4.3L V6
1/11/06, 06:31 PM
#41
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Scrming
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
I am trying to find out what the RWHP is on this 4.3 stroker kit by SSM listed in my previous post.
So if we can find out what the RWHP on the stroker 4.3 SSM Mustang that ran 10.65 that would help.
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
I am trying to find out what the RWHP is on this 4.3 stroker kit by SSM listed in my previous post.
So if we can find out what the RWHP on the stroker 4.3 SSM Mustang that ran 10.65 that would help.
1/11/06, 06:43 PM
#42
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ06@January 11, 2006, 8:34 PM
@Scrming
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
@Scrming
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
I'm just using the PHP as an example... I mean a 13.9 with only 206RWHP...
1/11/06, 08:11 PM
#43
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ06@January 11, 2006, 9:34 PM
@Scrming
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
I am trying to find out what the RWHP is on this 4.3 stroker kit by SSM listed in my previous post.
So if we can find out what the RWHP on the stroker 4.3 SSM Mustang that ran 10.65 that would help.
@Scrming
I believe this car runs 10.65 thats not it, Excep thinking 325RWHP NA (before spray) and Jimp thinks he is high. I think its it more like 420RWHP NA before spray. How can I be so far off from these guys? thats what I am trying to see. The setup Excep is talking about I believe is the the same one in the SSM Mustang.
I am trying to find out what the RWHP is on this 4.3 stroker kit by SSM listed in my previous post.
So if we can find out what the RWHP on the stroker 4.3 SSM Mustang that ran 10.65 that would help.
Here is what I asked about changing the pistons and heads:
I have a 2006 V6 Mustang. Please advise on the following set-up:
Supercharge Kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 8.8 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect before the SC went on?
NA/Nitrous kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 10.0 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect?
Thanks!
His response was :
The Stage 3 heads and cams are expected to add about 60 horsepower at stock type compression ratio, i.e., 9.7:1-10.1:1. If you run 8.8:1 compression ratio forged pistons in a naturally aspirated application versus the stock 9.7:1 compression ratio, we'd expect to loose about 10 horsepower.
So, here is how I came up with 325 RWHP.
280 RWHP for new cams, pistons, etc. at 10.0 CR
45 RWHP for the Stage 3 Superheads (since the 60 HP estimate included cams)
325 RWHP, which is anywhere from 375-400 BHP. Like I said earlier, these are based on pure conjecture.
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Interesting.... :scratch:
1/11/06, 08:22 PM
#44
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 11, 2006, 10:14 PM
Tom at SSM told me that the 4.4/4.5L (this engine strokes bigger) would produce 280 RWHP with a good tune, plugs, and dual exhaust. This is including the forged pistons and new cams.
Here is what I asked about changing the pistons and heads:
I have a 2006 V6 Mustang. Please advise on the following set-up:
Supercharge Kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 8.8 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect before the SC went on?
NA/Nitrous kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 10.0 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect?
Thanks!
His response was :
The Stage 3 heads and cams are expected to add about 60 horsepower at stock type compression ratio, i.e., 9.7:1-10.1:1. If you run 8.8:1 compression ratio forged pistons in a naturally aspirated application versus the stock 9.7:1 compression ratio, we'd expect to loose about 10 horsepower.
So, here is how I came up with 325 RWHP.
280 RWHP for new cams, pistons, etc. at 10.0 CR
45 RWHP for the Stage 3 Superheads (since the 60 HP estimate included cams)
325 RWHP, which is anywhere from 375-400 BHP. Like I said earlier, these are based on pure conjecture.
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Interesting.... :scratch:
Tom at SSM told me that the 4.4/4.5L (this engine strokes bigger) would produce 280 RWHP with a good tune, plugs, and dual exhaust. This is including the forged pistons and new cams.
Here is what I asked about changing the pistons and heads:
I have a 2006 V6 Mustang. Please advise on the following set-up:
Supercharge Kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 8.8 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect before the SC went on?
NA/Nitrous kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 10.0 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect?
Thanks!
His response was :
The Stage 3 heads and cams are expected to add about 60 horsepower at stock type compression ratio, i.e., 9.7:1-10.1:1. If you run 8.8:1 compression ratio forged pistons in a naturally aspirated application versus the stock 9.7:1 compression ratio, we'd expect to loose about 10 horsepower.
So, here is how I came up with 325 RWHP.
