This is topic Car got dynoed today in forum Tech Talk at Northern California Ford Owners  .


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=005657

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Well it is an okay amount of power for the 347. It made 353rwhp and 360rwtq. What do you guys think this power will make the car run? I am hoping for somewhere in the 11's mid to upper is fine with me. As for the suspension it has welded torque boxes, steeda aluminum upper and lower control arms, 50/50 rear shocks, 70/30 front struts. The rear end is waiting in my room it is an eaton posi unit 31 spline strange axels, clip elimators, and 3.73 gears. The car has 3.73 right now but I am going to upgrade it all to what I just listed. So what do you guys think?
 

---

Posted by Black94 5.0 (Member # 655) on :
 
NICE NUMBERS!....

I think that low 12's are easily obtainable....It depends on how much your car weights, but I'm sure 11's are right around the corner...
 

---

Posted by AaronC (Member # 86) on :
 
Ouch! I was expecting around 400 RWHP. Doesn't the motor have some TEA 185's and a custom TEA cam 240/244?
 

---

Posted by Blu50Stang (Member # 489) on :
 
I'd say you are looking at mid/low 12s
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Yeah it does I wanted some in the 400 also but hey the numbers are there and I think 11's are very there. It should it low 12's very easy. I have a holley intake on the damn thing do you think that is what holding me back. It is a 10 to one 347. It runs really really well though
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Another thing is this thing is very street friendly I can drive it anywhere it isn't a trailor queen
 

---

Posted by Jeff S (Member # 371) on :
 
Can you post the dyno graph? I'd call TEA and see what they have to say about those numbers...something definitely isn't right.

What is the rest of the combo again?
 

---

Posted by st5150 (Member # 51) on :
 
Yeah, I too was expecting more than 350 rwhp. Can you post the dyno graph? It should run around 115 mph at the track.
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
347 10 to one tea 185 cc holley intake 75mm throttle body, 80mm mass air 30 lb injectors, Tea custom cam 240 244 545 lift, bbk 1 3\4 inch headers with 2 1\2 inch exhaust, and other little things
 

---

Posted by Hater (Member # 3085) on :
 
I think 11s with those numbers are going to be hard to get,,but I'd say mid 12s are a good number though.
 

---

Posted by jmcclesk (Member # 1355) on :
 
I made 337 at the wheels with tea 185's on a 302 stock short block. If you call me sometime this week I can tell you that to check. I had to spend 200.00 at a local machine shop the get everything to work right.
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
What were wrong with your heads? I really don't want to have this thing apart again it isn't really worth it to me.
Albert
 

---

Posted by FasterDamnit (Member # 442) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hater:
I think 11s with those numbers are going to be hard to get,,but I'd say mid 12s are a good number though.

---

Uhhh- I don't think so. If he gets a good launch on slicks ( he has the rest of the suspension pretty well setup) AND the car is not a heavyweight, 11's are a lock.
 

---

Posted by 87 Saleen (Member # 1549) on :
 
Do you have longtubes? how about a 3" free flowing exhaust? think that would help? or how about some cutouts?
 

---

Posted by st5150 (Member # 51) on :
 
If you're happy with your car, that's all that counts really. Finding a 5.O driver happy with his combo is more rare than a 400rwhp 347
 

---

Posted by Team SOLO (Member # 722) on :
 
yoyoyo...

what does your car weigh? stick or automatic? what tires are you gonna run on the car?

300 rwhp got me consistent 12.0's @ 111/112 but my car was lighter than a feather.
 

---

Posted by shade- (Member # 298) on :
 
let me drive it and I will break an axle or run 11.5s , one or the other

[ October 12, 2003, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: shade- ]
 

---

Posted by ON N2O (Member # 2067) on :
 
if you get me that graph albert i can post if for you.
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Rob I will get you the graph. Chris taped the dyno run maybe you can post it from chris. I think mid to upper 11's are more than reachable with this power level. It made over 300 pounds of torque all the way up.
I am going to be running some 26 by 10.5 et streets and the car is a 5spd.
 

---

Posted by st5150 (Member # 51) on :
 
What RPM did you make peak HP at?
 

