 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / October 2004Build me a 5.0
I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying to get a plan together. Basically, I'm looking for at least 275 HP using a 92 fuel injected core. I have all the FI wiring, sensors, etc., and wiring it is no problem. But I am also using an AOD, and would like to select heads, intakes, throttle body and cam for best power at lower rpms, with peak power in at 5500 rpm or less. I don't want to defeat any smog control (except for not using cats). Any and all suggestions appreciated. Edwin 275 at the flywheel or at the tires?? Either way it shouldn't be too hard. If you want to make it really easy, stroke it out a little. If you want to use the stock bottom end it should still be fairly easy. Just throw on a good set of AFR's or trick flows, feed it with a cobra or GT40 intake for that low end torque, and also get a custom cam ground. As far as throttle body, i'd say go with an accufab 70mm. This is one of those cases where there is one destination, but lots of ways to get there. Erik D. '94 white lightning > I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying to get a > plan together. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Edwin > > I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying to get a > > plan together. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > > > Edwin take one factory 87-92 5.0 H.O. add a cobra induction, longtube headers,roller rocker arms,give it a good tune & you'll be close to 275 hp at the flywheel. mild port work & cutting the E7 heads .030 will help. the factory H.O.cam is good for around 300 hp & 5500 rpm http://store.summitracing.com/eproduct.asp?N=120+4294925232+4294918831+309062 Sorry it puts out more hp than you wanted, but it's a done deal. Or you could get this: http://store.summitracing.com/eproduct.asp?N=120+4294925232+4294918831+309065 Then pick your heads, cam, intake, etc... Steve 72 Skylark Custom455 > I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying to get a > plan together. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Edwin > I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying > to get a plan together. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Edwin The '92 is good - it's got the right pistons for the Kenne Bell you can just bolt on for 75 easy hp. Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC >> I am going to build a 5.0 for a 68 coupe, and am going crazy trying >> to get a plan together. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > The '92 is good - it's got the right pistons for the Kenne Bell you > can just bolt on for 75 easy hp. Which, by the way, is excellent for bottom end torque. The twin-screws are supposed to feel like a big block got thrown into your car. For bottom-end power, the theory is H-pipe instead of X-pipe exhaust, longer runner manifolds instead of shorter, and a cam set up to put the power where you want. Oversized intakes will give you top-end horsepower, but will kill the bottom end grunt. Choose your parts wisely and ask lots of questions. Or, you can do as Joe suggested... you could leave the '92 engine bone stock and throw on a Kenne Bell blower and you'll be at your goal. Just make sure to have it dyno-tuned to get the fuel system tuned correctly. JS > For bottom-end power, the theory is H-pipe instead of X-pipe exhaust, longer > runner manifolds instead of shorter, and a cam set up to put the power where > you want. Oversized intakes will give you top-end horsepower, but will kill > the bottom end grunt. Choose your parts wisely and ask lots of questions. I agree with what you said. Thats why I suggested a cobra intake and a custom cam. Along with some halfway decent flowing heads and that should make 275 horsies easily. Erik D. '94 white lightning It's not the length of the tubes that determine low or high RPM power improvement, it's the diameter. Smaller primary pipes tend to help in the bottom end. Shortys don't flow as good as long tube but in your case I'd go with shortys for better ground clearance and less engine compartment heat. >> For bottom-end power, the theory is H-pipe instead of X-pipe exhaust, >> longer runner manifolds instead of shorter, and a cam set up to put the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Erik D. > '94 white lightning Sorry if I wasn't quite clear Mark, I was referring to the intake manifold runners as far as length goes. The airbox style is great for high RPM HP, but loses some of the torque. The inverse is true with the longer runner style intakes (stock, Cobra, and the GT-40 to an extent). JS > It's not the length of the tubes that determine low or high RPM power > improvement, it's the diameter. Smaller primary pipes tend to help in the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> Erik D. >> '94 white lightning Oops, I got ya. > Sorry if I wasn't quite clear Mark, I was referring to the intake manifold > runners as far as length goes. The airbox style is great for high RPM HP, [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>> Erik D. >>> '94 white lightning |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.