4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang Technical discussions on 1996-2004 4.6 Liter Modular Motors (2V and 4V) within.

best bang for your buck

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-07-2006, 03:21 AM
  #11  
96cobra10101
3rd Gear Member
 
96cobra10101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Titty Bar
Posts: 805
Default RE: best bang for your buck

your keeping ur stock tranny, gears, radiator, and drive shaft? Don't forget about lower control arms, mass air, throttle body and a 3 core radiator. And dyno time to get a good a/f. I say about 12k for a well setup car. I'm not pulling these numbers out of my ***, more of a been there done that.
96cobra10101 is offline  
Old 07-07-2006, 03:42 AM
  #12  
czwalga00gt
5th Gear Member
 
czwalga00gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pittsburgh/Dayton
Posts: 3,062
Default RE: best bang for your buck


ORIGINAL: 96cobra10101

your keeping ur stock tranny, gears, radiator, and drive shaft? Don't forget about lower control arms, mass air, throttle body and a 3 core radiator. And dyno time to get a good a/f. I say about 12k for a well setup car. I'm not pulling these numbers out of my ***, more of a been there done that.

My friend just built is his 2v with a 2.2kb + 150 shot of nitrous. Hes hoping for low 800 on the nitrous. Hes spent about 13k, with a viperspec t56.
czwalga00gt is offline  
Old 07-07-2006, 01:56 PM
  #13  
96cobra10101
3rd Gear Member
 
96cobra10101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Titty Bar
Posts: 805
Default RE: best bang for your buck


ORIGINAL: czwalga00gt


ORIGINAL: 96cobra10101

your keeping ur stock tranny, gears, radiator, and drive shaft? Don't forget about lower control arms, mass air, throttle body and a 3 core radiator. And dyno time to get a good a/f. I say about 12k for a well setup car. I'm not pulling these numbers out of my ***, more of a been there done that.

My friend just built is his 2v with a 2.2kb + 150 shot of nitrous. Hes hoping for low 800 on the nitrous. Hes spent about 13k, with a viperspec t56.
Hoping and reality are 2 dif things my friend. If 800 hp was that cheap there would be a crap load of fast cars on the road. I can see this turning into a useless arguement. I can only say if you do it right, it isn't cheap. If you shortcut your parts list you'll end up paying for them anyways or even pay more. The stock fuel system on these cars doesn't support 400 hp. You need to replace your internal fuel pump, your injectors, add an additional external pump, new chip, mass air, throttle body. Add up the cost of just those parts. Your buddy doing 800 hp in no way has a stock bottom end. That right there is atleast 3k on a 2v. I'll stick with a strong bullet proof car that I don't cross my fingers and hope something doesn't break everytime I get on it vs. a car thats in the shop more than driven.
96cobra10101 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mungodrums
5.0L GT S550 Tech
7
10-07-2015 04:01 AM
Matt's 95 Stang
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
2
10-05-2015 07:16 AM
jstrothe
V6 (1994-2004) Mustangs
2
09-24-2015 12:17 PM
SteelerNation82
V6 (1994-2004) Mustangs
1
09-16-2015 07:11 AM



Quick Reply: best bang for your buck



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11 PM.