Holy horsepower wars...

In reply to carguy123:

A 351 is much heavier than a 302.

hmm, is the 351 a tall deck? otherwise it should be the same overall size with different bore/stroke. A cleveland 351 would be mucho heavier than a windsor.

bravenrace wrote: In reply to carguy123: A 351 is much heavier than a 302.

There's a little block height difference but it doesn't amount to a lot of weight. We'd built that 351 with forged pistons, alum. heads, lightweight flywheel, etc., etc. In other words we spent a ton of money and time on it and I'd bet the little V6 would have run rings around it on the track due to the width of it's powerband. And that's without tweaking the V6.

The point is, that based upon other crate engine package prices I've seen we could have bought this and saved ourselves a lot of time and some money and been racing a lot sooner and more reliably.

In reply to yamaha:

351w to 302 is 1.3" taller from crank centerline to deck height, 8.2 for a 302/5.0 vs 9.5 on the 351. Clevelands are a completely different animal.

carguy123 wrote:

bravenrace wrote: In reply to carguy123: A 351 is much heavier than a 302.

There's a little block height difference but it doesn't amount to a lot of weight. We'd built that 351 with forged pistons, alum. heads, lightweight flywheel, etc., etc. In other words we spent a ton of money and time on it and I'd bet the little V6 would have run rings around it on the track due to the width of it's powerband. And that's without tweaking the V6. The point is, that based upon other crate engine package prices I've seen we could have bought this and saved ourselves a lot of time and some money and been racing a lot sooner and more reliably.

I disagree. I have a 289 and a 351 block sitting next to each other in my shop. There's a huge difference in the construction of these blocks, and the 351 is MUCH heavier. IIRC, the 351W block is anywhere from 50-80 lbs heavier, and the crank is 15-20 lbs heavier. That's using a '87 5.0 and a '69 351w as examples, BTW. Later 351W's were lighter. A 5.0 can be easily built with the same amount of power as a stock TT V-6 for a lot less money and complexity.

In reply to bravenrace:

It won't be able to be built as cheap in a few years when the sho's and f150's get to the bottom of their depriciation curve......

Is it just me or did Ford pick the most boring font ever for the "Twin Turbo" callouts on the intake and hood?

yamaha wrote: In reply to bravenrace: It won't be able to be built as cheap in a few years when the sho's and f150's get to the bottom of their depriciation curve......

I hope you have as much fun waiting as I do driving my 480hp 347 powered Mustang...

If this is a horsepower war, this must be a covert op because I haven't seen the power rating for the twin turbo listed anywhere.

Given the old CJ made about 850 before blueprinting... and a few people I know say this new CJ will "easily" beat the old one heads up....

From the thread on the Kepler

"Power to the rear wheels is rated at 550 horsepower, thanks to the same Ford-built, 3.5-liter, V-6 twin-turbo Ecoboost engine found in cars like the 2013 Ford Taurus SHO."

In reply to carguy123:

Not sure what that has to do with the CJ Mustang, but in any case I can't imagine it's going to have less power than that last one.

Considering it's the same engine it just gives you an idea of what can be done.

The 351W block is heavier then the 302 because of the way they were cast. The late model 302 blocks are thin walled blocks and that's why they have a tendency to start cracking at anything over 400hp where the 351 blocks have a lot more materiel and strength

carguy123 wrote: Considering it's the same engine it just gives you an idea of what can be done.

The Cobra Jet has a V8 not a V6.

carguy123 wrote: From the thread on the Kepler "Power to the rear wheels is rated at 550 horsepower, thanks to the same Ford-built, 3.5-liter, V-6 twin-turbo Ecoboost engine found in cars like the 2013 Ford Taurus SHO."

Which is 350hp from the gas engine, and 200hp from the electric motor.

Just sayin.

At first glance, I thought that was a supercharger on top of the engine and thought, "Oh hell, someone actually worked up the stupid turbo supercharger idea I've kicked around for a while..."

Ashyukun wrote: At first glance, I thought that was a supercharger on top of the engine and thought, "Oh hell, someone actually worked up the stupid turbo supercharger idea I've kicked around for a while..."

Sorry to rain on your parade, but that's been done many times.

Ashyukun wrote: At first glance, I thought that was a supercharger on top of the engine and thought, "Oh hell, someone actually worked up the stupid turbo supercharger idea I've kicked around for a while..."

You mean Lancia 30 years ago?

As much as I'd love to shoehorn a Coyote 5.0 into a Miata, it'll never happen. These motors, while lightweight, are physically huge, because of the large angle between cylinder banks necessary to fit DOHC and 32 valves. For reference, here is a picture of the motor in my Mustang. You can see there's very little room between the valve covers and strut towers, and this is a fairly big car.

Ashyukun wrote: At first glance, I thought that was a supercharger on top of the engine and thought, "Oh hell, someone actually worked up the stupid turbo supercharger idea I've kicked around for a while..."

You mean like what has been done for years in other industries?

Flight Service wrote:

Ashyukun wrote: At first glance, I thought that was a supercharger on top of the engine and thought, "Oh hell, someone actually worked up the stupid turbo supercharger idea I've kicked around for a while..."

You mean like what has been done for years in other industries?

Weren't P-38 Lightnings both super- and turbocharged?

93EXCivic wrote:

carguy123 wrote: Considering it's the same engine it just gives you an idea of what can be done.

The Cobra Jet has a V8 not a V6.

Earlier we were discussing the V6

I believe Gale Banks builds Duramaxes with Super/Turbocharging.

Sky_Render wrote: Weren't P-38 Lightnings both super- and turbocharged?

In a different way, yes....but not all of them were.

Also skyrender, the 60* 32v v8 has been done before.....if the bellhousing is the same as the current 3.7L mustangs, I'll eventually put the 3.4L ford v8 into my bmw..... It'll prolly sound good, just won't be as fast as other options.