05 V6 Runs 11's!
11/1/05, 07:39 PM
#41
Originally posted by MSP@November 1, 2005, 10:30 PM
This is the problem with what happened today.. Mike made a post with bad news, but didnt explain he had problems with the timing chains, and thus is trying to remedy the problem by tunnning the turbo to give out more HP/TQ at a lower RPM..
The link that my man rygenstormlocke put up covers Mikes bases..
So the point is, I think he should have put up his timing chain problems along with the timing chain rant, then I would understand..
It looks like Mike is trying to make the appropriate adjustments to the turbo setup though, which is good.. But he left me hangin on the timing chains, because sense I dont frequent several different forums on a dailey basis, I was completely out of the loop on that discussion, where Mike, and the other guy, who have had good experience shared their situations with the 2005+ 4.0..
So only half of the debate was posted here, and not the full argument for the assumptions, which is never a good way to end a post.. I do however give Mike lots of credit for pursuing a turbo setup which is done at 5300 rpm..
But like I said, all the facts were not here..
@Jimp
This is the info I was looking for.. I noticed you frequent that forum and had a heads up on the info.. You should have shared it..
This is the problem with what happened today.. Mike made a post with bad news, but didnt explain he had problems with the timing chains, and thus is trying to remedy the problem by tunnning the turbo to give out more HP/TQ at a lower RPM..
The link that my man rygenstormlocke put up covers Mikes bases..
So the point is, I think he should have put up his timing chain problems along with the timing chain rant, then I would understand..
It looks like Mike is trying to make the appropriate adjustments to the turbo setup though, which is good.. But he left me hangin on the timing chains, because sense I dont frequent several different forums on a dailey basis, I was completely out of the loop on that discussion, where Mike, and the other guy, who have had good experience shared their situations with the 2005+ 4.0..
So only half of the debate was posted here, and not the full argument for the assumptions, which is never a good way to end a post.. I do however give Mike lots of credit for pursuing a turbo setup which is done at 5300 rpm..
But like I said, all the facts were not here..
@Jimp
This is the info I was looking for.. I noticed you frequent that forum and had a heads up on the info.. You should have shared it..
11/1/05, 07:41 PM
#42
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rygenstormlocke@November 1, 2005, 6:35 PM
Also, lets keep in mind that Mike is providing us "behind the scenes" information on this kit. He's the guy sweating the details, testing the modificaitons and trying to come up with a solution that will last. Most tech-head/gear-heads are not the type to be...how should we say it...."client facing". I mean, he is...but more as coleage approach..keeping us informed of how things are going. If he didn't believe in this car...he wouldn't be pushing it to 11's.
Also, lets keep in mind that Mike is providing us "behind the scenes" information on this kit. He's the guy sweating the details, testing the modificaitons and trying to come up with a solution that will last. Most tech-head/gear-heads are not the type to be...how should we say it...."client facing". I mean, he is...but more as coleage approach..keeping us informed of how things are going. If he didn't believe in this car...he wouldn't be pushing it to 11's.
I know, and this is why it does make me sort of feel bad for being so harsh.. But he could have told us the issues with the timing chain, but said he is working on the problem.. I just hate not getting all the info, then getting worked up.. So basically, all I can say is not enough facts were placed on the table, to go along with the rest of his post basically making us all step back for a minute to look at the 4.0..
It will be interesting how Vortech will tune the Shelby V6.. I'm guessing they will set it to 300RWHP like others have suggested.. We have alot to think about.. All this is news to me.. It kinda just makes me want to just run the nitrous in a way, because the Nitrous advantage on our motors is lots of torque, which is good.. It saves us from the headache of high RPM HP.. This is precisley why Scrming's car is doing quite well.. He has gobs of lowend torque, and a moderate amount of HP.. This is a good combination it seems for reliability of the motor, based on the new facts..
11/1/05, 07:51 PM
#43
Originally posted by Jimp@November 1, 2005, 9:42 PM
Well, next time I will. I try to visit as many forums as I can to get as much info as possible on my car. I read everyone's opinion and try to seperate the facts from the BS. I defend the 4.0 every chance I get(as you can see!), but that guy gave me quite an eye opener. It's not going to keep me from pushing my car but maybe just made me a little more realistic in my goals.
Well, next time I will. I try to visit as many forums as I can to get as much info as possible on my car. I read everyone's opinion and try to seperate the facts from the BS. I defend the 4.0 every chance I get(as you can see!), but that guy gave me quite an eye opener. It's not going to keep me from pushing my car but maybe just made me a little more realistic in my goals.
I know it!!! I mean, for me...shooting for 360-400 RWHP just might not be realistic. Besides, I know when I have 300, I will be grinning ear to ear. Definitely have a lot to sleep on tonight when I get to power adders. So far, my bet is on nitrous!
