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

New Engine

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 8, 2004 | 03:35 AM
  #31  
Dan04COBRA's Avatar
Dan04COBRA
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 14,917
Default RE: New Engine

ORIGINAL: Dan02GT
What about my original post confused you? Depending on the quality of fuel you get in your area, also factoring in the WEATHER. Yes, his car can OPERATE on 87 octane, but driving around with a PINGING engine is not going to it any good for it's longevity. So, my point is - if your going to do a 99+ engine swap, I'm going to pee my pants laughing if you're not capable of running on 87 octane without pinging.

The reason why I said they HAVE to run on 89 & 93 octane is for this reason: An operational engine after 60,000 miles!
I love quoting myself. Razor, I said it 2 days ago also. Like I said, you looked right through it, you were so hell-bent on trying to prove me wrong. Humorous. I hope every enjoyed the entertainment
Old Sep 8, 2004 | 05:14 AM
  #32  
Sidewayz6.0's Avatar
Sidewayz6.0
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,639
From: IL
Default RE: New Engine

As much as I'm not a fan of agreeing with Dan, he's right. Razor, you're a tool and you have the worst case of I'm always right and you're wrong I've ever seen.

But to answer your question as nobody else seems to have caught. With the PI swap, you have to run higher octane because the pre '99 4.6's have different pistons. The combustion chambers in the pre '99 heads are shaped differently. When you swap to the PI heads, you will actually have higher compression than the factory PI cars have. So STFU and pony up to the premium gas!
Old Sep 8, 2004 | 05:20 AM
  #33  
Dan04COBRA's Avatar
Dan04COBRA
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 14,917
Default RE: New Engine

See, you know it's bad when Sidewayz agree's with me. I don't think we've ever seen eye to eye on ANYTHING.


But, Sidewayz - I do believe in Razor's original post he shunned the PI swap because he would have no choice but to run 93 octane because of the compression boost.
Old Sep 8, 2004 | 05:25 AM
  #34  
Sidewayz6.0's Avatar
Sidewayz6.0
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,639
From: IL
Default RE: New Engine

Ah, you're right. It wasn't him that asked why. It was JDaniel. Razor just had his lips flapping so fast, I completely forgot where I was going with this whole thing. So let's all just pretend that I quoted JDaniel in that last post.
Old Sep 8, 2004 | 07:25 AM
  #35  
SilverGTV8's Avatar
SilverGTV8
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,974
From: United States
Default RE: New Engine

Your right it was JD. I knew the compression was higher, just got caught up in the argument about gas grades. Man i hope this thread is over. If Razor could have read it might have been done like 10 posts ago.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nick Oliver
V6 S197 General Discussion
6
Oct 17, 2018 04:22 AM
AmericanMuscle4.6GT
2005-2014 Mustangs
7
Nov 10, 2015 02:06 PM
rksnow1
Motor Swap Section
0
Sep 14, 2015 08:46 PM
TfcCDR
V6 (1994-2004) Mustangs
1
Sep 14, 2015 12:08 PM
Pyrate Dave
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
8
Sep 10, 2015 07:30 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25 AM.