280 RWHP for new cams, pistons, etc. at 10.0 CR
45 RWHP for the Stage 3 Superheads (since the 60 HP estimate included cams)
325 RWHP, which is anywhere from 375-400 BHP. Like I said earlier, these are based on pure conjecture.
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Interesting.... :scratch:
325 RWHP n/a is more than enough, after that just put the girl on juice and you are kicking butt at the track. But like he said, hasn't been done yet.
1/11/06, 08:24 PM
#45
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 11, 2006, 7:14 PM
Tom at SSM told me that the 4.4/4.5L (this engine strokes bigger) would produce 280 RWHP with a good tune, plugs, and dual exhaust. This is including the forged pistons and new cams.
Here is what I asked about changing the pistons and heads:
I have a 2006 V6 Mustang. Please advise on the following set-up:
Supercharge Kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 8.8 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect before the SC went on?
NA/Nitrous kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 10.0 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect?
Thanks!
His response was :
The Stage 3 heads and cams are expected to add about 60 horsepower at stock type compression ratio, i.e., 9.7:1-10.1:1. If you run 8.8:1 compression ratio forged pistons in a naturally aspirated application versus the stock 9.7:1 compression ratio, we'd expect to loose about 10 horsepower.
So, here is how I came up with 325 RWHP.
280 RWHP for new cams, pistons, etc. at 10.0 CR
45 RWHP for the Stage 3 Superheads (since the 60 HP estimate included cams)
325 RWHP, which is anywhere from 375-400 BHP. Like I said earlier, these are based on pure conjecture.
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Interesting.... :scratch:
Tom at SSM told me that the 4.4/4.5L (this engine strokes bigger) would produce 280 RWHP with a good tune, plugs, and dual exhaust. This is including the forged pistons and new cams.
Here is what I asked about changing the pistons and heads:
I have a 2006 V6 Mustang. Please advise on the following set-up:
Supercharge Kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 8.8 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect before the SC went on?
NA/Nitrous kit: If I added Stage 3 Superheads, new headstuds, an SSM Cam, and forged pistons for 10.0 compression, what kind of HP increase could I expect?
Thanks!
His response was :
The Stage 3 heads and cams are expected to add about 60 horsepower at stock type compression ratio, i.e., 9.7:1-10.1:1. If you run 8.8:1 compression ratio forged pistons in a naturally aspirated application versus the stock 9.7:1 compression ratio, we'd expect to loose about 10 horsepower.
So, here is how I came up with 325 RWHP.
280 RWHP for new cams, pistons, etc. at 10.0 CR
45 RWHP for the Stage 3 Superheads (since the 60 HP estimate included cams)
325 RWHP, which is anywhere from 375-400 BHP. Like I said earlier, these are based on pure conjecture.
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Interesting.... :scratch:
http://www.lethalperformance.com/pages-pro...019b9f8d84ecaa7
So with this engine, you would need....
With proper headers and low restriction air intake and vehicle exhaust systems, the engine will exceed 400 BHP and have a very broad torque curve, peaking over 365.ft/lbs. of torque. Among the many features of the 5.0L Cammer are:
So this means, quite a few things... I dont think I really need to point out that our motors normally aspirated would have to eat themselves to make 350 to 400HP normally aspirated...
There could be something I am missing with what your looking for my good friend Excepcion13, but I cant figure it out... Please tell me even with all the right parts, and cams how we can make anywhere close to 400HP normally aspirated even stroked to 4.5L... Please tell me... There may be something I am missing...
1/11/06, 08:37 PM
#46
Originally posted by MSP@January 11, 2006, 10:27 PM
A 5.0L Cammer doesnt even make that kind of power normally aspirated...
http://www.lethalperformance.com/pages-pro...019b9f8d84ecaa7
So with this engine, you would need....
With proper headers and low restriction air intake and vehicle exhaust systems, the engine will exceed 400 BHP and have a very broad torque curve, peaking over 365.ft/lbs. of torque. Among the many features of the 5.0L Cammer are:
So this means, quite a few things... I dont think I really need to point out that our motors normally aspirated would have to eat themselves to make 350 to 400HP normally aspirated...
There could be something I am missing with what your looking for my good friend Excepcion13, but I cant figure it out... Please tell me even with all the right parts, and cams how we can make anywhere close to 400HP normally aspirated even stroked to 4.5L... Please tell me... There may be something I am missing...
A 5.0L Cammer doesnt even make that kind of power normally aspirated...
http://www.lethalperformance.com/pages-pro...019b9f8d84ecaa7
So with this engine, you would need....