11/1/05, 10:24 PM
#44
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interersting 
A thing to note is not to be scared by it's complexity. It seems to me that fear is being brought merely through this fact, rather than adressing directly the actual components. All DamageInc did was do a good job at explaining how the chain is linked up
and how prone the rear cassete is to breaking. Wonder how prone it is because I've never heard any V6 owner say they just happened to have one break (unless I've missed it).
this part seems to contradict itself as well, or is it just me
I've noticed this, but figured that the internals would be the main concern for this engine. A note to add is how mike left this as his final word, sort of weening out the chain FYI speech.
A thing to note is not to be scared by it's complexity. It seems to me that fear is being brought merely through this fact, rather than adressing directly the actual components. All DamageInc did was do a good job at explaining how the chain is linked up
and how prone the rear cassete is to breaking. Wonder how prone it is because I've never heard any V6 owner say they just happened to have one break (unless I've missed it).this part seems to contradict itself as well, or is it just me
The cam gears aren't keyed by any means either. They rely solely on bolt torque to keep them properly seated on the camshaft. For this reason, under a basic thread pattern, the rotational twist of the jackshaft will inerently try to "loosen" the cam gear retaining bolt for bank 1. So, the bank 1 cam gear bolt is reverse threaded. That may have been the only decent idea that went into this engine.
I would say that 300 rwhp is mostly safe (depending on the tune) on a stock short block, but if your goals were much higher I would definitly be looking into a set of pistons at minimum.
11/2/05, 03:26 AM
#45
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by ManEHawke@November 2, 2005, 12:27 AM
interersting
A thing to note is not to be scared by it's complexity. It seems to me that fear is being brought merely through this fact, rather than adressing directly the actual components. All DamageInc did was do a good job at explaining how the chain is linked up and how prone the rear cassete is to breaking. Wonder how prone it is because I've never heard any V6 owner say they just happened to have one break (unless I've missed it).
this part seems to contradict itself as well, or is it just me
I've noticed this, but figured that the internals would be the main concern for this engine. A note to add is how mike left this as his final word, sort of weening out the chain FYI speech.
interersting
A thing to note is not to be scared by it's complexity. It seems to me that fear is being brought merely through this fact, rather than adressing directly the actual components. All DamageInc did was do a good job at explaining how the chain is linked up
and how prone the rear cassete is to breaking. Wonder how prone it is because I've never heard any V6 owner say they just happened to have one break (unless I've missed it).this part seems to contradict itself as well, or is it just me
I've noticed this, but figured that the internals would be the main concern for this engine. A note to add is how mike left this as his final word, sort of weening out the chain FYI speech.
The thing with DamageInc's early post is it was like "Chicken Little".... H basically said that ANY attempts to get more power out of thish motor was going to cause the whole car to fly apart including the "worthlesss 7.5"... He did kind of back off that position some what a little later... but at first it was completely "The sky is fallling! The sky is falling!" Enough of us have shown the the75HP shot seem very safe in our cars... And if things were as bad as he say I would have expected the chains and gears to come through my hood when I hit the 100HP shot! Especially last weekend when we sprayed down around 2200RPM!
Like I said I'll be happy with something a little less then 300RWHP.... The key I think is to go slow, double check everything along the way, tune conservatively and DON'T GET GREEDY!!! And maybe I never go to a Drag Radial and I keep the weakest link that little spot between the pavement and the tire...
11/2/05, 05:54 AM
#46
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by scrming@November 2, 2005, 2:29 AM
The thing with DamageInc's early post is it was like "Chicken Little".... H basically said that ANY attempts to get more power out of thish motor was going to cause the whole car to fly apart including the "worthlesss 7.5"... He did kind of back off that position some what a little later... but at first it was completely "The sky is fallling! The sky is falling!" Enough of us have shown the the75HP shot seem very safe in our cars... And if things were as bad as he say I would have expected the chains and gears to come through my hood when I hit the 100HP shot! Especially last weekend when we sprayed down around 2200RPM!
Like I said I'll be happy with something a little less then 300RWHP.... The key I think is to go slow, double check everything along the way, tune conservatively and DON'T GET GREEDY!!! And maybe I never go to a Drag Radial and I keep the weakest link that little spot between the pavement and the tire...
The thing with DamageInc's early post is it was like "Chicken Little".... H basically said that ANY attempts to get more power out of thish motor was going to cause the whole car to fly apart including the "worthlesss 7.5"... He did kind of back off that position some what a little later... but at first it was completely "The sky is fallling! The sky is falling!" Enough of us have shown the the75HP shot seem very safe in our cars... And if things were as bad as he say I would have expected the chains and gears to come through my hood when I hit the 100HP shot! Especially last weekend when we sprayed down around 2200RPM!
Like I said I'll be happy with something a little less then 300RWHP.... The key I think is to go slow, double check everything along the way, tune conservatively and DON'T GET GREEDY!!! And maybe I never go to a Drag Radial and I keep the weakest link that little spot between the pavement and the tire...
