03 AM
TerryD
1964-1970 Mustang
3
Sep 28, 2015 11:48 AM
JTB
Motorsports
0
Sep 7, 2015 10:20 PM




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:30 PM.