|
Author
|
Topic: WooHoo! Ordered my cam today!
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
 
 
600-700 RPM? An inch of intake runner is worth about a 100 RPM offset in the power band. I've seen countless cars dyno and countless dyno test online and in magazines and have never seen one "thing" such as a cam, intake, headers, heads, ect offset the powerband 600-700 RPM, let alone retarding the same cam 6 degrees.
As for Ed, he doesn't run anything himself. He runs his fingers on the keyboard all day, spreading mis-information to make his pockets fatter.
Amoung certain local cirlces, "Ed Curtis" is a joke.... "12.4 NA, good job man, now if you had an Ed C. cam, you would have gone 11.4 short shifting" or "Nice flow numbers, 60 cfm gain from stock.... but Ed C. says he could get 100 cfm more than stock with 50 cc smaller runns", "Good job getting into the 10's man, but Bob Cosby's TT, Canfield AOD Ed C. car also ran 10's" ![[Wink]](wink.gif) I even heard that a custom cam Ed C. designed with the help of jod powered a generator to keep the Jews warm in the year 354 A.D. ![[worship]](graemlins/worship.gif)
Has an Ed C. cam made it out to northern california yet? Jeff S said some cams were here, but the cars weren't running yet?
[ December 03, 2002, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: st5150 ]
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
Sawson...have you been drinking?
Project 'Real Street' uses TW heads:
http://www.flowtechinduction.com/real.html
& yes, there are a few FTI cams coming to the area. Problem right now is no Ford Hydrolic roller cores....anywere.
Technically the cam I run now is an Ed cam...although it is a Ford Factory cam.
The new cam is not from Ed. It's from my head. Ed is the most knowledgable motor head I've ever run across.
& yes, advanceing/retarding the cam has a drastic effect on the powerband.
I retarded Drew's cam 6 degrees. He needed to lower timing cause it pinged (add cylinder pressure) & now hits the rev-limiter with ease. The motor should now peak @ ~6200-6300rpm. Before I moved it the motor fell on its face at 5500rpm.
Awefull lot of smack coming from a high 13 second setup.
Had to say it... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I know you've got plans for the beast.
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
StoplightWarrior
¯
Member # 211
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by 93PONY:
Sawson...have you been drinking?
Project 'Real Street' uses TW heads:
http://www.flowtechinduction.com/real.html
& yes, there are a few FTI cams coming to the area. Problem right now is no Ford Hydrolic roller cores....anywere.
Technically the cam I run now is an Ed cam...although it is a Ford Factory cam.
The new cam is not from Ed. It's from my head. Ed is the most knowledgable motor head I've ever run across.
& yes, advanceing/retarding the cam has a drastic effect on the powerband.
I retarded Drew's cam 6 degrees. He needed to lower timing cause it pinged (add cylinder pressure) & now hits the rev-limiter with ease. The motor should now peak @ ~6200-6300rpm. Before I moved it the motor fell on its face at 5500rpm.
Awefull lot of smack coming from a high 13 second setup.
Had to say it...
I know you've got plans for the beast.
93Pony, check your PM's ![[patriot]](graemlins/patriot.gif)
--------------------
2000 GT
couple bolt ons
Check out the website: peep it
Posts: 2952 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2001
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
93PONY- Haven't been drinking, but I am really sick with the flu, but I'm sure next week, I'll still think Ed C. is an internet tele-marketer
As for Drew's motor, if his power band was raised and he gained in theory 30-40 rwhp, wouldn't it have shown in his trap speed? I was under the impression that he gained nothing by switching from his E cam.
As for my 13 second beast... its all good, I know my standing on www.californiafords.com/fastest.htm ![[burnout]](graemlins/burnout.gif)
I've always thought it doesn't matter how fast a guy runs, but what he uses to get there... for example a civic guy with bolt ons running 14.9's probably has some good tips and tricks I can learn from, even though he's barely out of the 15's. On the flip side, a Viper guy running 12.5's with some bolt ons probably has nothing to offer me as far as tips and tricks go, even though he is over two seconds faster than the 14.9 second Civic guy.
Same goes for 'stang too... a guy making 235 rwhp out of a stock motored 5.O has some good tips and tricks I can learn from, but a guy with a 245 rwhp '99 GT probably has little to offer.
Being close to Apex, Mustang Ranch and Charlies Mustangs for several years, I've seen a ton of combo's. I've seen everything from strokers with Vortech T trims not make it past 450 rwhp to stock bottem end + TFS + E cam + cobra intake + S trim + power pipe make 450+ rwhp. I've seen heads/intake/cam 302's make 255 rwhp and 351W's make 275 rwhp. On the flip side, I've seen the same displacement motors make about 100 rwhp more with the same, but better chosen top half of the motor.