Yeah, I accept Mike's philosophy about the HIGH RPM situation, which makes sense.. This is because the higher the revolution of the motor, the more things distort and flex.. Which is why if more power is created down low in the powerband, the less chance or risk of this type of distortion happening.. Basically this could be why the motor is great in regards to producing torque and not HP.. Since like some have said the motor was created primarily to be used in trucks and the Explorer's, these types of vehicles never needed alot of high rpm HP, but rather a more consistant but more robust lower rpm torque situation..
We must accept the boundries as they are presented, and learn to exploit our strengths over time.. Our strengths are good low rpm torque power, owith a taste of mild HIGH RPM power..
This goes back to my previous discussions in regards to the 1st 1/8th of a 1/4mile race.. That same arguement still applies here, which states we must get to the first 1/8th marker first, with a good time.. Then use what ever amount of HP be it anywhere from 250HP to 300HP to finish the race.. We must accept this..
This still makes for a really fun car in the short term, because off the line we can be as strong as a V8 to some extent.. 384RWTQ like in Scrmng's car is nothing to be shy about, but dealt with respectfully...
Suffice it to say that overall, even with this new information, which is not really all that new, nothing has changed really with what we have all somewhat known.. The timing chain issue has already been discussed somewhat on different forums.. What was new here yesterday, was Mike disclosing for the first time his encounters with problems. Even though not plainly stated by him at this forum..
So what the understood focus should still be is TQ.. Rather than us concentrate on high HP numbers, which must be achieved higher in the RPM range, we need to stay true to what makes the SOHC 4.0 tic, which is low rpm torque.. This is from 1800RPM to about 4500RPM.. Our HP is moderated between 4600RPM and 5500RPM.. We must win races between 1800RPM and 5500RPM... We must produce our best numbers between 1800rpm and 5500rpm.. Now it can be noted that in some cases on a dyno, pushing the car above 5500RPM may yield higher HP numbers, but at the risk of reliability..
So basically what happend is the waters have been muddied with old issues already discussed on previuos forums.. We have had this discussion before in regards to the timing chains..
As log as we continue to allow the waters to get muddied over old arguments progress cant be made.. Irratating if nothing more.. But nothing new either.. Same still applies..
11/2/05, 08:05 AM
#47
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 4, 2005
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dammmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnn, I miss a day of following up and look at what happens.
I read most of this thread and skimmed trough alot of it as well, so if I miss anything please bring it to my attention.
I am, by no means, the Grim Reaper bearing the bad news taking the lives of all the little 4.0's across the country, nor did I ever call the 4.0 an engineering disater.
I am, However, showing everyone the potential of the 4.0, and the potentialy weak links.
I wanted to bring you up to speed with the potential failings and why it is a good idea to limit the rpm of this motor. Everything is 100% fact. If I do not have an answer or opinion I will tell you just that.
The 4.0 SOHC is an after thought, it was originally intented to be a pushrod motor and has been adapted to be ohc, It was not a new motor from the ground up when the introduced it as a SOHC. Those are facts, it's not good, it's not bad. It's just the truth.
Let me give you a bit of background, I have been in Business for just over ten years, and a hobbiest since I was able to turn a wrench. In this course of nearly 20 years I have tried things that others would believe to be unorthodox or taboo, I am absolutly infactuated with mechanical engineering and believe that boundaries and ratings are set only to be pushed consiquently creating new ones, I believe that items or devices will greatly exceed their recomendations if kept proper.
I have been in the V6 turbo (buick 3.8) scene since the late 90's and still have one to this day running in excess of 125 MPH in a #3700 car, stock crank,block and rods. although I have not raced it recently because of the time that i have spent on the 05 v6 and v8 turbocharging stuff.
I can also tell you that our 05 GT, with a single turbo at the same 11.5-12 psi has run 10.65@132 w/ 1.51 60ft at the NMRA finals in Bowling Green Kentucky, that car is also full weight (3500#)and utlizes the stock engine, trans and clutch. the rear had been upgraded to moser axles but still uses the original traction lock.
There is always two sides to every coin, on the one side it makes a good deal of power, on the other is the reason for caution.
Can I tell you that a stock longblock will survive at this powerlevel, NO. Should it, Probably. The AFR on that pull and the track was 11.5:1, what is considered by most as safe.
"Too much power" on a good safe tune will typically shorten the life of a motor by useing up the bearings, possibly fatigueing some coponents as well (over extended periods of time, basically wearing a bearing faster than the oem had expected EX the motor may only last 75000 as opposed to 175000mi.), a hazardous tune or detonation caused by fuel delivery or excesive timing will cause the crank, rod or piston to fail. That is what is typically percieved as "too much power".
That is why you see threads like '"4.6 3v breaks rod at 9psi" musta been too much power.' That cant be further from the truth. There is an underlying reason for that damage, I believe that someone did not know what they are doing when they tuned it or a malfuntion occured under a hi load situation.
