These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
05-10-2006, 08:28 PM
#51
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12,575
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
ORIGINAL: Stang9946
The standard was a 2.73, optional is a 3.08 and 3.27. In 99 3.27 became standard.
ORIGINAL: Dragon02GT
I thought 96-98's had a 2.73 stock in the rear. I though they bumped it up to a 3.27 in 99. Anyone know for sure?
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
because even with the mods your NPI car is prolly only making right around 200 RWHP (205 or something) if your lucky and its hard to get a 60' in the 2.0 range with street tires and the stock 3.27s with this car.
The NPI cars do not respond well to boltons because the top engine package just does not flow enough air to take advantage of them.
PI engine swap!
ORIGINAL: s28111
How do you figure high 14s? How can you say 15.x anything when they are a 14.8 stock car?!?!
How do you figure high 14s? How can you say 15.x anything when they are a 14.8 stock car?!?!
The NPI cars do not respond well to boltons because the top engine package just does not flow enough air to take advantage of them.
PI engine swap!
05-10-2006, 08:41 PM
#52
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 782
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
i would check out the mm&ff red headed step child project. this would give you good info on what kind of power to expect from these mods. i think with the same set up your running they picked up like 18-22hp. cant remember. its like 5 issues ago.
05-10-2006, 10:14 PM
#53
4th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,648
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
ORIGINAL: Dave2000GT
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
05-10-2006, 10:32 PM
#54
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,893
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
yes... but that's just like a new edge is a stock 13.9... maybe 10% of people with these cars will run that... everyone else is 15 or so... STOP MAGAZINE RACING! For christs sake, I beat one in my S197 V6!!!!!
ORIGINAL: Stang9946
The car is a 14.8 stock for christ sakes. Where do you come up with this?!!!!
ORIGINAL: Dave2000GT
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
05-10-2006, 10:38 PM
#55
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,893
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
I was referring to the New Edge gt's... lol - I have a good tune... and the only bolt on I don't have are LT headers... but the tune is only from when I had intake, so it's kinda old... i have to get it recalibrated soon... and as far as the tb/plenum goes... i've seen cars get them and get dyno'ed and be 6 or 7 rwhp up.. that was a BBK that i saw.. they "say" accufabs wioll get 1 or 2 more...
Oh and those non pi Stangs are rated at 225 at the flywheel - which would put em in the low 190's for a stock dyno if they have ONLY 15% drivetrain loss...
Oh and those non pi Stangs are rated at 225 at the flywheel - which would put em in the low 190's for a stock dyno if they have ONLY 15% drivetrain loss...
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
NOT on a NPI car you won't. If you gain 15 RWHP with full exhaust on a stock heads/cams/intake NPI car you are doing well.
You don't seem to realise there is a HUGE difference between how a PI car responds to boltons nad how a NPI one does.
Also, your "butt dyno" cannot tell the difference 5 or even 10 rwhp makes. You are simply excited to get something done to your car, and in the case of hte exhaust it is alot louder and more agressive sounding, so it feels faster.
Edit: You will also be pretty lucky to see 260 RWHP without ALL of the major boltons. Full exhaust + full intake botlons + u/d pulleys + a CUSTOM tune (not a generic Xcal) should net you somewhere in the 260-270 range.
I was losing like 8 RWHP and 10 RWTQ on a generic diablo mail order tune at full boltons. With the stock tune I put down 260~ rwhp and the car was acutally pretty close to correctly tuned. Maybe another 5 rwhp in the tune.
ORIGINAL: xxkazp3rxx
with LT headers, midpipe and catback - You can expect 15-20rwhp and more then 25lbs of tor... To bad LT headers cost about a grand for my car
... i'd rather treat em like Barry Bonds and give my car the JUICE!
with LT headers, midpipe and catback - You can expect 15-20rwhp and more then 25lbs of tor... To bad LT headers cost about a grand for my car
... i'd rather treat em like Barry Bonds and give my car the JUICE!
You don't seem to realise there is a HUGE difference between how a PI car responds to boltons nad how a NPI one does.
Also, your "butt dyno" cannot tell the difference 5 or even 10 rwhp makes. You are simply excited to get something done to your car, and in the case of hte exhaust it is alot louder and more agressive sounding, so it feels faster.
Edit: You will also be pretty lucky to see 260 RWHP without ALL of the major boltons. Full exhaust + full intake botlons + u/d pulleys + a CUSTOM tune (not a generic Xcal) should net you somewhere in the 260-270 range.
I was losing like 8 RWHP and 10 RWTQ on a generic diablo mail order tune at full boltons. With the stock tune I put down 260~ rwhp and the car was acutally pretty close to correctly tuned. Maybe another 5 rwhp in the tune.