---

Posted by Camara90 (Member # 134) on :
 
Like everyone else said what does the car weight? That will give you the best idea. If i were you I would start looking into a few things as well I made 357 rwhp and i belive 363 torque with a afr 165 untouched and an x c cam with the holley intake, and 30 lb injectors with 1 5/8 headers. Not trying to say anything bad about your setup but if it were me I would wantto know what the problem is. But then again im one of those guys sawson was talking about who is never happy
 

---

Posted by AaronC (Member # 86) on :
 
Mike- 353 RWHP at 5600 and 371 TQ at 4400. Just looked at your old sheets today
 

---

Posted by z ya (Member # 1327) on :
 
Nice numbers bro...With a good hook should go high 11's easy..
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
I don't know what my car weighs but it is a typical Lx basically. No Ac and a couple of aluminum things here and there.
The torque max was at 4000 and the peak hp was at 5800. The two meet with each other at around 5250. I mean I really am wondering where the other 20-30rwhp is? Do you guys think it is in the intake?? How about the exhaust it has that shitty bbk collector that is like 2 and 1/4 inch. The exhaust is only 2 and 1/2 inches. But I am going to drive it for a while let it have some track time and look at the numbers. From thoses numbers I will make a choice to rip it apart and change things or keep it the same
Albert
 

---

Posted by shade- (Member # 298) on :
 
are you running a race-crank underdrive pulley?
 

---

Posted by Fast472Mach1 (Member # 2559) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1SLOWLX:
The torque max was at 4000 and the peak hp was at 5800. The two meet with each other at around 5250.

---

quote:

---

The two meet up around 5250

---

that's too funny!


(HP always equals Torque at 5250)
 

---

Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
I'd say that combo should have made 380-390RWTQ at ~4500rpm.
This combo is ment for high RPM power. If you can't get that thing to make power above 6K, you won't see the combo's full potential. That combo would make the best power peaking at 6500rpm.

IMO the intake is holding it back. Perhaps by 15-20RWTQ. Seems to me the runners are just too long for a 347...especially with that cam. A better choice would be a Victor intake.

Aside from that I'd definately open up the exhaust to at least 2.5 inches (if not 3 inches) & check the header flanges to make sure they are larger then the head ports.

[ October 13, 2003, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: 93PONY ]
 

---

Posted by boosted89Saleen (Member # 2243) on :
 
Hmm, I hope my 347 makes a little more power then that, but we are running close to the same specs so I guess we will see!
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
How about an edelbrock intake fully ported? Or should I get the victor and open up the exhaust?
 

---

Posted by Jeff S (Member # 371) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1SLOWLX:
How about an edelbrock intake fully ported? Or should I get the victor and open up the exhaust?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1SLOWLX:
The one thing that pissed me off about this deal was Tea did the heads and I don't think they upgraded the valve springs like I paid for since it had valve float at 6200 and I don't think they milled the heads like I paid for either

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 93PONY:
My reasoning behind the Holley as a restriction was not based on cross-section of the port. It's based on runner length.
IMO you need an intake with ~13 inches of total runner length.

---

Runner length schumther length. Pure street/Renegade cars rev 8000+rpm with that intake.

Also Brian Tooley seems to think it's better than a Victor 5.0 on a high RPM 347 as well.
 

---

Posted by 66 AC COBRA of CA PERFORMANCE (Member # 904) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff S:

quote:

---

Originally posted by 93PONY:
My reasoning behind the Holley as a restriction was not based on cross-section of the port. It's based on runner length.
IMO you need an intake with ~13 inches of total runner length.

---

Runner length schumther length. Pure street/Renegade cars rev 8000+rpm with that intake.

Also Brian Tooley seems to think it's better than a Victor 5.0 on a high RPM 347 as well.

---

the holley intake is an awesome intake after it has been flowmatched, the flow from one runner to another is so different that it really affedcts performance, if the all the runners flowed as well as the best one, it would be a fenominal intake, as good as a victor 5.0, not sure about that, but it would definetleyt give it a run for its money

but since his intake is box stock i presume, a vitor or even a rpm would be better, spend 500 or so and get it cut and ported alittle and then make so huge numbers, maybe take out mike as the NA king
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Yeah well I am going to live with this combo for a while and then later on I will port the hell out of it or move on to a new one
Albert
 

---

Posted by AaronC (Member # 86) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 66 AC COBRA of CA PERFORMANCE:

QUOTE]the holley intake is an awesome intake after it has been flowmatched, the flow from one runner to another is so different that it really affedcts performance, if the all the runners flowed as well as the best one, it would be a fenominal intake, as good as a victor 5.0, not sure about that, but it would definetleyt give it a run for its money

but since his intake is box stock i presume, a vitor or even a rpm would be better, spend 500 or so and get it cut and ported alittle and then make so huge numbers, maybe take out mike as the NA king

---

Mike makes more power now with a smaller cross section intake than the holley is stock!
 