The supplied tune should be, at minimum, checked on a dyno or least check the actual AFR on the car under an aggressive drive to be sure that the AFR is deemed safe. That goes for any System or Kit from Supercharger, Turbocharger to even the CAI.
Assuming that everything is spot on after you have installed your system is wrong and very likely to cause some sort of damage.
I have retuned cars with systems installed as shipped, most times those tunes are concerningly lean. But the customer has been whipping the car two months prior to that with no report of damage.
Does it make it right, No.
All of this plays in the role of determining the life of a motor, let's face it, not many guys who utilize this system or any other power adder will be going around in circles with engine speeds in excess of 6000rpm for a multitude of miles, most will be with extreme power being only applied in short burst of less than a mile at a time.
MSP, you have to be a well educated person, maybe even an attorney. But you have to understand there is no Holey Grail as far as the boundaries are concerned with the power limitations or life expectancy of a motor, If the conditions are controlled the life of an engine will be a long happy one, if any particular one of the conditions goes haywire then failure can potentially happen.
As you should realize the more power that one begins to make, the less detonation tolerant the engine becomes. So to tell anyone an exact failure point is tough to determine, and it all theory until it's tested.
I hope this clarifies any misconception of any previous post.
I read most of this thread and skimmed trough alot of it as well, so if I miss anything please bring it to my attention.
I am, by no means, the Grim Reaper bearing the bad news taking the lives of all the little 4.0's across the country, nor did I ever call the 4.0 an engineering disater.
I am, However, showing everyone the potential of the 4.0, and the potentialy weak links.
I wanted to bring you up to speed with the potential failings and why it is a good idea to limit the rpm of this motor. Everything is 100% fact. If I do not have an answer or opinion I will tell you just that.
The 4.0 SOHC is an after thought, it was originally intented to be a pushrod motor and has been adapted to be ohc, It was not a new motor from the ground up when the introduced it as a SOHC. Those are facts, it's not good, it's not bad. It's just the truth.
Let me give you a bit of background, I have been in Business for just over ten years, and a hobbiest since I was able to turn a wrench. In this course of nearly 20 years I have tried things that others would believe to be unorthodox or taboo, I am absolutly infactuated with mechanical engineering and believe that boundaries and ratings are set only to be pushed consiquently creating new ones, I believe that items or devices will greatly exceed their recomendations if kept proper.
I have been in the V6 turbo (buick 3.8) scene since the late 90's and still have one to this day running in excess of 125 MPH in a #3700 car, stock crank,block and rods. although I have not raced it recently because of the time that i have spent on the 05 v6 and v8 turbocharging stuff.
I can also tell you that our 05 GT, with a single turbo at the same 11.5-12 psi has run 10.65@132 w/ 1.51 60ft at the NMRA finals in Bowling Green Kentucky, that car is also full weight (3500#)and utlizes the stock engine, trans and clutch. the rear had been upgraded to moser axles but still uses the original traction lock.
There is always two sides to every coin, on the one side it makes a good deal of power, on the other is the reason for caution.
Can I tell you that a stock longblock will survive at this powerlevel, NO. Should it, Probably. The AFR on that pull and the track was 11.5:1, what is considered by most as safe.
"Too much power" on a good safe tune will typically shorten the life of a motor by useing up the bearings, possibly fatigueing some coponents as well (over extended periods of time, basically wearing a bearing faster than the oem had expected EX the motor may only last 75000 as opposed to 175000mi.), a hazardous tune or detonation caused by fuel delivery or excesive timing will cause the crank, rod or piston to fail. That is what is typically percieved as "too much power".
That is why you see threads like '"4.6 3v breaks rod at 9psi" musta been too much power.' That cant be further from the truth. There is an underlying reason for that damage, I believe that someone did not know what they are doing when they tuned it or a malfuntion occured under a hi load situation.
The supplied tune should be, at minimum, checked on a dyno or least check the actual AFR on the car under an aggressive drive to be sure that the AFR is deemed safe. That goes for any System or Kit from Supercharger, Turbocharger to even the CAI.
Assuming that everything is spot on after you have installed your system is wrong and very likely to cause some sort of damage.
I have retuned cars with systems installed as shipped, most times those tunes are concerningly lean. But the customer has been whipping the car two months prior to that with no report of damage.
Does it make it right, No.
All of this plays in the role of determining the life of a motor, let's face it, not many guys who utilize this system or any other power adder will be going around in circles with engine speeds in excess of 6000rpm for a multitude of miles, most will be with extreme power being only applied in short burst of less than a mile at a time.
MSP, you have to be a well educated person, maybe even an attorney. But you have to understand there is no Holey Grail as far as the boundaries are concerned with the power limitations or life expectancy of a motor, If the conditions are controlled the life of an engine will be a long happy one, if any particular one of the conditions goes haywire then failure can potentially happen.