With proper headers and low restriction air intake and vehicle exhaust systems, the engine will exceed 400 BHP and have a very broad torque curve, peaking over 365.ft/lbs. of torque. Among the many features of the 5.0L Cammer are:
So this means, quite a few things... I dont think I really need to point out that our motors normally aspirated would have to eat themselves to make 350 to 400HP normally aspirated...
There could be something I am missing with what your looking for my good friend Excepcion13, but I cant figure it out... Please tell me even with all the right parts, and cams how we can make anywhere close to 400HP normally aspirated even stroked to 4.5L... Please tell me... There may be something I am missing...
I still want to know what labor is to pull the engine. If you're gonna pull the engine, I hate to say it but:
2005 GT Engine on eby!
1/11/06, 08:48 PM
#47
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rygenstormlocke@January 11, 2006, 7:40 PM
I still want to know what labor is to pull the engine. If you're gonna pull the engine, I hate to say it but:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2005-MUSTAN...1QQcmdZViewItem
I still want to know what labor is to pull the engine. If you're gonna pull the engine, I hate to say it but:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2005-MUSTAN...1QQcmdZViewItem
I completely understand the concept, allthough I feel the N/A numbers are slighty higher than whats reasonable..
You must remember a 2001 4.6L engine N/A only make 260HP..
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/time...4/01/index.htm
So like I said, I understand.. I hope it doesnt sound like I am being to realistic... You know I hate reality!! LOL!!
1/11/06, 08:51 PM
#48
Originally posted by MSP@January 11, 2006, 10:51 PM
I understand what Excepcion13 is trying to get at.. But he is talking about a situation which will occure in about 5 to 7 years from now.. Our cars are just way to new to be stroked... Now maybe if someone hurts an engine or something, and they refuse to just install a V8..
I completely understand the concept, allthough I feel the N/A numbers are slighty higher than whats reasonable..
You must remember a 2001 4.6L engine N/A only make 260HP..
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/time...4/01/index.htm
So like I said, I understand.. I hope it doesnt sound like I am being to realistic... You know I hate reality!! LOL!!
I understand what Excepcion13 is trying to get at.. But he is talking about a situation which will occure in about 5 to 7 years from now.. Our cars are just way to new to be stroked... Now maybe if someone hurts an engine or something, and they refuse to just install a V8..
I completely understand the concept, allthough I feel the N/A numbers are slighty higher than whats reasonable..
You must remember a 2001 4.6L engine N/A only make 260HP..
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/time...4/01/index.htm
So like I said, I understand.. I hope it doesnt sound like I am being to realistic... You know I hate reality!! LOL!!
It's all good dude, and with the circumstances you describe, yes, I can see going that route. And you are right, our cars are too new to be stroked, there is no data yet.
I spent hours lookng for a stroked ranger on the net and couldn't find one.
1/11/06, 09:21 PM
#49
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked Tom if it was possible to make 350 RWHP NA and he wrote back:
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Well, obviously we don't have the experience with this engine yet, so I guess its possible that a NA engine might make 350RWHP, but I doubt it with the cams that we have available now.
Good info
Looks like I over estimated on a stroked 4.3 with heads /cams headers, tune! I would have thought this setup would have been worth more than 325RWHP Tom from SSM said in his figures said for dual exhaust think that was with headers or just dual exhaust?
But like I said I do not know a lot about stroked 4.3 engines.
If you take our 4.0's sticks are at what 205RWHP with a CAI, tune add headers/Muff your 225RWHP I mean 325 RWHP is still decent but all that work and money fo 100 more RWHP. This does clear up somethings for me and gives me a good feel for heads and cams now good info and on a stroker 4.3 complete RWHP.
You know you take that 325RWHP with a 125 shot puts you at 450RWHP and that car run's 10.65 and Mike PH runs 400RWHP and is at 11.80's something still doesn't seem right.
Excep if you call them or e-mail if you could ask them if this is the same exact setup in thier Mustang 10.65 and what is the RWHP on that car before spray.
This thread has produced some excellant info for me just for the Knowledge.
1/11/06, 09:37 PM
#50
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ06@January 12, 2006, 12:24 AM
You know you take that 325RWHP with a 125 shot puts you at 450RWHP and that car run's 10.65 and Mike PH runs 400RWHP and is at 11.80's something still doesn't seem right.
Excep if you call them or e-mail ask them if this is this is the same exact setup in thier Mustang 10.65 and what is the RWHP on that car before spray.
This thread has produced some excellant info for me just for the Knowledge.
