Here's the deal, the stock HI PO 289 had a HP rating of 271hp.. You're telling me that 350HP can't be done and I'm saying BS. There are many documented cases out there, not only Edelbrock or the one link I provided above that put out close to 400hp.
You're saying that can't be done, that's being closed minded. If I took that approach on anything I did, every one would fail and technology advances would never happen.
oh now its 350? I thought it was 380? The 289 used a solid lifter, an easy 20-30hp difference from a soft hydraulic lifter. I never said making the hp is impossible, in your case and your parts your not gonna make 380, period. Im done with this sillyness
Whatever, 350, 380hp.. There are many 289' / 302's out there in the 400 hp range using hydraulic lifters (that technology has come a LONG way as well) and setups not much deferant than mine..
You know I am an original what was put into the car works the best guy. Yes, you can add a 351 W and in some cases a 351C engine in a classic Mustang. Hell, some guys even try to put in large block engines in theirs like 426's and EFI 5.0's and have relative success with a ton of mods, but I just think the classic 65-66 Mustangs were neither designed nor meant to have that kind of power. The bodies are not designed to accept that, and neither are the rest of the components. Yes, you can modify it with beefed up components, but in the end, you have a freak. If you want a hot rod that will give you the best of both worlds, get an O3-06 Mach or Cobra. I have read where guys have spent 30 thousand dollars on their classic to make it about the same as my 03 Mach that I spent less than that for a new car. Yes, the classic look is great as we all agree, but from a sheer performance standpoint, the classics cannot be modded enough to beat the modern Mustangs. Rembering, that the modern Mustangs can also be modded too.
Boy I would have to dissagree HIGHLY with this last statement...
Infact you can make a classic OUT DO a modern machine ANY DAY...one word EMISIONS!!
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
Not if your talking about passing emisions......You can mod a classic out as much as you want and it STILL look like a classic.....It just money but the classic obviously has more power potiential from a LEAGEL stand point
< Message edited by want_66fastback -- 6/26/2006 4:29:39 PM >
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
Flat Tire may be young, but he is a pretty smart kid. Nah, there is no reason for locking this thread. Nobody is calling each other childish names, just disagreeing. Through disagreement, comes knowledge. I have never put too much credence in desk top dyno's though. The real test comes when it is finished and you have rubber to the pavement.
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
Flat Tire may be young, but he is a pretty smart kid. Nah, there is no reason for locking this thread. Nobody is calling each other childish names, just disagreeing. Through disagreement, comes knowledge. I have never put too much credence in desk top dyno's though. The real test comes when it is finished and you have rubber to the pavement.
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
well slick, first i want to say i just recieved the alarm, thank you muchly.
second, what was said about dynos is very true. you can take your car to a dozen dynos in one day and get a dozen different numbers. i just read a whole article explaining why in one of the mustang mags. not all of them are calibrated to the same specs and (i think) the temperature acts as a variable also. yeah, they can give you an idea of what you are running, but all in all, dyno numbers, never match up to real world performance.
and i do second the dyno racing is corny comment. you wanna prove something go to the track and run the 1/4. or take a few laps at a road course.
i mean no offense to anyone here by my comments in this post, just speaking my mind on the subject.
< Message edited by Clu7ch -- 6/26/2006 3:38:43 PM >
You could take that 351W and toss some 302 pistons on those rods and have a 393
maybe i'm missing something, but i thought just about all pistons were 4 in. give or take. how does just swapping a set of pistons take a 351 to 393? you'd need a new stroker crank, at the least, to get the proper stroke to go from 351 cubic inches to 393 cubic inches. the 393 is the poor mans stroker, its nothing more than a 3.85 stroke crank, stock length 351 rod and stock height 302 pistons
_____________________________
Thats what i thought, i read that on the **** forum.