As you should realize the more power that one begins to make, the less detonation tolerant the engine becomes. So to tell anyone an exact failure point is tough to determine, and it all theory until it's tested.
I hope this clarifies any misconception of any previous post.
11/2/05, 11:46 AM
#48
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice post Mike.. I understand there is no Holy Grail..
How about this sceanrio... You create the the Single Turbo setup for the 05V6.. You ship it with 12 lbs. of boost.. The "Tune" shipped out limits the RPM to 5400RPM..
Question is, cant an SCT protect the owner of the car, by limiting the engine RPM to whatever the user sets? Lets say its set to 5300RPM.. Shouldnt this allow the engine to maintain a very safe operation point?
Also, do you recommend this sceanrio no matter what power-adder is used? With the SOHC 4.0 the problem starts at HIGH RPM power ratings.. Using an SCT to keep the motor from this area is an effective tool correct?
How about this sceanrio... You create the the Single Turbo setup for the 05V6.. You ship it with 12 lbs. of boost.. The "Tune" shipped out limits the RPM to 5400RPM..
Question is, cant an SCT protect the owner of the car, by limiting the engine RPM to whatever the user sets? Lets say its set to 5300RPM.. Shouldnt this allow the engine to maintain a very safe operation point?
Also, do you recommend this sceanrio no matter what power-adder is used? With the SOHC 4.0 the problem starts at HIGH RPM power ratings.. Using an SCT to keep the motor from this area is an effective tool correct?
11/2/05, 12:05 PM
#49
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, it must be stated that a lower RPM range would pretty much make the cars 1/8th mile racers. To some extent..
Mike's times in his 05 V6 are with the 3.55 gear ratio.. It would be really tough on some of us running 4.10's or 3.73's to maintain good track speeds in the 1/4 mile with those gears..
Example Using 5300RPM as a RPM cutoff
4.10Gear - With 27.5in tires
110MPH 1/4 Mile= 5510RPM
105MPH 1/4 Mile= 5259RPM
107RPM 1/4 Mile= 5360RPM
So as you can see, you would basically be limited to a Car which could never see 11's.. But rather your absolute best on a great day, and a perfect launch, with cold air, would be a 12.266ET.. Or a 12.3...
I am just looking at the implications guys.. These numbers I have posted are mathimatically correct.. But they are posted as vision of the implications..
Lets say we keep the stock gearing..
3.31 Gear with 27.5 tires..
112MPH 1/4 Mile = 4529RPM
120MPH 1/4 Mile = 4853RPM
This is what you would need for a 11 sec run.. So this turns back the need to rush to smaller gears.. If you plan on this type of Power-adder, and have longterm reliability as a concern in your mind.. Just food for thought..
Mike's times in his 05 V6 are with the 3.55 gear ratio.. It would be really tough on some of us running 4.10's or 3.73's to maintain good track speeds in the 1/4 mile with those gears..
Example Using 5300RPM as a RPM cutoff
4.10Gear - With 27.5in tires
110MPH 1/4 Mile= 5510RPM
105MPH 1/4 Mile= 5259RPM
107RPM 1/4 Mile= 5360RPM
So as you can see, you would basically be limited to a Car which could never see 11's.. But rather your absolute best on a great day, and a perfect launch, with cold air, would be a 12.266ET.. Or a 12.3...
I am just looking at the implications guys.. These numbers I have posted are mathimatically correct.. But they are posted as vision of the implications..
Lets say we keep the stock gearing..
3.31 Gear with 27.5 tires..
112MPH 1/4 Mile = 4529RPM
120MPH 1/4 Mile = 4853RPM
This is what you would need for a 11 sec run.. So this turns back the need to rush to smaller gears.. If you plan on this type of Power-adder, and have longterm reliability as a concern in your mind.. Just food for thought..
11/2/05, 12:37 PM
#50
Originally posted by MSP@November 2, 2005, 2:08 PM
Also, it must be stated that a lower RPM range would pretty much make the cars 1/8th mile racers. To some extent..
Mike's times in his 05 V6 are with the 3.55 gear ratio.. It would be really tough on some of us running 4.10's or 3.73's to maintain good track speeds in the 1/4 mile with those gears..
Example Using 5300RPM as a RPM cutoff
4.10Gear - With 27.5in tires
110MPH 1/4 Mile= 5510RPM
105MPH 1/4 Mile= 5259RPM
107RPM 1/4 Mile= 5360RPM
So as you can see, you would basically be limited to a Car which could never see 11's.. But rather your absolute best on a great day, and a perfect launch, with cold air, would be a 12.266ET.. Or a 12.3...
I am just looking at the implications guys.. These numbers I have posted are mathimatically correct.. But they are posted as vision of the implications..
Lets say we keep the stock gearing..
