Here is a test we ran against a stock 4.6L. This shows our stage I cam, stock intake with our upper plenum,our 70mm TB and our new heads vs. a completely stock engine.

 

...stock 4.6 dyno's at 300?

I like how the power band is moved much beyond 5k.

 

I guess that shows how reliable these results are.

I have always been a fan of TrickFlow products, but come on. A STOCK PI 4.6 will not dyno 300 hp at the crank.

 

That was my first issue, The Stock GT puts down 300 hp. Unless this was on an engine dyno with full boltons and an electric water pump. (that way it would be INTERNALLY stock)

Obviously the trickflow heads/cams made a difference. But because the numbers are so off it is really hard to tell how significant the gain truly was.

 

you guys have another graph? maybe one that makes sense?

 

that engine has to have something done to it to make 40hp more than what ford rated it at.

 

i tihnk it is an engine dyno. i saw it on another forum. made like 407 hp with no accesories i think.

 

stock 4.6 is rated 260 at the CRANK....even on an engine dyno, that is 40 higher than what it is supposed to have

 

sooo if your engine dyno numbers are off as we all know a pi motor puts out about 260 at the crank then that means............. that 390 is more like 350-360 at the crank which is about 320-330 to the wheels. not impressed.

 

Actually looking at this the trickflow heads/cam seem to be about a 50% gain in power, so if you take a normal 225rwhp stock and add the 50% gain to that and you should hit around 337.8rwhp which is in the ballpark of what regular well built N/A heads/cams is capable of putting 4.6l put down.

But all that is just speculation, based on a lot of assumptions, and If I was right with that wild guess, that would still leave headroom for power with other bolt-ons like headers and plenum and pulleys ect...

But who knows, I'm waiting until I see them in a car on a dyno where I can see actual Rwhp. And hopefully with either a control car or a before and after on the same dyno.