You know you take that 325RWHP with a 125 shot puts you at 450RWHP and that car run's 10.65 and Mike PH runs 400RWHP and is at 11.80's something still doesn't seem right.
Excep if you call them or e-mail ask them if this is this is the same exact setup in thier Mustang 10.65 and what is the RWHP on that car before spray.
This thread has produced some excellant info for me just for the Knowledge.
There was a lot of good insight in this thread.
It has given me a lot of food for thought.
But back to reality. I still have to put duals on!! LTs will probably have to wait (no catted Prochamber for LTs around), so I m going to get some SS piping, some JBA Axlebacks, and an X-pipe.
1/11/06, 09:52 PM
#51
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ06@January 11, 2006, 8:24 PM
Thanks Excep
Good info
Looks like I over estimated on a stroked 4.3 with heads /cams headers, tune! I would have thought this setup would have been worth more than 325RWHP Tom from SSM said in his figures said for dual exhaust think that was with headers or just dual exhaust?
But like I said I do not know a lot about stroked 4.3 engines.
If you take our 4.0's sticks are at what 205RWHP with a CAI, tune add headers/Muff your 225RWHP I mean 325 RWHP is still decent but all that work and money fo 100 more RWHP. This does clear up somethings for me and gives me a good feel for heads and cams now good info and on a stroker 4.3 complete RWHP.
You know you take that 325RWHP with a 125 shot puts you at 450RWHP and that car run's 10.65 and Mike PH runs 400RWHP and is at 11.80's something still doesn't seem right.
Excep if you call them or e-mail if you could ask them if this is the same exact setup in thier Mustang 10.65 and what is the RWHP on that car before spray.
This thread has produced some excellant info for me just for the Knowledge.
Thanks Excep
Good info
Looks like I over estimated on a stroked 4.3 with heads /cams headers, tune! I would have thought this setup would have been worth more than 325RWHP Tom from SSM said in his figures said for dual exhaust think that was with headers or just dual exhaust?
But like I said I do not know a lot about stroked 4.3 engines.
If you take our 4.0's sticks are at what 205RWHP with a CAI, tune add headers/Muff your 225RWHP I mean 325 RWHP is still decent but all that work and money fo 100 more RWHP. This does clear up somethings for me and gives me a good feel for heads and cams now good info and on a stroker 4.3 complete RWHP.
You know you take that 325RWHP with a 125 shot puts you at 450RWHP and that car run's 10.65 and Mike PH runs 400RWHP and is at 11.80's something still doesn't seem right.
Excep if you call them or e-mail if you could ask them if this is the same exact setup in thier Mustang 10.65 and what is the RWHP on that car before spray.
This thread has produced some excellant info for me just for the Knowledge.
So looking at a 2001 4.6L V8, producing 260HP this helps us to understand a few things while talking stroked on a 4.0L to 4.3L..
One is we can safely assume it would be impossible to match the 4.6L, because one it has 2 more cylinders which are larger than even ours stroked to 4.5L.. This means that using stock parts we can safley assume a level much to what I predicted which was about 241HP @ the crank..
I could go on and on, but I think it should be easier to see my point of view...
It should also be stated that the TUNE is also normal just for theoretical purposes... Now I am not saying it cant be done.. I am quite sure with an aggressive tune, cams, heads and a good air intake we could get pretty close to 260 crank HP.. Maybe alittle more..
1/11/06, 10:24 PM
#52
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can pretty much look at the 4.6L V8's N/A HP and correctly assume that with stock parts, our V6's could not come close... You must use stock parts like heads and cams while guessing at possible ratings.. Using aftermarket cams and heads will confuse things..
So looking at a 2001 4.6L V8, producing 260HP this helps us to understand a few things while talking stroked on a 4.0L to 4.3L..
One is we can safely assume it would be impossible to match the 4.6L, because one it has 2 more cylinders which are larger than even ours stroked to 4.5L.. This means that using stock parts we can safley assume a level much to what I predicted which was about 241HP @ the crank..
I could go on and on, but I think it should be easier to see my point of view...
It should also be stated that the TUNE is also normal just for theoretical purposes... Now I am not saying it cant be done.. I am quite sure with an aggressive tune, cams, heads and a good air intake we could get pretty close to 260 crank HP.. Maybe alittle more..
So looking at a 2001 4.6L V8, producing 260HP this helps us to understand a few things while talking stroked on a 4.0L to 4.3L..