3.31 Gear with 27.5 tires..
112MPH 1/4 Mile = 4529RPM
120MPH 1/4 Mile = 4853RPM
This is what you would need for a 11 sec run.. So this turns back the need to rush to smaller gears.. If you plan on this type of Power-adder, and have longterm reliability as a concern in your mind.. Just food for thought..
Also, it must be stated that a lower RPM range would pretty much make the cars 1/8th mile racers. To some extent..
Mike's times in his 05 V6 are with the 3.55 gear ratio.. It would be really tough on some of us running 4.10's or 3.73's to maintain good track speeds in the 1/4 mile with those gears..
Example Using 5300RPM as a RPM cutoff
4.10Gear - With 27.5in tires
110MPH 1/4 Mile= 5510RPM
105MPH 1/4 Mile= 5259RPM
107RPM 1/4 Mile= 5360RPM
So as you can see, you would basically be limited to a Car which could never see 11's.. But rather your absolute best on a great day, and a perfect launch, with cold air, would be a 12.266ET.. Or a 12.3...
I am just looking at the implications guys.. These numbers I have posted are mathimatically correct.. But they are posted as vision of the implications..
Lets say we keep the stock gearing..
3.31 Gear with 27.5 tires..
112MPH 1/4 Mile = 4529RPM
120MPH 1/4 Mile = 4853RPM
This is what you would need for a 11 sec run.. So this turns back the need to rush to smaller gears.. If you plan on this type of Power-adder, and have longterm reliability as a concern in your mind.. Just food for thought..
What about 3.75 or 3.55's. I was just about to pull the trigger today on some motive 4.10's. How aqre you comming up with the calulations? What gear would be optimal...it seems that the stock gear would be safest, but what is safe and optimal at the same time? Perhaps 3.55's?
11/2/05, 12:47 PM
#51
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rygenstormlocke@November 2, 2005, 11:40 AM
What about 3.75 or 3.55's. I was just about to pull the trigger today on some motive 4.10's.
What about 3.75 or 3.55's. I was just about to pull the trigger today on some motive 4.10's.
What your looking at is either a 3.45 or possibly a 3.73.. These are the gear ratio's for our 7.5 Rear-end..
You can still go with the 4.10's, but as stated, the high rpm stress to the motor can be reliability issue with the timing chains in the long run.. The 4.10's want you to work at max rpm.. So keeping the power level restricted to a nitrous setup of 100 to 175 shot, should be ok for the 4.10.. But remember the numbers we are contained to for reliability reasons.. 5300 to 5400 rpm.. Its very hard to finish a race with 4.10's with this type of restriction...
With a 3.73 @ 112MPH=5104RPM
3.73 @ 120MPH=5468RPM
3.73 @ 115MPH=5240RPM
It does appear you can be quite happy with a 3.73 gear setup.. This would be the max to keep the engine in a safe range, while still being able to make extrememly good lap times, and speeds.. So go with 3.73's my friend.. This is what I have.. By figuring the numbers out before, this has allowed me to make an educated guess as to the best scenario for us.. It seems that the work I did before saved me some money, because I only need to buy one gear one time.. If you rush to 4.10's you might place yourself in a box..
3.73 @ 117MPH=5332RPM
Trust me my good friend.. I'll never steer you wrong..
11/2/05, 12:52 PM
#52
Originally posted by MSP@November 2, 2005, 2:50 PM
What your looking at is either a 3.45 or possibly a 3.73.. These are the gear ratio's for our 7.5 Rear-end..
You can still go with the 4.10's, but as stated, the high rpm stress to the motor can be reliability issue with the timing chains in the long run.. The 4.10's want you to work at max rpm.. So keeping the power level restricted to a nitrous setup of 100 to 175 shot, should be ok for the 4.10.. But remember the numbers we are contained to for reliability reasons.. 5300 to 5400 rpm.. Its very hard to finish a race with 4.10's with this type of restriction...
With a 3.73 @ 112MPH=5104RPM
3.73 @ 120MPH=5468RPM
3.73 @ 115MPH=5240RPM
It does appear you can be quite happy with a 3.73 gear setup.. This would be the max to keep the engine in a safe range, while still being able to make extrememly good lap times, and speeds.. So go with 3.73's my friend.. This is what I have.. By figuring the numbers out before, this has allowed me to make an educated guess as to the best scenario for us.. It seems that the work I did before saved me some money, because I only need to buy one gear one time.. If you rush to 4.10's you might place yourself in a box..
3.73 @ 117MPH=5332RPM
Trust me my good friend.. I'll never steer you wrong..
What your looking at is either a 3.45 or possibly a 3.73.. These are the gear ratio's for our 7.5 Rear-end..
You can still go with the 4.10's, but as stated, the high rpm stress to the motor can be reliability issue with the timing chains in the long run.. The 4.10's want you to work at max rpm.. So keeping the power level restricted to a nitrous setup of 100 to 175 shot, should be ok for the 4.10.. But remember the numbers we are contained to for reliability reasons.. 5300 to 5400 rpm.. Its very hard to finish a race with 4.10's with this type of restriction...