After a while I've grown to care more about cars running in my own back yard than internet theory combo cars 2-3000 miles from me. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the combo's listed here: www.cafords.com/fastest.htm
Top runners of each "class":
5.o NA- #1) TFS heads +TFS1 cam, #2) GT40X heads + B cam #3) TFS heads + TFS1 cam
5.0 + power adder- Waiting for updates on this, I can think of countless cars that should be on this list but haven't submitted their times yet. The people listed so far don't represent the cream of the local crop.
Stroker 5.O class- #1) If this is the maroon LX I think it is, it had either Victor Jr's or TFS's and a carburator. #2 and #3) AFR 185's + hi-tech cams.
Stroker 5.O + power adder class ) #1) TFS heads, don't know the cam and intake, #2) TFS heads, "off the shelf" comp cam as far as I know and hogan upper intake with TFS-R lower #3) TFS heads, don't know the cam, GT40 intake.
Are you noticing a trend here? What's fast on Corral.net isn't what's fast in our back yard... personally I care more about whats fast in my own back yard because I don't race at corral.net raceway.
[ December 03, 2002, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: st5150 ]
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
StoplightWarrior
¯
Member # 211
|
posted
Sawson...that post was AWESOME!! Great stuff, great outlook on the racing scene!
--------------------
2000 GT
couple bolt ons
Check out the website: peep it
Posts: 2952 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2001
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
st5150,
Yes I have 2 buddies running FTI cams. One of the cars just fired up last week and we're getting ready to tune it. It should be a good comparison with Camara90 and 93lx342 since it's a 347 with out of the box AFR 185's and a performer RPM intake.
The other car should be up and running within the next few days however the cam was not degreed in due to the owner being a LAZY ASS ![[Frown]](frown.gif) This car is a stock bottom end 302 with AFR 165's pedestal mount and a GT-40 upper(for now, a RPM once he gets one) 1 5/8" LT's and 4:10's
Re: the Stroker 5.O class Maroon LX, it had ported Edelbrock RPM heads.
[ December 03, 2002, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: Jeff S ]
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
Drew should've gained more like 20hp peak & 5-10 under the curve. You know the HP equation. Moving the torque curve higher in RPM's above 5252 will give more HP. It really depends on the initial curve on how much can be gained/lost with moving the valve-events.
The problem that I see w/Drew's setup is the rev-limiter. Peak power moved from 5500 to ~6000-6100 I think. So, he went from shifting at 6000 to shifting as close to the rev-limiter as possible. Idealy, you want to shift 4-500rpm above your peak HP to give max MPH in the 1/4. With the stock rev-limiter, he'll never get there. Aside from that, on nearly every run he hits the limiter, which pulls fuel/timing....& doesn't it store tables & cause the car to go into 'limp' mode sometimes???
As for the tried & true combos....those H/C/I blower cars only putting out 450RWHP are weak. Better valve events alone would give more impressive results. Add faster ramp-rates, which means more .200 duration (were heads REALLY flow) & the power just keeps coming.
As for the fastest cars around here.... You have said that it's pretty sad that there are so many slow HCI cars in Norcal. I agree. & like you said, not many custom ground cams around here.
Most of these slow HCI cars are suffering from poor valve-events, intake air-charge & exhaust gasses stalling in the manifolds causing surging, etc.
Mike Camara's GT ran as hard as those blower cars....w/an AFR/custom cam combo 347.
Aaron's car was well over 400flywheel HP this time around....on a 306 w/AFR's & Mikes old cam. It got faster after you rode in it BTW. Added fuel & it responded quite well.
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
I'm really interested in seeing what kind of numbers the stock bottem end 5.O puts up. Did he get a fairly "wild" Ed cam?
As for the Maroon LX, are you sure its ported performer heads? I could have swore he posted here once it was Victor Jr's. The most I've ever heard of Performer heads flowing is about 270 cfm
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
He didn't degree the cam in!?! D'oh!
That could have a serious impact on performance. Most cams I've degreed have been off by 4 degrees or more.
Some of those timing chains out there are terible! Even those expensive Big-name ones.
I've found to FMS 9-position to be pretty accurate (within 1 degree).
