FRPP 3V Intake
4/27/10, 08:05 AM
#61
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 20, 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if my goal is not just straight line acceleration and having another 150-200lb over the front top of my engine is detrimental to what my needs are. There is a nut for every bolt. The naturally aspirated route is the most labor intensive however all this can be accomplished for far less than quoted if say labor was free to me. Hell if all said and done it can be accomplished for about 3k using new parts and lost of work.... I hate to tell you, its not freedom of speech territory for anyone. Anything and everything written here can be removed as well as archived for the forum owners purposes. Therefore freedom of speech it is not.
- I wasn't talking about a straight line, so on road events, same suspension/tires setup, stroked engines N/A vs FI, you might still be looking at their plates... now, onto the cost...
- 3K? Really?!?! a 9000rpm rotating assembly, pistons, heads, and just about everything that was mentioned in this thread, for 3k? well, I'll stay tuned to the thread where you can show the rest of us how it can be done. This will definitely bring to light that the companies out there are charging us an arm and a leg, armed robbery! if someone like you can get it done for 3K vs the 50K that Bullitt995 guessed.
- It's still freedom of speech, you are free to say whatever you want, but with that freedom comes responsibility, so the owners of the forum have to excercise that responsibility if we don't know how to do it ourselves.
Last edited by rony1976; 4/27/10 at 08:07 AM.
4/27/10, 09:16 AM
#62
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2009
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem isn't necessarily the rotating assembly. Although there will be decent money in that. For a 9000 rpm effective range you need a lightweight, yet strong rotating assembly. This means billet pieces pretty much throughout which gets pretty expensive.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
4/27/10, 05:03 PM
#63
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11:1 cr is quite possible on pump gas. Some engine builders have built engines with higher compression and still run on pump gas.
Oiling is what I was mearly asking about. Then again a dry sump system for mod motors can be had for about 2500bux with pumps. As for any oiling issues after that, gotta pay to play.
9,000 rpm is well within the specs of a good forged set of pistons & rods.
ITB's are arund 3k.
Now as for fuel system, a full return style fuel system can be had for less than 2k with triple pumps in the basket.
Oiling is what I was mearly asking about. Then again a dry sump system for mod motors can be had for about 2500bux with pumps. As for any oiling issues after that, gotta pay to play.
9,000 rpm is well within the specs of a good forged set of pistons & rods.
ITB's are arund 3k.
Now as for fuel system, a full return style fuel system can be had for less than 2k with triple pumps in the basket.
I'm putting some of this in my signature to document the hilarity of your "intelligence".
4/27/10, 05:13 PM
#64
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem isn't necessarily the rotating assembly. Although there will be decent money in that. For a 9000 rpm effective range you need a lightweight, yet strong rotating assembly. This means billet pieces pretty much throughout which gets pretty expensive.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
By the way, a billet rotating assembly (which I have personally spec'd out) costs A LOT. The crank alone costs about 5k if I remember correctly.
Last edited by Bullitt995; 4/27/10 at 05:16 PM.
4/27/10, 05:15 PM
#65
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: January 9, 2005
Location: New Carlisle, Ohio (20 miles north of Dayton)
Posts: 6,982
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Don't forget to include mine "Butthead"
I will give you one thing Nick. Your an *** day or night. 
Why do you continue to post amoung us losers on this site.
Only for your only personal entertainment must be the reason because no one cares anything you have to say. 
Move on *******! And I guess if you really want to impress any of us... post some pictures of your build up, dyno sheets, anything but your hollow opinions that mean absolutely nothing. I said it once a few weeks ago and I will say it again. You have never offered any pictures, vids or instructions on how to do anything on this site. Ever! Nothing but opinions with nothing backing them up. I believe you have what in known as "small man syndrome" While I have never seen you I can only imagine a guy that in 4'6" tall weighing 230 lbs, bald, a 3 inch peter and pot belly and an opinion that tries to make up for everything lacking in his real life.
Last edited by 70MACH1OWNER; 4/27/10 at 05:42 PM.
4/27/10, 06:49 PM
#67
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget to include mine "Butthead" will give you one thing Nick. Your an *** day or night. Why do you continue to post amoung us losers on this site. Only for your only personal entertainment must be the reason because no one cares anything you have to say. Move on *******! And I guess if you really want to impress any of us... post some pictures of your build up, dyno sheets, anything but your hollow opinions that mean absolutely nothing. I said it once a few weeks ago and I will say it again. You have never offered any pictures, vids or instructions on how to do anything on this site. Ever! Nothing but opinions with nothing backing them up. I believe you have what in known as "small man syndrome" While I have never seen you I can only imagine a guy that in 4'6" tall weighing 230 lbs, bald, a 3 inch peter and pot belly and an opinion that tries to make up for everything lacking in his real life.