With a 3.73 @ 112MPH=5104RPM
3.73 @ 120MPH=5468RPM
3.73 @ 115MPH=5240RPM
It does appear you can be quite happy with a 3.73 gear setup.. This would be the max to keep the engine in a safe range, while still being able to make extrememly good lap times, and speeds.. So go with 3.73's my friend.. This is what I have.. By figuring the numbers out before, this has allowed me to make an educated guess as to the best scenario for us.. It seems that the work I did before saved me some money, because I only need to buy one gear one time.. If you rush to 4.10's you might place yourself in a box..
3.73 @ 117MPH=5332RPM
Trust me my good friend.. I'll never steer you wrong..
Excellent! Thank you for this. I'll do that, time to whip out the credit card (with the worn magnetic strip) and **** off the wife some more.
3.73's definitely sound like the sweet spot. Besides, it will be interesting to see what kind of 1/4 mile times I get with those and a 100HP shot of nitrous. I wonder how it will compare to Scrmings times.
11/2/05, 01:02 PM
#53
Originally posted by rygenstormlocke@November 2, 2005, 2:55 PM
Excellent! Thank you for this. I'll do that, time to whip out the credit card (with the worn magnetic strip) and **** off the wife some more.
3.73's definitely sound like the sweet spot. Besides, it will be interesting to see what kind of 1/4 mile times I get with those and a 100HP shot of nitrous. I wonder how it will compare to Scrmings times.
Excellent! Thank you for this. I'll do that, time to whip out the credit card (with the worn magnetic strip) and **** off the wife some more.
3.73's definitely sound like the sweet spot. Besides, it will be interesting to see what kind of 1/4 mile times I get with those and a 100HP shot of nitrous. I wonder how it will compare to Scrmings times.
Done!!! 3.73's ordered along with a new bearing kit. Now I need to pull the trigger on the FR TLOK. Anyone have a suggestion on where to get it. I see it on v6mustangstuff.com, but is there a better price?
11/2/05, 01:04 PM
#54
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rygenstormlocke@November 2, 2005, 11:55 AM
Excellent! Thank you for this. I'll do that, time to whip out the credit card (with the worn magnetic strip) and **** off the wife some more.
3.73's definitely sound like the sweet spot. Besides, it will be interesting to see what kind of 1/4 mile times I get with those and a 100HP shot of nitrous. I wonder how it will compare to Scrmings times.
Excellent! Thank you for this. I'll do that, time to whip out the credit card (with the worn magnetic strip) and **** off the wife some more.
3.73's definitely sound like the sweet spot. Besides, it will be interesting to see what kind of 1/4 mile times I get with those and a 100HP shot of nitrous. I wonder how it will compare to Scrmings times.
Well, you will have to give Scrmng the edge of course with containing yourself to the 100shot.. But if you upgrade to the 125shot, while he's at the 100shot, you will have a better chance.. Just make sure you set the SCT to shutoff the engine at 5300rpm.. This way the rpms wont get away from you while trying to catch Scrming.. Remember, with the 3.73's, Scrming is going to beat you to the 1/8th mark.. With the 125 shot, if he does not get a good dig on you coming out of the hole, you can catch him in the 2nd 1/8th.. He might flip you off as you pass by, but atleast you will run him down and win, unless he digs the hole to deep for you to catch him in the last 1/8th..
11/2/05, 01:06 PM
#55
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got mine here.. He ships really fast! New in BOX wrapped in plastic and carboard..
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/FORD-MUSTAN...sspagenameZWDVW
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/FORD-MUSTAN...sspagenameZWDVW
11/2/05, 01:47 PM
#56
Originally posted by MSP@November 2, 2005, 3:09 PM
I got mine here.. He ships really fast! New in BOX wrapped in plastic and carboard..
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/FORD-MUSTAN...sspagenameZWDVW
I got mine here.. He ships really fast! New in BOX wrapped in plastic and carboard..
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/FORD-MUSTAN...sspagenameZWDVW
Item is purchased. Sweeettt!!!
11/2/05, 02:16 PM
#57
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 4, 2005
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rev limiter set a 5300 (or any rpm) with a shot of N20 will do nothing as far as limiting engine speed.
The factory computer limits rpm via fuel, you are now introducing fuel via the nozzle and the motor can easily spin past the ecm set limiter.
I can say with the amount of torque that we have on tap that the gear of choice would be a 3.45, I am also contemplating the pros/cons of going to a 2.95 first gear in our particular combo.
The factory computer limits rpm via fuel, you are now introducing fuel via the nozzle and the motor can easily spin past the ecm set limiter.
I can say with the amount of torque that we have on tap that the gear of choice would be a 3.45, I am also contemplating the pros/cons of going to a 2.95 first gear in our particular combo.