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
93PONY- I don't know Drew's combo and his combo is such an odd ball performer , won't even try to guess what his dyno graph looks like ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
As for H/I/C+boost "summit catalog" combo's making 450+ rwhp with a stock bottem end, I think its pretty good. In theory you can take any 5.O and a summit catalog and over a weekend turn it into an Exotic car killer that still passes smog. What more could you want? I'm a huge fan of simple combo's that run hard. For example Bob Cosby's mid 12 second stock motored LX is my hero, but I poop on his ported canfield headed, twin turbo, holley intake, built AOD, Ed C. Cam, 10.9 second LX.
As for the 5.O + power adder class, just quickly thinking of a few that should be on the list... Jeff Peterson's victor Jr heads + off the shelf comp cam + S trim LX running 11.2's and Paul Booth's 11.3 second TFS heads + nitrous + comp cam notch.
Either way, I'm a spectator.... let me pull up my lawn chair and see what works and what doesn't work for people... I already have a pretty good idea of what has worked pretty damn good over the past 5 years here. Bring on the revolution, worse thing that can happen is standards being raised and ET records being broken
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
cobraman_1994
¯
Member # 467
|
posted
lol, poop. LMAO
--------------------
86 GT
Posts: 4882 | From: eldorado hills | Registered: Sep 2001
| :
|
|
Yellow94GT
Mr. 60 FT
Member # 431
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by st5150:
93PONY- I don't know Drew's combo and his combo is such an odd ball performer , won't even try to guess what his dyno graph looks like
As for H/I/C+boost "summit catalog" combo's making 450+ rwhp with a stock bottem end, I think its pretty good. In theory you can take any 5.O and a summit catalog and over a weekend turn it into an Exotic car killer that still passes smog. What more could you want? I'm a huge fan of simple combo's that run hard. For example Bob Cosby's mid 12 second stock motored LX is my hero, but I poop on his ported canfield headed, twin turbo, holley intake, built AOD, Ed C. Cam, 10.9 second LX.
As for the 5.O + power adder class, just quickly thinking of a few that should be on the list... Jeff Peterson's victor Jr heads + off the shelf comp cam + S trim LX running 11.2's and Paul Booth's 11.3 second TFS heads + nitrous + comp cam notch.
Either way, I'm a spectator.... let me pull up my lawn chair and see what works and what doesn't work for people... I already have a pretty good idea of what has worked pretty damn good over the past 5 years here. Bring on the revolution, worse thing that can happen is standards being raised and ET records being broken
That 11.2 that Jeff Peter's ran does not do justice to the power of that setup. He never got a full run out of that car due to lack of gear at the top of the track. That car was capable of 130 MPH traps and 10's easily. this is show by his 101 MPH 1/8 mile MPH.
Must be the heads
--------------------
AED
1994 GT Bucket that will likely never run
1999 SLOLEEN Twin Turbo Coyote
2008 F250 580 RWHP 1129 RWTQ
Posts: 5990 | From: Cameron Park, Ca | Registered: Sep 2001
| :
|
|
Yellow94GT
Mr. 60 FT
Member # 431
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by st5150:
Bring on the revolution, worse thing that can happen is standards being raised and ET records being broken
--------------------
AED
1994 GT Bucket that will likely never run
1999 SLOLEEN Twin Turbo Coyote
2008 F250 580 RWHP 1129 RWTQ
Posts: 5990 | From: Cameron Park, Ca | Registered: Sep 2001
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
Naw, the secret to his mojo was his custom cam from some shmuck 3000 miles away degreed in to .00001 degree accuracy...... no wait, I'm mistake'n, actually his "secret" was a well matched off the shelf cam mixed with some good flowing out the box heads..... at least we now know what's truely important when putting up the numbers
[ December 03, 2002, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: st5150 ]
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
I don't see how 450RWHP is impressive for a 302 W/HCI & boost! That's a mear 250HP above stock with high-flowing heads, cam, intake & boost.... Pull off the blower & what's the combo good for...~300RWHP...not real impressive.
What's impressive is these N/A boys putting those high #'s down... without passing smog of course.
Jeff used the XE274 in his car. An excellent Blower cam! Those XE lobes are exactly what Ed C., Brian E., & a bunch of other use for their custom grinds. The XE series cams have awesome lobes! But they're really designed for carb setups w/the standard split duration, so the valve events are hit & miss for most of the HCI combos floating around. Jeff ran 104 on motor w/that setup (w/the auto). The blower was doing all the work. 15psi from a blower should nearly double the power of the motor. 10psi from a turbo will do it!
I agree that Bob's Coupe was bad-ass, but have you ever seen this car run???
