What NOT to do..............

[gtsr515]

What, in your opinion is the #1 thing new stangers do to their cars, that they shouldn't do?

Mine is upgrading injectors to soon, and adding electric fans right away.

This thread is meant to be everyone's opinion, not to start an argument....stay cool boys!

Mustangs even set up wrong..........still kick Camaro's ***!

[Unit 5302]

• Computer Chip
• Shortie 1 5/8" Headers
• 190lph fuel pump for a N/A car that will never see more than a couple little mods.
• Throttle Body
• Fuel injectors
• Stock alternator, underdrives, electric fans, big stereo.
• Cam
• "Yo Dawg G-Money" Wheels
• Chrome Fenderwelt

[gtsr515]

O jeez, how could I have forgot "the chip?", but I am wondering why you list 1 and 5/8" shorties, whats your theory on that?

[Coupe5oh]

I disagree, about the fan anyway, the electric fan should be a mod to do soon as possible, sorry just my opinion, since i got a noticeable gain from this, and people say the aluminum driveshaft was a worthless mod, i also disagree, because electric fan, aluminum driveshaft reduce drag on the motor significantly.....But i agree with most that was listed by unit, but i elieve a 190 fuel pump cant really hurt, as long as you plan on some heads, maybe a 125 shot.

[Coupe5oh]

Well unit knows how the 1-5/8 shorties are actually bigger than exhaust ports on stock heads, so no gain is felt, and could lose some power, but i think 1-5/8 longtubes will gain even on a stock motor because of the design, now buying an msd ignition for a stock motor is kinda unnecessary.

[Jeb_Bush_2000]

Throttle-body...maybe a "hogged-out" MAF.

[gtsr515]

O.K., I said not to argue, well, maybe we should, my question is what is wrong with the stock fan setup, that needs to be replaced with an electric, if its for less drag on the motor, well, when cold at the strip, during your pass, you could reach out and grab the stock fan, it's not engaged when cold, so therefore no drag, or so little its not worth changing, okay, easy now, dont slam me too hard...........

Let's have a good time with this post, it is one that I feel has been needed here for a while.

[MidNiteBlu 5.0]

I think Tireburner and I will disagree about the Big stereo not to do thing

[Hissing Cobra]

As far as the electric fan goes, my brother installed one on his '85 GT and ran it at the track. It didn't change one thing! The times/trapspeeds remained EXACTLY the same. I'm not saying it doesn't work, I'm just stating that on his car, nothing changed. He also made a ram air set-up, totally sealing his air cleaner assembly to the hood with rubber weatherstripping and opening up the hood scoop. This too, did not change a thing! Is it a myth that ram air setups increase 1/4 mile times? By the way his car runs consistent 12.50's-12.60's @ 108-109 MPH every time down the track.

[Unit 5302]

The 1 5/8" headers do nothing for a stock car. The cats are the restriction in the exhaust, and with the stock engines powerband, all you're doing is sacrificing torque.

[Mr 5 0]

So many mistakes, so little time.

Based on five years of reading Mustang tech posts I would say that the basic error most new Mustang owners make is not thinking ahead and just slapping on parts without a real plan.

I would add that the first thing most new owners want to do is get a bigger, louder exhaust...mostly louder. No problem, but as we all know, just removing the cats and installing a pair of Flows will do that just fine...better flow, more noise. Unfortunately, many new Mustangers want to add big-tube headers and pipes on a stock engine, thus minimizing the one big advantage Mustangs have right off the production line: torque. Same with bigger TB's. Chips are another 'mod' that often fails to deliver - especially on a stock engine.

I usually advise members to think through what you want from your car and what the reality is of getting there. Saying: "I wanna go 11's on street tires but I need good gas mileage cuz I hafta commute 100 miles each day and I don't wanna lose any drivability...and I only have about $500. to spend on mods right now but maybe in a year or two I can spend more" isn't going to cut it.

Don't laugh too hard...I've seem very similar posts right on this forum.

