MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums - View Single Post

Unit 5302 · 11-27-2006, 08:02 PM

Wow, everybody goes to their local "I cook the numbers" dyno guy and suddenly 400rwhp dyno slips from a N/A 302 are being given out like candy. If you have 400rwhp on a N/A 302, you had better be able to show some 120mph+ trap speeds on a time slip. If you can't, you don't have that much power. My guess is that you don't so I guess that's news for the purely dyno faithful. As helpful as dynos are when it comes to tuning, they are only as accurate as the operator makes them or wants them to be. It takes a LOT of rpm to get 400rwhp or 482hp at the crank from a N/A 302. The Edelbrock package is not going to cut it without SERIOUS additional investment.

The Borg Warner (now Tremec) T-5 is a lightweight transmission designed primarily with moderate hp/torque loads and high efficiency in mind. If you put 650rwhp to the ground hard on any T-5, you can kiss it goodbye after a few passes. If the T-5 were capable of handling that kind of horsepower, reliably, you'd see a lot more of them in racing. G-Force, as a company, does not like to give out actual horsepower or torque ratings for their products, but they indicate with upgraded components, they are good for about 600hp on DRAG RADIALS. That's 600hp not 600rwhp, and on drag radials. Those two numbers are vastly different. The average T-5 driveline uses up about 17% of the horsepower being produced by the engine. I'll do the math for you. 17 out of every 100hp is eaten by the driveline. So 600rwhp/.83 = about 725hp. If you take a 600rwhp car to the track on slicks and you hook up, you're likely to blow that G Force T-5 to pieces in short order, even with the race only dog ring setup.

My uncle owned, until recently, a 1969 Boss 302 that he fully restored. Gorgeous car, but spinning the tires in 3rd isn't all that impressive back in the day with low ratio gearing and the crappy tires available. He was disappointed with the very poor low end power production from the engine and sold it because he was tempted to modify the car. I think he liked his original owner 70k 1969 Mach 1 fastback with the 428CJ/toploader combination better, anyway. In fact, Ford racing decreased the size of the Boss 302's intake valves in 1970 to increase velocity because the 302 simply couldn't use all the air and the oversized valves/ports were slowing them down a little. I guess it worked since they captured the Trans Am championship in 1970 where they failed in 1969. More is not always better, and those AFR 205s are overkill for a N/A EFI 302. It's not all about peak power. It never has been and never will be. You need a usable powerband you can stay in, and your average horsepower you put down at the wheels to the tarmac will determine the numbers on your timeslip. That's the reason the SVO Mustang failed against the 5.0s back in the mid 80s. Sure, the SVO made more peak power, but it lost ground coming out of the corners. It's no different in drag racing when you're shifting gears.

Anyway, I'm done explaining this. Every once in a while, a new group of kids show up with 25hp K&N filters and 100hp exhaust systems from a magazine lighting up their eyes. It's not that easy. It never has been, and likely never will be with N/A engines.

For the record, Dark 5.0 has spent time in the dyno shop. So have I. 8 $%#%$@ hours straight before. You like the smell of burnt race fuel? I don't think I can stand it anymore.

11-27-2006, 08:02 PM	#2
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Re: Is 350 RWHP Possible ? Wow, everybody goes to their local "I cook the numbers" dyno guy and suddenly 400rwhp dyno slips from a N/A 302 are being given out like candy. If you have 400rwhp on a N/A 302, you had better be able to show some 120mph+ trap speeds on a time slip. If you can't, you don't have that much power. My guess is that you don't so I guess that's news for the purely dyno faithful. As helpful as dynos are when it comes to tuning, they are only as accurate as the operator makes them or wants them to be. It takes a LOT of rpm to get 400rwhp or 482hp at the crank from a N/A 302. The Edelbrock package is not going to cut it without SERIOUS additional investment. The Borg Warner (now Tremec) T-5 is a lightweight transmission designed primarily with moderate hp/torque loads and high efficiency in mind. If you put 650rwhp to the ground hard on any T-5, you can kiss it goodbye after a few passes. If the T-5 were capable of handling that kind of horsepower, reliably, you'd see a lot more of them in racing. G-Force, as a company, does not like to give out actual horsepower or torque ratings for their products, but they indicate with upgraded components, they are good for about 600hp on DRAG RADIALS. That's 600hp not 600rwhp, and on drag radials. Those two numbers are vastly different. The average T-5 driveline uses up about 17% of the horsepower being produced by the engine. I'll do the math for you. 17 out of every 100hp is eaten by the driveline. So 600rwhp/.83 = about 725hp. If you take a 600rwhp car to the track on slicks and you hook up, you're likely to blow that G Force T-5 to pieces in short order, even with the race only dog ring setup. My uncle owned, until recently, a 1969 Boss 302 that he fully restored. Gorgeous car, but spinning the tires in 3rd isn't all that impressive back in the day with low ratio gearing and the crappy tires available. He was disappointed with the very poor low end power production from the engine and sold it because he was tempted to modify the car. I think he liked his original owner 70k 1969 Mach 1 fastback with the 428CJ/toploader combination better, anyway. In fact, Ford racing decreased the size of the Boss 302's intake valves in 1970 to increase velocity because the 302 simply couldn't use all the air and the oversized valves/ports were slowing them down a little. I guess it worked since they captured the Trans Am championship in 1970 where they failed in 1969. More is not always better, and those AFR 205s are overkill for a N/A EFI 302. It's not all about peak power. It never has been and never will be. You need a usable powerband you can stay in, and your average horsepower you put down at the wheels to the tarmac will determine the numbers on your timeslip. That's the reason the SVO Mustang failed against the 5.0s back in the mid 80s. Sure, the SVO made more peak power, but it lost ground coming out of the corners. It's no different in drag racing when you're shifting gears. Anyway, I'm done explaining this. Every once in a while, a new group of kids show up with 25hp K&N filters and 100hp exhaust systems from a magazine lighting up their eyes. It's not that easy. It never has been, and likely never will be with N/A engines. For the record, Dark 5.0 has spent time in the dyno shop. So have I. 8 $%#%$@ hours straight before. You like the smell of burnt race fuel? I don't think I can stand it anymore.