Seriously though most of the problems with the HCI cars in norcal are due to poor cam choices/valve-events. It's hit & miss. The ones that hit it run hard w/off-the-shelf parts. The ones that miss don't. A custom grind hits nearly every time. Hell, no one's perfect.
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
I can only think of maybe 2-3 locals that have made 450+ rwhp with 12ish psi and box stock heads, intake and off the shelf generic cams on a stock bottem end. On the flip side, Team Solo, Jon and Aaron are the only people I know of in Northern California that have EVER made over 300 rwhp out of a stock bottem ended 302. I no longer set my standards on what is the latest fad on corral.net so yeah, 450+ rwhp box stock parts + boost on a stock bottem end and 300+ rwhp from a stock bottem end 302 are impressive to me. As for 15 psi of blower boost being the same as 10 psi of turbo boost... sounds like the Incon mailing list is alive and well....a long time ago I conluded that boost is boost, turbo, centrifical, roots, ect, I don't care, just give me the cheap, efficient, practicial one so I can have the most fun
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
st5150,
I would say the 302's cam is not *wild* but decently aggresive(whatever that means). When I ordered the cam I just told Ed that I wanted the cam to make the most power with the parts he already had at full weight with all accessories and not to worry about that smog thing
My experiece with blower cars is that it doesn't really matter what your combo is. If you strap on a blower and know how to tune your gonna haul some ass.
93PONY,
I told him over and over to make sure to get a 9-way FMS chain and to degree it in, but when I stopped by his house today the cam was already in. ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
st5150,
Boost is boost, however when you lose 50+hp from spinning the blower, the turbo boost seems much more efficient.
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by st5150:
As for 15 psi of blower boost being the same as 10 psi of turbo boost... sounds like the Incon mailing list is alive and well....a long time ago I conluded that boost is boost, turbo, centrifical, roots, ect, I don't care, just give me the cheap, efficient, practicial one so I can have the most fun
Ignorance at it's finest. It's all about the efficiency of the blower/turbo. Roots have ~55-60% efficiency rates at BEST. The wipple gets up there in the mid 60's. Centrifugals are in the 75% range.
Why do you think Turbos are baned in most racing classes?
How much power do you think my GT40 iron headed, cobra intake, stock camed 331 is making? Not much! 9psi from these hair-dryers are easily giving me 200HP/TQ.
How much do you think it'd make with an S trim pushing 9psi? 350-370RWHP & TQ most likely.
There's actually a guy on turbomustangs that just made the same power w/15psi on the blower as 9-10 on the turbo....everything else was the same. I'll try to find the link.
IMO 300RWHP from a HCI combo 302 is not very impressive. 325+ yes.
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
Jeff S- A Novi 2000 pullied up can take 50 hp to spin, but look at the big restriction the turbo puts on the exhaust....that will cost you 50 HP as well. On the internet its turbo this, turbo that, AFR this, AFR that, custom cam this, custom cam that but on Saturday night its almost always the trick flow heads + vortech cars that you have to watch out for. This was the case 10 years ago. This is still the case today. I don't see it changing anytime soon either. I've never owned any of the products I'm talking about here and have never even been in the market to buy any of them so you can't get more unbias than my opinion I just want to see 5.O's on top.
93PONY- How am I being ignorent? My personal preference is centrifical just because I can bolt it between lunch and dinner, it don't really obstruct much and its proven to be cheap and reliable. Its just my personal taste though, everyone has different preferences and neither one is right or wrong as long as they get the job done to the owners satisfaction. If you still think I'm ignorent, prove me wrong. Let ink and paper do the talking. You've claimed 500 RWHP at 6100 RPM at 9-10 psi by only adding a custom cam, we'll have to wait for the inkjet printer to settle it.
As for the turbo vs centrifical boost, I'm just telling you what I've seen with my own eyes and you're telling me what you've read on a products internet mailing list. I've been on that mailing list since it started, I've read all the B.S. those morons post there and get use to get a good laugh out of it. I've been in the stage you're at now and came full circle to see the the whole forest instead of individual trees. So if you still think 10 turbo psi = 15 blower psi...You're running 10 psi of turbo boost. Go race some 15 psi T-trim or Novi 2000 cars and tell me 10 psi turbo = 15 psi centrifical.