---

Posted by MR GO FAST (Member # 2088) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1SLOWLX:
Yeah well I am going to live with this combo for a while and then later on I will port the hell out of it or move on to a new one
Albert

---

Put it this way Albert, It more horsepower then a rusted blue 69 camaro that is sitting on stands
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
That is true well it will take a trip to the track soon and I will let all you guys in on what it runs. Going to launch in hard cause the whole thing is built
 

---

Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
Did you degree in the cam?
I've seen some chains that are 4+ degree advanced...add that to the 4 degree of advance your cam has ground in & you may have a problem there.
Just curious since your torque peaked at 4000rpm.
 

---

Posted by Jeff S (Member # 371) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by AaronC:
Mike makes more power now with a smaller cross section intake than the holley is stock!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff S:

quote:

---

Originally posted by AaronC:
Mike makes more power now with a smaller cross section intake than the holley is stock!

---

Mike might make more power if he switched to a Holley.

---

he had a holley on the car and ditched it for a rpm, but isnt his rpm ported too, but as i said a stock holley needs a lot of work, but if the work is done its a bad ass
my holley intake is untouched
 

---

Posted by Jeff S (Member # 371) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 66 AC COBRA of CA PERFORMANCE:he had a holley on the car and ditched it for a rpm, but isnt his rpm ported too, but as i said a stock holley needs a lot of work, but if the work is done its a bad ass
my holley intake is untouched [/QB]

---

Mikes switch from a Holley to a ported RPM doesn't mean the RPM is better for him. When he switched intake he also switched cams and ported his heads. The only way he'll know which is better for him is to switch JUST the intake itself and do some track testing.
 

---

Posted by AaronC (Member # 86) on :
 
Mike had the Holley on for 2 setups and couldn't get it to peak higher than 5600 RPM (X cam,165's 1 5/8 headers to 185's and 232/227 cam with 1 3/4 headers). The RPM now peaks at 5900/6000 (current setup). His heads are very lightly cleaned up so I wouldn't call it a port job. If you see them you'd know what I mean. The cam is a lot stouter now, but he makes more power everywhere now including the midrange just as Brian said it would. A guy StreetpowerEFI331 on the corral also gained power going from a Holley to a ported RPM. That was with the holley worked to fit the head ports. He had well documented results on his 331. The Holley doesn't fit the AFR heads very well. In some areas it'd be bigger than a 1/8" than the opening to the head on Mike's car. On all corners the intake was bigger. The new RPM is a direct match to the head so there isn't any turbulence. I'm sure the better balance of the runners helps too. On the TEA heads the Holley should be a better fit port to port.

In regards to the setup in this thread I don't think the intake is holding it back. Maybe from reving where the heads/cam will like to peak but the motor is severely lacking in midrange torque as well as having odd peaks.

[ October 14, 2003, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: AaronC ]
 

---

Posted by jmcclesk (Member # 1355) on :
 
If tea did not mill the heads after port work you combustion chamber is approx 64-66cc.

 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
Well I am going to deal with it for a little with get some track time in and see how I like it.
Do you guys think the exhaust is a problem? The bbk headers are pretty shitty at the collector and I only have 2 and 1/2 exhaust. Maybe it needs to breath better
 

---

Posted by Rhombeus50 (Member # 2973) on :
 
U can also open up the throttle body inlet on the Holley to a true 75mm to match ur TB. I think the inlet is actually 72.5mm, so there may be a little turbulence there. Also, I remember a MM&FF article about the C&L beating the Pro-M by 10hp thruout the whole rpm range.
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
My feeling would be the exhaust is hurting me the most
 

---

Posted by Rhombeus50 (Member # 2973) on :
 
Exactly what exhaust system are u runnin? U can't go wrong with the 1 3/4" long tubes & I think 2 1/2" thruout is good til 400rwhp. Do u have an off road X or H? Also, what kinda cat back?
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
1 3/4 bbk longtubes with 2 1/2 inch exhaust. It is a flowmaster catback with american thunder
 

---

Posted by Rhombeus50 (Member # 2973) on :
 
Do u have cats on it?
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
No cats
 

---

Posted by Rhombeus50 (Member # 2973) on :
 
Yeah, I agree. U should be makin more power.
 

---

Posted by 87 Saleen (Member # 1549) on :
 
.
 

---

Posted by Saint (Member # 2746) on :
 
Did you get it dyno and tune? where didi you get it dyno at and how muhc did it cost? when i get my back back togather ill need a dyno and tune. where is a good place to go and whats it going to run me?
 

---

Posted by Saint (Member # 2746) on :
 
Did you get it dyno and tune? where didi you get it dyno at and how muhc did it cost? when i get my car back togather ill need a dyno and tune. where is a good place to go and whats it going to run me?
 

---

Posted by 1SLOWLX (Member # 558) on :
 
mustang ranch. IT is 180an hour for the tune and if you need a chip it is 300 for that
 

---