• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cheap Horsepower

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Iron Woode said:
its basically the cobra engine. Hot Rod magazine had a hop up guide for 5.0 back in the mid 90's. Since using a truck engine in a car was an emissions nitemare, they said to use the parts from it on your 5.0. It used GT40 heads and what not.

it is possible I have the HP rating wrong, since its been so long.

I don't feel like going through my back issues to find the article.
Click to expand...

The way you stated it, it implied it was a factory offering.

There are 700HP+ Explorers out there too. None came from the factory that way though.
 
alkemyst said:
The way you stated it, it implied it was a factory offering.

There are 700HP+ Explorers out there too. None came from the factory that way though.
Click to expand...
it was a factory offering, but I was wrong on the HP rating.

I found the article: October 2000 Hot Rod - Exploring The Possibilities.

I confused the torque rating of the engine with the HP rating.

Basically they took a 5.0 mustang (225hp) and modded it with Explorer heads (GT-40P) and a Cobra intake. The Explorer came with a Cobra lower intake. Final output was 249 HP and 290 lb-ft torque.

as for the Explorer: In early 1997, the 5.0 L received new cylinder heads (GT-40P series), which upped power to 215 hp (160 kw). Since this change was made in the middle of the 1997 release, the 1997 GT-40P equipped Explorers and Mountaineers were dubbed 1997¼ models.

sorry for the mix up.
 
Iron Woode said:
it was a factory offering, but I was wrong on the HP rating.

I found the article: October 2000 Hot Rod - Exploring The Possibilities.

I confused the torque rating of the engine with the HP rating.

Basically they took a 5.0 mustang (225hp) and modded it with Explorer heads (GT-40P) and a Cobra intake. The Explorer came with a Cobra lower intake. Final output was 249 HP and 290 lb-ft torque.

as for the Explorer: In early 1997, the 5.0 L received new cylinder heads (GT-40P series), which upped power to 215 hp (160 kw). Since this change was made in the middle of the 1997 release, the 1997 GT-40P equipped Explorers and Mountaineers were dubbed 1997¼ models.

sorry for the mix up.
Click to expand...

The GT-40P's are a great bolt on for mustangs.
 
exdeath said:
irony.png
Click to expand...

Looks like a shop.
 
Well you could probably get more HP with GT40 heads + hotter cams. According to several muscle car mags, aftermarket camshafts are a lot better than even a decade ago.
 
Bignate603 said:
I believe it's possibly but I would bet that mustang next to it has quite a bit less money invested in it. Your average home mechanic can piece together an American V8 that produces quite a bit of power for the fraction of the cost it would take to get most other engines anywhere close.
Click to expand...

No doubt about that... I just wanted to show that it is indeed real. ^_^
 
v8envy said:
Anyhoo, not sure what you mean by the engine not being offered again. The 289 became the 302, just like the 289 descended from the 260 which in turn descended from the 221. They were all the 90 degree family, and a factory option on all mustangs until 1995. Even on the mustang II (technically NOT a mustang) 1975-1978.
Click to expand...

The 221 came out in 1962 for the then new "mid-size" Ford Fairlane, and was that size to commemorate the very first Ford (flathead) V-8, which also displaced 221 cubes.
 
How's that? A supercharger and a set of slicks will get you a wheelstand (and maybe a cracked/ejected windshield) in quite a few late model v8s. Right off the showroom floor.

Getting wheelstanding torque out of a high revving, small displacement 4cyl is... a bit more involved. Most likely engine swap level of involved.
 
v8envy said:
How's that? A supercharger and a set of slicks will get you a wheelstand (and maybe a cracked/ejected windshield) in quite a few late model v8s. Right off the showroom floor.

Getting wheelstanding torque out of a high revving, small displacement 4cyl is... a bit more involved. Most likely engine swap level of involved.
Click to expand...

And in the case of that car, swapping which wheels get driven.
 
I had a 2.6L dodge boosting to 21 psi, so yes, I do know it's possible to get some torque once you build up a full head of steam in the turbo. But not off idle.

That little motor was very, very convinced it was bigger than a 7 liter -- including the 7.5 mpg it delivered city/highway. Scary fast car for the day, but the temperature gauge could serve as a speedometer once it hit 90+ mph and it completely ran out of gear by 115. It was a 1/4 mile only wonder, I couldn't even bench race it against real cars. Today with 60-75 mph speed limits I couldn't even use it to commute without pissing people off.

Also, a wheelstand in a mid engine car is cheating!
 
v8envy said:
I had a 2.6L dodge boosting to 21 psi, so yes, I do know it's possible to get some torque once you build up a full head of steam in the turbo. But not off idle.

That little motor was very, very convinced it was bigger than a 7 liter -- including the 7.5 mpg it delivered city/highway. Scary fast car for the day, but the temperature gauge could serve as a speedometer once it hit 90+ mph and it completely ran out of gear by 115. It was a 1/4 mile only wonder, I couldn't even bench race it against real cars. Today with 60-75 mph speed limits I couldn't even use it to commute without pissing people off.

Also, a wheelstand in a mid engine car is cheating!
Click to expand...

7.5mpg? Yeesh....and who launches off idle? 😛
 
That's the beauty of a turbo vs belt driven supercharger, lots of cubes or nitrous! Well, no, not launching off idle, but definitely not at peak power. Then the power builds exactly when you need it -- after you've hooked up -- and wheelspin is completely under control in first. Second and third gear, yeah, you're pretty much hosed like you would be in any other car, but wheelspin at 50 is a lot easier to deal with than at 0, IMO.

4:30 rear end gears + potential for lots of air+fuel in do not make for good gas mileage, no.
 
jlee said:
7.5mpg? Yeesh....and who launches off idle? 😛
Click to expand...

I had a coworker with a CRX packing an all motor B16 that only was able to manage 13-15MPG. I think he ran mid-high 12's iirc. Stopped driving it on the street after not wanting to deal with getting it smogged and it became a trailer queen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top