MustangWorks.com - The Ford Mustang Power Source!

Go Back   MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums > Mustang & Ford Tech > Windsor Power
Register FAQ Members List Calendar

Notices


 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 03-08-2001, 01:50 AM   #18
NO SLO PK
Registered Member
 
NO SLO PK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Arcadia, CA, USA
Posts: 731
Post

Hey MM, I gotta disagree. I recall a dyno test in MM&FF back in 93 or 94 where they compared long rod motors to their stock counterparts. In the article, the long rod motors made more torque and hp than those of standard rod length. Although I don't recall the specifics of the engines used in the test, they were definitely street motors running on pump gas without excessive camming/port work, etc.

Regarding that "legendary 454", it BETTER be making some decent torque...after all, it's got 454 cubes for crying out loud. What it lacks in rod ratio it makes up for in size.

You never hear anyone complaining that a rod ratio is too high, but the 347 is criticized quite often for having a poor rod ratio. Just saying maybe there's something there.

Btw, I totally agree that a 347 IS compatible with forced induction. Like you say, it just costs $$$ to assemble it with the necessary parts.

L8r

------------------
'91 LX
Procharger, 3 row intercooler, extrude honed Cobra intake, Mac full Length Headers, 30# inj., 73mm C&L, 75mm tb, E303 cam, 289 rods, ported E7 heads, MSD, T-Rex w/255 lph Walbro, 5 lug conversion, Cobra R wheels, 3.27 gears and Moser Axles.

[This message has been edited by NO SLO PK (edited 03-08-2001).]
NO SLO PK is offline   Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 PM.


SEARCH