The best thing a new Mustang owner can do is a thorough tune-up, a K&N, rear gears, subs, maybe a shifter (5-speed) and then develop a realistic plan for where they want to car to be when it's 'done' and go from there. That takes planning and patience, none of which are very exciting on a Friday night cruise when you're surrounded by well-modded Mustangs and F-bodies with tons of goodies under the hood that can smoke you easily. Been there, done that.

When a newbie reads the ads in the Mustang magazines that all promise 5 - 10 - 25 HP gains it's tempting to run out and buy shiny new parts and start slapping them on, then go for a run and (hopefully) 'feel' the difference in the butt-dyno, often to be dissappointed. The truth is that a lot of these advertised HP gains are on fully built engines with the stock part left on so that when they install the aftermarket chip, intake, whatever, the HP jumps up.

There is no real secret to better performance. It takes money, of course, and planning. Any 5.0 can run low 14's and 13's are easily attainable for many 'Stangs - 5.0 and 4.6 versions - but beyond that, you need to get smart and spend some cash...usually on heads and then matching intake, exhaust, fuel and spark delivery. Control arms, subs and the right rubber are a big factor too as is learning how to drive your 'Stang to extract the maximum performance from it.

Done right, you'll have a 12-second 'Stang and be ready for most anything on the street. Done wrong, you'll tear your hair out and waste a ton of money trying to beat the guy who had a plan, some patience and did it right.

[PKRWUD]

Bigger injectors or a big cam with stock heads.

Hissing Cobra-
I just wrote a lengthy explanation on the whole electric fan thing, and it's reported hp increase, over on F-150 online. Here:

Donate is correct about the source of the added power. The reason it isn't usually very noticeable is because of the way the stock fan clutch works. The stock fan clutch puts minimal drag on the engine most of the time. It's only at slow speeds when hot that it creates a drag. If the horsepower of an engine was measured on a stationary dyno, with a hot engine, there would be a substantial difference between a stock set-up and an electric fan. However, in most daily driving, the difference is minimal. It works something like this:

The stock fan is connected via a fan clutch. A fan clutch is kinda like a torque convertor, in that the two ends don't ever come into physical contact with each other, but have a liquid between them. This is why you can spin the fan by hand when the engine is not running. The oil inside the clutch "gels" when it reaches a certain, predetermined temperature. It reaches this temperature due to the temp of the air that hits it after passing through the radiator. When the temp rises to a certain point, the oil "gels", and the fan becomes temporarily "solid" with the pulley to which it's attached. This creates a vacuum inside the fan shroud which pulls more air through the radiator, which radiates the heat away from it, allowing the coolant to cool down, thus cooling the engine. In this condition, there is a substantial load placed on the engine in order to turn the fan. When the temp of the air coming through the radiator drops enough, the oil in the clutch becomes more fluid, and the fan just "free-spins" with the engine. In this condition, there is minimal load placed on the engine from turning the fan. Once you are moving more than 10 miles an hour, there should be sufficient air moving through the radiator to keep the temp down so that the oil in the clutch remains a liquid. However, once you come to a stop, or reduce your speed below 10 mph, there is no longer enough air being forced through the radiator, and the oil "gels" and the fan cools. Start moving again, and the clutch oil becomes liquid again. The bottom line is that the only time the fan is in use to the point where it robs power from you is in stop and go traffic, or when sitting still at idle. This isn't a time when peak horsepower is needed, so the loss isn't really noticed.

An electric fan is also thrmostatically controlled by the radiator temp. When it reaches a certain point, the fan kicks on, and sucks air through the radiator. Once the radiator cools, the fan is turned off. Because of this, an electric fan is almost never in use when driving more than 10 mph.

The advantages to an electric fan are many, however. They can have a manual switch added so that you can turn it on at will, although this is rarely necessary. They also can remain on after the engine is shut off, continuing to cool the engine and radiator while you are parked. They also help you when towing, or other times you need top power at very slow vehicle speeds. The down side to electric fans is their lifespan. Most aftermarket electric fans won't last more than 30 or 40k miles, and they often don't give any warning before quitting. Also, if not installed properly, they can drain your battery, or even cause a short in your electrical system. This usually happens when someone installs a manual override switch, and doesn't wire it through a relay. The switch quickly overheats and melts, and you've got a short on your hands.