I kept your quote about small man syndrome. It was the most humorous part of your post. If I had small man syndrome, wouldn't I constantly post about my car and everything it does, and how much money gets poured into it? It's nauseating to see people post every time they do some mundane thing on this board. Oh you changed the oil? Good for you. You figured out how to read the directions and install something? Wow, I'm amazed.
4/28/10, 01:52 AM
#68
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem isn't necessarily the rotating assembly. Although there will be decent money in that. For a 9000 rpm effective range you need a lightweight, yet strong rotating assembly. This means billet pieces pretty much throughout which gets pretty expensive.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
The biggest issue is the valvetrain. The mod heads were never designed to even need to spin that high, and there's some design issues you'll run into there. It's not just about the springs either. The roller followers are a problem at this range. I'm not a valvetrain expert by any means and I don't know the specifics about the roller followers on these engines, but from what I know they are hydraulic followers much like you'd find in a hydrollic roller cam setup for a pushrod engine. These tend to "pump up" with rpm and as the speed increases they don't have time to adjust their lash and start bouncing over the cam lobes. This causes valve flutter and well...you get the picture. Higher pressure springs help somewhat but they also tend to exacerbate the problem when it does occur.
Realistically you'd need to modify the heads to take solid roller followers. Plus all the fun you have with continuous adjustments to those solid followers. I'm sorry but I do not want to take the valve covers off these engines any more than I have to. It's not like a big chevy in a boat of a car with oodles of room.
You'll have to likely go with a custom one-off intake manifold as well. I'm not certain of any aftermarket pieces that will flow enough at the rpm's you're wanting to even be worth trying it. So there's more $$ in fabrication and testing. Either way you're going to kill the power band below probably 4000rpm. The short runners will see to that.
I mean, it's a cool idea, I just don't know if it's really practical. Even for a road race car. You're going to have to have so much gear in the back that it almost defeats the purpose.
If I was building a project like this, I'd be looking at a 4 valve motor first off. I'd go with a teksid block with billet rods, possibly a high quality cast piston to save weight. ARP2000 hardware and a solid bearing set. I'd then have a set of Ford B heads (found on the 96-98 Cobra) massaged thoroughly. These heads work the best in high rpm applications over the C heads in the 99/01 Cobra's and the 03 updates.
I'd run a sullivan short runner intake on top of those heads with a cam profile to give you peak power arouns 7200rpm. Then spin it to about 7800. You'll likely need to go with a set of beehive style springs, and of course you'll need hardened valvetrain items as well. billet oil pump gears with a high capacity pickup and pump.
Make sure the rotating assembly is balanced within a couple grams (you should shoot for within 1 gram) and you've got a quality harmonic balancer attached to the crank. Add a lightweight flywheel, pressure plate and driveshaft and finish it off with a set of 4.56 gears.
That would be my suggestion anyway, but I'm not you.
I don't necessarily think it would take 50,000 to get what you want, but it's certainly going to take many thousands over simply building a motor for stock rpm limits but to add power on top of.
4/28/10, 02:08 AM
#69
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JUST an FYI, as far as what you speked out. Don't really care, there was a time that you were going on and on on how you cant have a nicely built short block for less than 10k, seems the market has changed with quality forged short blocks going for less than 4 now with 5k or so installed. I agree with 70MACH1OWNER on this, you must have a small pecker
Last edited by jaguarking11; 4/28/10 at 02:24 AM.
4/28/10, 08:28 AM
#70
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI a mediocre set of forged pistons, will have a typical max velocity of 25 meters per second, to be considered reliable. @9000rpm keeping the 90mm stroke of the engine the piston speed is 27 meters per second, a good quality set should survive this type of thrashing. There are engines out there hitting 27 meters per second or so in piston speed FACTORY. Not to mention if you destroke a modular to 88mm from factory 90mm you can reach a hair over 9k rpm while still being within spec of pistons @ 24.93 meters per second. Mening the modular goes from being a 4.6L engine to a 4.5L engine. A bit of boring out should gain back the lost displacement.
JUST an FYI, as far as what you speked out. Don't really care, there was a time that you were going on and on on how you cant have a nicely built short block for less than 10k, seems the market has changed with quality forged short blocks going for less than 4 now with 5k or so installed. I agree with 70MACH1OWNER on this, you must have a small pecker
JUST an FYI, as far as what you speked out. Don't really care, there was a time that you were going on and on on how you cant have a nicely built short block for less than 10k, seems the market has changed with quality forged short blocks going for less than 4 now with 5k or so installed. I agree with 70MACH1OWNER on this, you must have a small pecker
Tell me jaguar, how many built shortblocks have you paid for? Ever had one in your car? Seems to me like you're talking out of your ***. Just because you can go over to MMR's website and look a price doesn't mean you know how much stuff costs.