05-11-2006, 12:11 AM
#56
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12,575
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
ORIGINAL: 40thgtfl
i would check out the mm&ff red headed step child project. this would give you good info on what kind of power to expect from these mods. i think with the same set up your running they picked up like 18-22hp. cant remember. its like 5 issues ago.
i would check out the mm&ff red headed step child project. this would give you good info on what kind of power to expect from these mods. i think with the same set up your running they picked up like 18-22hp. cant remember. its like 5 issues ago.
All totalled, the trip to magnaflow upped the peak power output of our project car by 15 HP and 18 lb/ft of torque.
The magnaflow after cat offered roughly 4-5 horsepower, peaking at 214 hp and 286 lb-ft torque.
WITH cams already installed they made 14 RWHP from the longtubes with a slightly different exhaust (differn't brand), so you won't make anywhere near that with just the LTs.
Put it this way, with u/d pulleys, full intake boltons, full exhaust with LTs and a catless X, cams, and a tune they made 241 rwhp.
NPI GTs are not exactly a good base for a bolton only car. Its just a major uphill battle with the stock heads/cams/intake in place. If you look at RSC's dyno sheets, they are flat for that last 1500+ RPM. The intake package is just too restrictive.
05-11-2006, 02:42 AM
#57
4th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,648
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
ORIGINAL: xxkazp3rxx
yes... but that's just like a new edge is a stock 13.9... maybe 10% of people with these cars will run that... everyone else is 15 or so... STOP MAGAZINE RACING! For christs sake, I beat one in my S197 V6!!!!!
yes... but that's just like a new edge is a stock 13.9... maybe 10% of people with these cars will run that... everyone else is 15 or so... STOP MAGAZINE RACING! For christs sake, I beat one in my S197 V6!!!!!
ORIGINAL: Stang9946
The car is a 14.8 stock for christ sakes. Where do you come up with this?!!!!
ORIGINAL: Dave2000GT
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
I'd say low 15's the only mod worth mentioning there is the UD pullies it is otherwise basically stock.
There are times when i'm wrong..there are times when everyone is wrong, but WHY is it that as soon as someone is wrong they don't correct them, but instead they tear viciously at the persons throat?
05-11-2006, 03:22 AM
#58
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,266
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
Nobody was attacking you at all with their first posts.
I said you would run a 14.8-15.2, that gives room for error and yet a decent run if you can drive well. Other people said similar times. You didn't like what you heard and said we were all basically full of BS. 14.8 with a PRO driver, that's what magazines are claiming. And I guarantee that was with multiple runs as well.
Your asking US what you would run, which means you haven't been to the track yet. And I'm also assuming your not a PRO driver. So unless you have a natural talent for driving, I still say 14.8-15.2.
Baby fits won't make you run better times. Get out there and have fun.
I said you would run a 14.8-15.2, that gives room for error and yet a decent run if you can drive well. Other people said similar times. You didn't like what you heard and said we were all basically full of BS. 14.8 with a PRO driver, that's what magazines are claiming. And I guarantee that was with multiple runs as well.
Your asking US what you would run, which means you haven't been to the track yet. And I'm also assuming your not a PRO driver. So unless you have a natural talent for driving, I still say 14.8-15.2.
Baby fits won't make you run better times. Get out there and have fun.
05-11-2006, 03:31 AM
#59
4th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,648
RE: These mods + 1/4 = ETA of??
ORIGINAL: Quickshift_02GT
Nobody was attacking you at all with their first posts.
I said you would run a 14.8-15.2, that gives room for error and yet a decent run if you can drive well. Other people said similar times. You didn't like what you heard and said we were all basically full of BS. 14.8 with a PRO driver, that's what magazines are claiming. And I guarantee that was with multiple runs as well.
Your asking US what you would run, which means you haven't been to the track yet. And I'm also assuming your not a PRO driver. So unless you have a natural talent for driving, I still say 14.8-15.2.
Baby fits won't make you run better times. Get out there and have fun.
Nobody was attacking you at all with their first posts.
I said you would run a 14.8-15.2, that gives room for error and yet a decent run if you can drive well. Other people said similar times. You didn't like what you heard and said we were all basically full of BS. 14.8 with a PRO driver, that's what magazines are claiming. And I guarantee that was with multiple runs as well.
Your asking US what you would run, which means you haven't been to the track yet. And I'm also assuming your not a PRO driver. So unless you have a natural talent for driving, I still say 14.8-15.2.
Baby fits won't make you run better times. Get out there and have fun.