< Message edited by daver -- 6/26/2006 8:11:12 PM >
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: daver
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Clu7ch
quote:
ORIGINAL: daver
You could take that 351W and toss some 302 pistons on those rods and have a 393
maybe i'm missing something, but i thought just about all pistons were 4 in. give or take. how does just swapping a set of pistons take a 351 to 393? you'd need a new stroker crank, at the least, to get the proper stroke to go from 351 cubic inches to 393 cubic inches. the 393 is the poor mans stroker, its nothing more than a 3.85 stroke crank, stock length 351 rod and stock height 302 pistons
_____________________________
Thats what i thought, i read that on the **** forum.
second, what was said about dynos is very true. you can take your car to a dozen dynos in one day and get a dozen different numbers. i just read a whole article explaining why in one of the mustang mags. not all of them are calibrated to the same specs and (i think) the temperature acts as a variable also. yeah, they can give you an idea of what you are running, but all in all, dyno numbers, never match up to real world performance.
Altitude is also a pretty big variable if I remember correctly
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 67Sally
quote:
ORIGINAL: Clu7ch
second, what was said about dynos is very true. you can take your car to a dozen dynos in one day and get a dozen different numbers. i just read a whole article explaining why in one of the mustang mags. not all of them are calibrated to the same specs and (i think) the temperature acts as a variable also. yeah, they can give you an idea of what you are running, but all in all, dyno numbers, never match up to real world performance.
Altitude is also a pretty big variable if I remember correctly
yes, that too, thank you Flat Tire. there's a lot of BS going on on this side of the computer screen! LOL!
Built to the max, the only real difference would be the body shell and paint job...something similar to NASCAR.
There is absolutely no reason the classic can't be built to out perform a modern car. What's keeping you from sticking that modern suspension under the classic? Nothing. Some for the engine and tires. As far as weight is concerned, my '71 weighs a little under 3000 pounds, still meeting all the safety requirements it was engineered for, and is safer in many respects (handling and brakes mainly).
There are definite limits to how far you can take a modern car, legally (especially with emissions and safety requirements).
quote:
ORIGINAL: 67Sally
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
Built to the max, the only real difference would be the body shell and paint job...something similar to NASCAR.
There is absolutely no reason the classic can't be built to out perform a modern car. What's keeping you from sticking that modern suspension under the classic? Nothing. Some for the engine and tires. As far as weight is concerned, my '71 weighs a little under 3000 pounds, still meeting all the safety requirements it was engineered for, and is safer in many respects (handling and brakes mainly).
There are definite limits to how far you can take a modern car, legally (especially with emissions and safety requirements).
quote:
ORIGINAL: 67Sally
An '06 at its highest potential will destroy a classic at its highest potential. Easily. You could probably get about the same amount of HP but what about traction, suspension, aerodynamics, power:weight, the list goes on...
Okay fine. Find me the fastest classic Mustang you've ever heard of and I'll find you just one of the fastest '06's. We'll see which one is faster
Anyways, there is no guarentee that I'm gonna go through with this - I'm just exploring my options and that classifieds ad happened to come up.
I went through this same decision process last year. I bought an 83 Bronco for $500 since I wanted the 351W and I would part our the rest. When I started pricing 408 stroker kits and accessories to make eveything work in my '65, I realized that the cost was getting excessive compared to stroked 289. Then I found out that the webbing in the 289 block is not as strong as a 302 and it was recommended that a 302 be stroked instead of a my 289 (I was looking for 400HP+). I then looked into a 347 from a 302 roller block out of a 1990 Mustang. There were so many more options with the 302, and much more aftermarket support than the 351W. I ended up running a 331 and the Bronco is still in the backyard, awaiting a possible restoration.
It is all about what you want to accomplish, and how much you want to spend. All three options are fine IMO. I think the 351W option is great, especially since it will drop into your 67. The fact that a 351W wouldn't fit so nicely in my 65 was a major contributing factor to my decision to go with a 331. Take your time and research your options, ask questions and then go for it.
I'm late to this party, but early on in this thread you mention a mexican block. My builder for my 347 told me he used a "Mexican long block". The dozen plus people I have talked to about my car none of them know what i'm refering to when I mention this block neither do I for that matter. Can you be so kind as to give an explanation as to the differances to the Mexican block.
Printable Version
RE: Stroked 347 vs 351w vs 289 - 
<daver 