Last edited by Bullitt995; 4/28/10 at 08:29 AM.
4/28/10, 03:10 PM
#73
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 20, 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4/28/10, 04:43 PM
#74
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: January 9, 2005
Location: New Carlisle, Ohio (20 miles north of Dayton)
Posts: 6,982
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
So you personally spec'd out a crankshaft that costs (To the best of your memory 5K). First off I would think if I did that I would remember the cost. Did you also personally spec these out?
Why not just move on to the "Big Boy's Website" and attempt to convince them of your superiority? You are boring us Peons. I also suspect since your claim SVO Paul has posted everything about your car it should be easy for you to come up with some links to those posts? But I am sure that will be a problem for you also. What a TROLL! Oh BTW I am going out to change my oil.
I also want to personally apologize to the original poster of this thread and everyone else (but butthead) that has posted in this thread for my posts toward Jackass or I mean Jake. He is right he must have gotten to me. His arogance and total disrepect for everyone's opinion on this site has been well documented for a long time. I just chose to call a ***** and *****. After this post I am done with him. I only hope he keeps my quote in his signature for a long time so even the newbies that come on board next week or next month wonder WTF is up with this *******. Again I am sorry that I misdirected this thread. Please get back to topic.
Why not just move on to the "Big Boy's Website" and attempt to convince them of your superiority? You are boring us Peons. I also suspect since your claim SVO Paul has posted everything about your car it should be easy for you to come up with some links to those posts? But I am sure that will be a problem for you also. What a TROLL! Oh BTW I am going out to change my oil.
I also want to personally apologize to the original poster of this thread and everyone else (but butthead) that has posted in this thread for my posts toward Jackass or I mean Jake. He is right he must have gotten to me. His arogance and total disrepect for everyone's opinion on this site has been well documented for a long time. I just chose to call a ***** and *****. After this post I am done with him. I only hope he keeps my quote in his signature for a long time so even the newbies that come on board next week or next month wonder WTF is up with this *******. Again I am sorry that I misdirected this thread. Please get back to topic.
Last edited by 70MACH1OWNER; 4/28/10 at 05:34 PM.
4/28/10, 06:55 PM
#75
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was way over two years ago.
You remember the turbo car that C&L tested their intake on? The post that Paul made and everyone went off the deep end and the thread was deleted? That's my car. Here's some other examples that still exist:
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=475801
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=472957
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=460888
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=461069 (you even posted in this one)
This is all really old stuff on the old build. And a really old picture:
But I guess none of that counts. It's not really fair for me to post "how-to" stuff or any kind of technical info seeing as I'm not the one building the car. Get the good stuff from the horse's mouth.
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=475801
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=472957
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=460888
https://themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=461069 (you even posted in this one)
This is all really old stuff on the old build. And a really old picture:
But I guess none of that counts. It's not really fair for me to post "how-to" stuff or any kind of technical info seeing as I'm not the one building the car. Get the good stuff from the horse's mouth.
Last edited by Bullitt995; 4/28/10 at 06:57 PM.
4/28/10, 06:56 PM
#76
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 17, 2006
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4/29/10, 06:02 AM
#77
GT Member
Join Date: September 12, 2009
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know much about the techy stuff...not involved in any of the work on my car...but I know quite a bit about spending money to modify the thing. It's on its 3rd build and I have two budgets. One for modding and another for replacing all the krap that's going to break sooner or later. It always costs more than you think, particularly if the build is on the cutting edge...as in doing something that is somewhat untested or untried. To be safe with extreme builds, project what it will cost and then double that figure.
4/29/10, 07:05 AM
#78
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 20, 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand why people get bent out of shape. This forum is not as technical as others, so when buttons get pushed, I find it amussing. Keep it up! he he heI don't know much about the techy stuff...not involved in any of the work on my car...but I know quite a bit about spending money to modify the thing. It's on its 3rd build and I have two budgets. One for modding and another for replacing all the krap that's going to break sooner or later. It always costs more than you think, particularly if the build is on the cutting edge...as in doing something that is somewhat untested or untried. To be safe with extreme builds, project what it will cost and then double that figure.
4/29/10, 07:19 AM
#79
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 20, 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the FRPP is going to make any more power than the C&L, where I think the FRPP will surpass the C&L is weight.
4/29/10, 07:39 AM
#80
GT Member
Join Date: September 12, 2009
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you are saying that I can have that 9Krpm redline engine for $6K?
The build would likely include major upgrades in fuel, transmission, rearend, intake manifold, and all the other upgrades needed to support the increase in boost/power. From my own experience and listening to others that have done extreme builds... you go 3 steps forward and often 2 steps backward...and all the time, the meter is running.
Last edited by forensicsteve; 4/29/10 at 07:52 AM.