One is we can safely assume it would be impossible to match the 4.6L, because one it has 2 more cylinders which are larger than even ours stroked to 4.5L.. This means that using stock parts we can safley assume a level much to what I predicted which was about 241HP @ the crank..
I could go on and on, but I think it should be easier to see my point of view...
It should also be stated that the TUNE is also normal just for theoretical purposes... Now I am not saying it cant be done.. I am quite sure with an aggressive tune, cams, heads and a good air intake we could get pretty close to 260 crank HP.. Maybe alittle more..
Thanks for the info.
I have picked some good info on stroked 4.3 because of the thread Excep started, and from you guys. I just thought stroking to a 4.3, heads, high lift cams and piston's would have produced more tha 325RWHP. But it has enlighten me and I came away with more info on a 4.3 stoker than I ever knew before this thread was started.
1/11/06, 10:43 PM
#53
I'm sorry, I'm not buying the HP figures you guys are throwing out here. I can't see this stroker motor making any more than 300RWHP even with the stage 3 heads, if that much. The 10.65 was WITH NOS. I can't believe nobody here thought to check out the SSM website to get the facts. Look:
http://www.supersixmotorsports.com/P...05WriteUp3.pdf
278RWHP NA. They also bumped the compression. So forget about all those crazy numbers you guys were throwing around. LOL
http://www.supersixmotorsports.com/P...05WriteUp3.pdf
278RWHP NA. They also bumped the compression. So forget about all those crazy numbers you guys were throwing around. LOL
1/11/06, 10:44 PM
#54
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MSP@January 12, 2006, 12:55 AM
One is we can safely assume it would be impossible to match the 4.6L, because one it has 2 more cylinders which are larger than even ours stroked to 4.5L.. This means that using stock parts we can safley assume a level much to what I predicted which was about 241HP @ the crank..
I could go on and on, but I think it should be easier to see my point of view...
It should also be stated that the TUNE is also normal just for theoretical purposes... Now I am not saying it cant be done.. I am quite sure with an aggressive tune, cams, heads and a good air intake we could get pretty close to 260 crank HP.. Maybe alittle more..
One is we can safely assume it would be impossible to match the 4.6L, because one it has 2 more cylinders which are larger than even ours stroked to 4.5L.. This means that using stock parts we can safley assume a level much to what I predicted which was about 241HP @ the crank..
I could go on and on, but I think it should be easier to see my point of view...
It should also be stated that the TUNE is also normal just for theoretical purposes... Now I am not saying it cant be done.. I am quite sure with an aggressive tune, cams, heads and a good air intake we could get pretty close to 260 crank HP.. Maybe alittle more..
I am at 241 at the crank with an 87 Octane tune, a JBA muffler, and a CAI. 205 RWHP/.85 (15% power loss) = 241
I know the thread title is 4.3L, but stroking our engine would give us 4.4-4.5L according to SSM.
So, are you suggesting that adding half a litre, new cams, and a higher CR is only going to net me 19 BHP?
If so, I gotta disagree with you on this one.
What the actual numbers will be is pure conjecture, granted, but NO ONE WOULD STROKE A MOTOR FOR ONLY 30 BHP! Not even ME!!! :shock:
No hard feelings, there, MSP! Remember, I am a lawyer in training and absolutely LOVE to argue!
1/11/06, 10:47 PM
#55
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jimp@January 12, 2006, 1:46 AM
I'm sorry, I'm not buying the HP figures you guys are throwing out here. I can't see this stroker motor making any more than 300RWHP even with the stage 3 heads, if that much. The 10.65 was WITH NOS. I can't believe nobody here thought to check out the SSM website to get the facts. Look:
http://www.supersixmotorsports.com/P...05WriteUp3.pdf
278RWHP NA. They also bumped the compression. So forget about all those crazy numbers you guys were throwing around. LOL
I'm sorry, I'm not buying the HP figures you guys are throwing out here. I can't see this stroker motor making any more than 300RWHP even with the stage 3 heads, if that much. The 10.65 was WITH NOS. I can't believe nobody here thought to check out the SSM website to get the facts. Look:
http://www.supersixmotorsports.com/P...05WriteUp3.pdf
278RWHP NA. They also bumped the compression. So forget about all those crazy numbers you guys were throwing around. LOL
). You are probably right about the 300 RWHP, though.
The 278 RWHP on their car is what let me know that the 280 RWHP for ours sounded about right. And all I have been doing is looking at their site!! Even posted on their forum!!! What can I say, I am at home recovering from surgery, not much else to do!