When taking about power adders in race classes... I agree, turbo's are the way to go for 30+ psi of boost. You run into a lot of mechanical problems pullying and gearing up a centrifical blower to the crazy boost levels they run in the NMRA.... but if I remember right, the Pro 5.O record in the NMRA is a nitroused car ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
As for comparing your combo with the same thing, but an S trim... are you forgetting your intercoolers? tisk tisk tisk I want a Vortech aftercooler on my virtual combo to make things fair
ps- Dave Inall is also a useless internet tele-marketer like Ed Curtis and I don't think that opinion will change after I'm over the flu next week either :razz:
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
93PONY,
The reason your Incon setup is making more HP than the same setup with an S-trim is not because the efficiency rating of your turbos but because they are intercooled and the take only a few HP to operate as opposed to the ~40 the stock pullied S-Trim would.
st5150,
Umm... what restriction does a turbo put on the exhaust? It may use a few HP, but nowhere near the amount that a centrifugal would.
I do agree that TFS heads are the way to go for a street/strip blower car but you must admit that almost all of the "impressive" NA cars have been using AFR heads recently.
PS. Out of curiosity what is the reason you dislike Ed Curtis so much?
--------------------
'90 Mustang LX: 8.53 @ 157.92 w/ 1.33 60' on DR's
'10 ZR1: FOR SALE
'14 E63 S: RENNtech ECU
'04 Gallardo: UGR TTG
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
Yes, igonorant if you think 15psi from a turbo = 15psi from a centrifugal.
Apmospheric pressure is ~14.7psi. Theoretically ~15psi forced into a given motor (say 300rwhp) will double the power. BUT, you must take compressor efficiency into account. A compressor in it's 75% efficiency range at 15psi will make 525RWHP on this motor....BUT, you must then subtract the power needed to run the blower. Anywere from 30-50hp to spin the gear box. This is fairly accurate to the real-world. True, a turbo doesn't use that kind of HP spinning any gears, but it is NOT free. Turbos take power to make power, just like the centrifugals, but they don't require nearly as much. Hard to say just how much they use, but it's definately NOT 50hp!
A turbo motor produces ~1.5-2 times the pressure in the exhaust manifold as in the intake. This robs power, yet at the same time adds power.....odd you say? Not really. N/A & SC motor's power stroke is from 0-90 crank degrees. The turbo motor's powerstroke is extended due to the pressure in the exhaust. It fights to push out the exhaust gasses. Simple physics. How much does it increase the powerstroke is hard to say. Most believe it's extended ~45 degrees. So, that's an extra 45 degrees of stroke/power.
There's another advantage to the ol' turbo. Full boost is achived BEFORE peak torque. On a matched setup full boost is achived before 3K rpm. On a SC....what 6K? If the motors are both making peak HP at 6000rpm, then both will make roughly the same peak HP. BUT, the power under the curve will be drastically higher w/the turbo motor. 100FTlbs of torque over the SC motor is NOT un-comon. Now lets just say these motors peak @ 5500rpm....well, the SC isn't even making full boost yet & is at a disadvantage....
You rode in my car..... Have you EVER felt a stock heads, cam, intake car w/9psi running through cats pull like that? 119MPH w/a slipping clutch @ 3550lbs going down the track.....It takes TW heads, E cam & off-road exhaust to match that on a Vortech car.
We will see what the motor does w/just a cam change..... & it should peak before 6K rpm...
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
FordPny
¯
Member # 510
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by st5150:
Jeff S- A Novi 2000 pullied up can take 50 hp to spin, but look at the big restriction the turbo puts on the exhaust....that will cost you 50 HP as well. On the internet its turbo this,
I know a little bit about turbos but nothing close to what 93pony or you know but I can honestly say running a 3-5 inch downpipe and a good exhuast system (read straight thru) there is no way you loose 50 hp from ristriction. I mean sure you get back pressure but there is absoultly no way I can imagine loosing 50hp especially on a twin turbo.
and jeff you forgot to mention the number 1 bearing on supercharged cars
one last thing if turbos are not as good as blowers how come some of the fastest cars out there came with turbos (GN Supras Svo's)
--------------------
Holla at yoo boooyyy
Posts: 2458 | From: San Jose CA | Registered: Oct 2001
| :
|
|
Jeff S
¯
Member # 371
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by st5150:
As for the Maroon LX, are you sure its ported performer heads? I could have swore he posted here once it was Victor Jr's. The most I've ever heard of Performer heads flowing is about 270 cfm
I just confirmed with him and they are/were Edelbrock RPM heads. I guess the solid roller and ~2800 pound race weight helped a bit
Posts: 2121 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Aug 2001
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
This thread rules. Can't wait to see some of the faster AFR combos when they hit the track. See sig!
--------------------
1984 Ford Tempo AOD--- RIP
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