11/2/05, 02:35 PM
#58
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mike@PowerHouse@November 2, 2005, 1:19 PM
The rev limiter set a 5300 (or any rpm) with a shot of N20 will do nothing as far as limiting engine speed.
The factory computer limits rpm via fuel, you are now introducing fuel via the nozzle and the motor can easily spin past the ecm set limiter.
I can say with the amount of torque that we have on tap that the gear of choice would be a 3.45, I am also contemplating the pros/cons of going to a 2.95 first gear in our particular combo.
The rev limiter set a 5300 (or any rpm) with a shot of N20 will do nothing as far as limiting engine speed.
The factory computer limits rpm via fuel, you are now introducing fuel via the nozzle and the motor can easily spin past the ecm set limiter.
I can say with the amount of torque that we have on tap that the gear of choice would be a 3.45, I am also contemplating the pros/cons of going to a 2.95 first gear in our particular combo.
Yes, the 3.45 gear would be a tremendous gear with gobs of low end torque..
One good question for you Mike.. Can we safely presume without fear of being to far off track, that the trick with our engines is to limit rpms to @ or below 5300rpm, while maintaining a maximum amount of torque, while using the proper gears?
Is this in a nutshell what is needed for the 4.0 motor to be a successful competitive racer?
It appears that the lower the RPM the safer it is for the motor.. With this, creating good low-end power combined with optimum gearing is essential to the success of 2005 4.0 V6 Mustangs?
Also, yes the 3.45 gear would be good.. But with the 3.73, isnt it safe to assume that sense the 3.73 still allows you to make passes up to atleast 117MPH, this is a good choice in gear?
11/2/05, 03:01 PM
#59
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In regards to the 2.95 first gear.. This would be one heck of a gear to dig outta the hole with.. Lets look at it..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.45= 5347RPM @ 43MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with Stock (1st Gear) 3.75 with 3.45= 5374RPM @ 34MPH..
A difference of 9MPH Coming out of the hole before a shift to 2nd gear...
Using the 3.73 shows..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 3.75 Gear (Stock) with 3.73= 5297RPM @ 31MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.73=5377RPM @ 40MPH
Looking at the 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.45 rear-end, comparing this to a 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.73 rear-end shows us a difference of 3MPH.. Both setups completely blows away the stock 1st gear.. Actually might be considered cheating by some.. But a darn good idea coming from Powerhouse.. LOL!!
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.45= 5347RPM @ 43MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with Stock (1st Gear) 3.75 with 3.45= 5374RPM @ 34MPH..
A difference of 9MPH Coming out of the hole before a shift to 2nd gear...
Using the 3.73 shows..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 3.75 Gear (Stock) with 3.73= 5297RPM @ 31MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.73=5377RPM @ 40MPH
Looking at the 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.45 rear-end, comparing this to a 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.73 rear-end shows us a difference of 3MPH.. Both setups completely blows away the stock 1st gear.. Actually might be considered cheating by some.. But a darn good idea coming from Powerhouse.. LOL!!
11/2/05, 03:05 PM
#60
Originally posted by MSP@November 2, 2005, 5:04 PM
In regards to the 2.95 first gear.. This would be one heck of a gear to dig outta the hole with.. Lets look at it..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.45= 5347RPM @ 42MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with Stock (1st Gear) 3.75 with 3.45= 5374RPM @ 34MPH..
A difference of 8MPH Coming out of the hole before a shift to 2nd gear...
Using the 3.73 shows..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 3.75 Gear (Stock) with 3.73= 5297RPM @ 31MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.73=5377RPM @ 40MPH
Looking at the 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.45 rear-end, comparing this to a 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.73 rear-end shows us a difference of 2MPH.. Both setups completely blows away the stock 1st gear.. Actually might be considered cheating by some.. But a darn good idea coming from Powerhouse.. LOL!!
In regards to the 2.95 first gear.. This would be one heck of a gear to dig outta the hole with.. Lets look at it..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.45= 5347RPM @ 42MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with Stock (1st Gear) 3.75 with 3.45= 5374RPM @ 34MPH..
A difference of 8MPH Coming out of the hole before a shift to 2nd gear...
Using the 3.73 shows..
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 3.75 Gear (Stock) with 3.73= 5297RPM @ 31MPH
1st Gear dig coming outta the hole with (1st Gear) 2.95 Gear with 3.73=5377RPM @ 40MPH
Looking at the 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.45 rear-end, comparing this to a 2.95 1st gear coupled to a 3.73 rear-end shows us a difference of 2MPH.. Both setups completely blows away the stock 1st gear.. Actually might be considered cheating by some.. But a darn good idea coming from Powerhouse.. LOL!!
I'm cool with my decision, keep in mind my goal right now is to maximize 100HP shot of nitrous. Some day I want to be in the 12's, and yes.....I would love to be in the 11's. But a 13 and 12 second V6 is very respectable.