1/11/06, 10:55 PM
#56
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 12, 2006, 1:50 AM
I originally said 280 RWHP with 10.3 CR. With the Heads I estimated MAYBE 325 (hey, I am a dreamer!!! ).
You are probably right about the 300 RWHP, though.
The 278 RWHP on their car is what let me know that the 280 RWHP for ours sounded about right. And all I have been doing is looking at their site!! Even posted on their forum!!! What can I say, I am at home recovering from surgery, not much else to do!
I originally said 280 RWHP with 10.3 CR. With the Heads I estimated MAYBE 325 (hey, I am a dreamer!!!
). You are probably right about the 300 RWHP, though.
The 278 RWHP on their car is what let me know that the 280 RWHP for ours sounded about right. And all I have been doing is looking at their site!! Even posted on their forum!!! What can I say, I am at home recovering from surgery, not much else to do!
1/11/06, 11:01 PM
#57
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: October 14, 2005
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am thinking about taking out the rear seats (they are USELESS) and .... don't laugh TOO hard... making a love seat out of them. I mean, what else would they be good for? And they are leather, so I'm not going to just throw them out...
1/11/06, 11:03 PM
#58
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 12, 2006, 2:04 AM
Probably!
I am thinking about taking out the rear seats (they are USELESS) and .... don't laugh TOO hard... making a love seat out of them. I mean, what else would they be good for? And they are leather, so I'm not going to just throw them out...
Probably!
I am thinking about taking out the rear seats (they are USELESS) and .... don't laugh TOO hard... making a love seat out of them. I mean, what else would they be good for? And they are leather, so I'm not going to just throw them out...
1/11/06, 11:13 PM
#59
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 11, 2006, 9:47 PM
I see the logic in comparing a stroked 4.0 to a 2001 4.6, but I think 241 at the crank is severely underestimating it!!!
I am at 241 at the crank with an 87 Octane tune, a JBA muffler, and a CAI. 205 RWHP/.85 (15% power loss) = 241
I know the thread title is 4.3L, but stroking our engine would give us 4.4-4.5L according to SSM.
So, are you suggesting that adding half a litre, new cams, and a higher CR is only going to net me 19 BHP?
If so, I gotta disagree with you on this one.
What the actual numbers will be is pure conjecture, granted, but NO ONE WOULD STROKE A MOTOR FOR ONLY 30 BHP! Not even ME!!! :shock:
No hard feelings, there, MSP! Remember, I am a lawyer in training and absolutely LOVE to argue!
I see the logic in comparing a stroked 4.0 to a 2001 4.6, but I think 241 at the crank is severely underestimating it!!!
I am at 241 at the crank with an 87 Octane tune, a JBA muffler, and a CAI. 205 RWHP/.85 (15% power loss) = 241
I know the thread title is 4.3L, but stroking our engine would give us 4.4-4.5L according to SSM.
So, are you suggesting that adding half a litre, new cams, and a higher CR is only going to net me 19 BHP?
If so, I gotta disagree with you on this one.
What the actual numbers will be is pure conjecture, granted, but NO ONE WOULD STROKE A MOTOR FOR ONLY 30 BHP! Not even ME!!! :shock:
No hard feelings, there, MSP! Remember, I am a lawyer in training and absolutely LOVE to argue!
I think all ideas should be tossed out to the community and kicked around.. No need to keep all these thoughts to yourself... Might as well let us all kick them around with you.. LOL!! Atleast you have gotten it off your chest, and came out with alittle bit more understanding, along with reality...
I still say 241 based on a stock setup.. Like I said, no tune, cams, heads or anything.. Just looking at it for what its worth, and I still say about 241HP... Now you tweak it with a tune and cams, then I wouldnt even venture to guess... There are so many things that change the numbers, its insane..
But I'll be here to debate next time you have another idea you want to test..
1/12/06, 03:28 AM
#60
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Excepcion13@January 12, 2006, 1:04 AM
Probably!
I am thinking about taking out the rear seats (they are USELESS) and .... don't laugh TOO hard... making a love seat out of them. I mean, what else would they be good for? And they are leather, so I'm not going to just throw them out...
Probably!
I am thinking about taking out the rear seats (they are USELESS) and .... don't laugh TOO hard... making a love seat out of them. I mean, what else would they be good for? And they are leather, so I'm not going to just throw them out...
Sorry to burst your bubble... but... I believe all we have is leather "inserts on the front seats... the rest, including the back seats, is vinyl... I'm sure I read some very angry threads about this last spring... LOL