A stock fan clutch is usually good for 100k miles or more before the oil inside starts to lose it's viscosity, and starts to fail. Also, this will be a gradual failure, so you won't be suddenly stranded somewhere with a fan failure. Most really enthusiastic stories I've heard about an increase in power after installing an electric fan(s) were cases in which the pullies were changed at the same time, and the owner has just decided to give the power increase credit to the fan(s) instead of the pullies. Remember, though, they do offer increased hp, but it's usually at a time when you don't really need it.

Also, however, a good, well installed electric fan system will yeild a noticeable improvement in cooling at idle. When those fans kick on, they work quickly. They also put a heavy load on your charging system at a time when the alternator is generating the least amount of energy, so if your charging system is marginal, forget it.

When my fan clutch starts to lose it's reliability, I will probably replace it with a pair of electric fans. Maybe sooner. I do alot of towing, and the extra power while still cooling well would be nice.

Take care,
-Chris

[Unit 5302]

I don't blame people for making poor modification choices as much anymore. Seems like a lot of kids learn from their dad's on how to modify cars, and a lot of the dad's that knew exactly what to do back in 1970 now know very little about how newer cars work. Most of them don't even want to know.

Like Mr 5 0 stated about the magazine claims. 25hp here, 15hp there. Usually the claims are made on highly modified engines being held back by one stock part they replace, or the gains they quote are at 5800rpm where most stock 5.0's won't see in a drag race.

Lack of understanding in regards to how the newer EFI systems work, and engine dynamics in general have a large part in mismatched combos. I see mismatched combinations on this site all the time. Many times a thread made wondering why a car is running so poorly, or is so slow when the owner has thrown so much money at it winds up being a mismatch.

CAI, 73mm MAF, 70mm T/B, stock intake, X cam, stock heads, equal shorties, stock H, and 2.5" exhuast.

Combinations like that are painful to see because there is no easy or inexpensive way to fix the issues. I don't like telling people, "You've got a 14sec car with $2k in mods because you made the wrong mods. To fix this problem you're gonna need to spend $1500." Most of the time the combination was inspired by magazines, or their buddy, or sometimes just lack of research.

I love it when a new person pops on here and says they are thinking about the above combo because their friend said this, and the magazine said that because it gives the guys and gals on this site a chance to save the newbie from hundreds or thousands of dollars of useless modifications. There are just a ton of people on this site that know the ins and outs of building and racing cars that can set people straight or help out.

The final thing I can think of I've seen cause real problems is propaganda. Speed Density cars cannot be modded, camming the stock 5.0 will add power, o-ringed heads are necessary with any power adder, any heads/cam/intake combo will make 400-500hp on a 5.0, first gen 4.6L GT's are expensive and difficult to put into the 12's and 13's, simply slapping on a supercharger will make your 5.0 the fastest car around, removing the smog pump on a car with cats is a good idea, a 160* thermostat will make a stock car run faster/better, etc. The word on the street says a lot of those statements are true when guys who have done some research know them to be false.

Lotsa BS out there. Hopefully those kinds of posts will continue to decline.

[PKRWUD]

Hey Kell, you're smart, maybe you can explain this to me. Why is it that the desired intake runner length for a race engine is the opposite between a carbed engine and a fuel injected engine? No one ever answers me when I ask that, and I want to know.

Thanks.

Take care,
-Chris

[gtsr515]

Boy am I ever glad I started this thread, it has turned out exactly like I had hoped, Mr. 5.0 and Unit5302 are spot on, I have seen countless posts claiming cams are okay and run fine in stock speed density, that it's just perfectly okay to run a supercharger with a stock fuel pump with 150,000+ miles on it and no FPR, "because my buddy has done it." or the same with nitrous, etc.

I understand that this forum can also include someone's "opinion" and thats cool, we all have our own believe's, thats how the wheel was invented, but when it comes to fuel pumps and superchargers, these are FACTS, undisputable FACTS, and I sometimes get so frustrated trying to HELP these boneheads so he doesnt blow up his motor, he slams me, because "it worked in my buddy's car." You all see what I'm getting at. I don't post much, but I have done this 5.0 thing to death from the 1980's to present, and I just wish some people would take the time to really THINK about what they are doing and saying and like Mr. 5.0 said, you'll save tons of money and go tons quicker. There was some guy saying that he bought a supercharger kit that requires NO MODIFICATION period, fuel pumps or nothing, I told him he was crazy, am i loosin' it or what?

[Hissing Cobra]

GTSR515, No you're not losing it! You're exactly right. Too many people give their opinions (a lot of the time, they've never done the mod themselves) without knowing a damn thing about it. I don't respond unless I have facts to back it up. Just last night, on a different site, a guy wanted to know where he could get a hood decal for his '86 GT. To me, he wanted to know who sells it right? Well, one of the responses he got was to look through the yellow pages for a graphics company. With companies such as Year One, Mustangs Unlimited, California Mustang, Dallas Mustang, etc...producing these pieces, why would you want to look in the yellow pages? I know that if I looked through the yellow pages in my area, I'd get some homemade decal that probably wouldn't even be factory looking! Just venting, no flames intended.

[Mr 5 0]

Chris:

Good, informative essay on electric fans vs clutch fans. Thanks.

I replaced my stock clutch fan with a 'Police Duty' Ford clutch fan when I saw the oil film building up (after I cleaned it) on the old unit at around 90,000 miles. Works great. I've no need for an electric fan anytime soon but the essay should be helpful for others in making that decision.

Kell has a good point too about mis-information and we do our best to dispell that here but new guys/gals come along all the time and the BS lives on.

We could probably do a thread titled: 'Everything You Think You Know About Mustangs is Probably Wrong'!

[Unit 5302]

Would you like me to hypothosize?

The primary concern with torque is port velocity.

In an EFI car keeping port velocity high requires long runners. The extra volume afforded by the long runners sheilds the incoming air from the turbulence created when the intake valve opens and closes, thus creating a more stable and smooth flowing intake charge and helping to keep port velocity high. The very inefficient upper intake design probably limits the ultimate flow capability of the intake. Short runner intakes flow a lot of air because of the low surface area the air has to travel through and a more direct link to the air source. They have large runners designed to flow high volume, and that slows the port velocity.

On a carbed car fuel is atomized above the lower intake, which would give greater mass and stability to the intake charge. The short intakes don't hold a great deal air and are probably designed more conservatively since they have little room to change the airflows direction. The small overall volume of air would increase the port velocity. Using a tall intake on a carbed car would probably result in a larger overall capacity and flow capability, along with the ability to straighten runners. The cost? Huge masses of air which would slow port velocity to a crawl.

Just some thoughts. I suppose I could research it more, but there are few sources that I have at my disposal for the moment. As of right now, I'm just guessing really.

[PKRWUD]

Okay. let me elaborate and simplify at the same time. In short, a carbed engine in 1/4 mile racing runs optimal with long runners. Straight or curved, it really doesn't matter at WOT. They just need to be long.

EFI engines optimal setup seems to be short runners.

I understand that the air/fuel is mixed differently, but that still doesn't explain it. The a/f mixture could be easily atomized perfectly with 10 inch runners, but it will run faster with 14 inch runners (carb applications). I have always presumed that velocity was the whole reason this was true, but why then wouldn't high velocity benefit an EFI engine?

Even in circle track racing, carbed engines perform better with longer runners. They also require a large plenum, which 1/4 mile engines do not.

The only thing I can think of is that if the velocity in an EFI engine was too high, it would "blow out" the fuel spray, reducing atomization. That can't be true, though, because if it were, EFI engines wouldn't be able to surpass 3000 rpms.

So why do carbed engines prefer high velocity, while EFI engines prefer low velocity? I don't get it.

[gtsr515]

no, no, no, EFI needs high velocity.