stanger88

I would have to do some number crunching on this but I know that I have had some customers run pretty good with these engines. We have a customer with one of these engines on our Dyno jet chassi dyno and it made about 320 to the rear tires which was pretty good. I feel that a 20 to 25 percent loss is not un-common. Some of these 302 engines we do will make about 390 and a 331 one we did the other day with the same parts as the 306 made 431HP. If we use the same parts that we use on the 306 we can do one of those for about 400.00 more. The 331 also makes more torque for sure. Just let us know how we can help when you are ready. Thanks,



Keith


There you go, this is his response to me when I asked why his 375hp rated motor was only cracking 300whp or so on most dyno's and the 331's rated at 425 whp were only making around 330whp. I think my motor being rated at 340hp and making 244whp is about right when you take into account that I have 4.10's (which rob around 5-8whp) and a tranny with heavier rotating mass than a T5 and a flex fan. As it is I have a 27% loss from 340hp to the 244whp that I dyno'ed. If I had 260whp (Aka, T5, 3.55's, and a electric fan would EASILY get me there), then that would be a 23% loss. I think my motor made exactly what it was supposed to make and it agrees with Keith Craft's numbers (20-25%). But I guess he doesnt know anything...

asauer

I was always under the impression driveline losses were in the ballpark of 15-20%. How do you figure your tranny has more rotating mass than a T-5? Did you dismantle both types and compare each individual gears' weights? Weight is also not everything. The viscosity of the gear lube, the way the gears are cut, etc have just as much bearing on the outcome. Also, 4.10s do not neccessarily reduce power- where do you get off saying that? The engine still puts out the same amount of power...sure, there MAY be slightly more driveline loss with one ratio versus another (with a higher number of pinion teeth vs. ring gear and vice versa), but all it's doing is changing the motor's "happy zone" of power band.

stanger88

I use GM syncromesh,and the the TKO500 is a ****load heavier internally than a T5. 4.10's reduce what a car will dyno by about 8whp or so, try doing a dyno pullin 3rd vs 4th and you will see what gearing can do to dyno numbers (hint, it will be lower in 3rd). If you think 15-20% is what it is, then e-mail or call Keith Craft, since you dont think that I know my ****, maybe you will respect him. Probably not since him and I are on the same page though. www.mustangforums.com>everyone else.

AdderMk2

IF what you are saying was true, youd would be talling me that MY car makes 335 hp at the crank. which would be a ~100hp increase over stock. Do you seriously think im making ~100 extra hp from a set of headers, x pipe, mac dumps, 70mm tb, ebay CAI, UDP's and 15° timing.... i think not

Ninety5five0

The trickflow top end kit is say it makes 350 HP at the fly, but that was also tested on a 306. So i'm guessing it would be a less bit on a 302.

asauer

Well if you say having lower horsepower will cause a slower pull from 3rd to 4th, then no, you don't know your ****. TORQUE determines how quickly car X vs. car Y will pull through a set gear, not horsepower.

FullAuto

The TFS combo numbers look a little low to me too. I'd say they were 15-20rwhp low minimum. Of course it isn't tuned and there is more to the combo that may be affecting it since not everything was listed.

Douchebag,

You don't know **** about cars. Your POS doesn't have a 27% drivetrain loss. Stop bringing up your Tremec and flex fan like it's supposed to turn on a light bulb when people say your combo is ****ed. You're a carb car. This comparision is apples to oranges and you are way low on power. Trade the pig off, buy an LS1 and go be their problem.

Everyone else,

Ignore the douchebag. You're wasting your time. He doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. He's demonstrated this in several threads. He ricer races to justify his poor combo. If you have read his posts and you still have doubts whether or not he knows what he's talking about, then you too need to seek professional help.

asauer

Thank you- I agree. I don't know why I am wasting my time...and I guess I just thought I could talk some sense into him...to no avail. We're not trying to attack you man- you set yourself up for it. I hardly ever post on here...I just read and observe, but I post in reply to you because you just stand out.[8D]

stanger88

You all amaze me. One of the leading engine builders says exactly what I do, you dont like it? Tough, how many of you thought about engine accessories? water pump anyone? Hrmmm?? I bet you didnt know that a stock 5.0 will make around mid 200's on an engine dyno. What about LS1's making 400+ on an engine dyno? Yeah? Why do they only get 300 at the tires. Oh, im sorry, I guess you dont think things fully through, thats why Keith Craft builds motors for a living (and is successful) and you are not. As far as you calling me a douche bag, I guess that is your common response when you show your *** by not knowing WTF you are talking about. Sorry to show you up and hurt your feelings. Maybe you should leave the thinking to those who are payed to do it (Keith, not me). As i said, call him and ask where 25% loss comes from going from engine to rwhp dyno numbers. YOU set yourself up for THAT one.

stanger88

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...ngine_buildup/

278 hp on the engine dyno with just a stealth intake and a different carb. That motor probably makes around 200 at the tires. Go think about it. Oh, and AFR headed 5.0's normally lay 300-330whp down (and for sure not with the stock cam like this motor has, im dead sure it wouldnt break over 330 at the tires in a car), this one made 405hp on the dyno. 100-70HP loss not in the drivetrain you say? No **** sherlock, it has to do with a lot of other factors as well, mainly accessories, fan, and waterpump. So get over your "me dumb, wont do the think" mentality and open your mind a little and you will see why both Keith and I say 25% loss from engine dyno numbers to the pavement is not excessive.

Talking to you people sometimes feels like banging my head against a wall, but I do it b/c I think you can get it if you open your mind a little. Why dont you lay the "Me hate, you wrong" aside until you read Keith's correspondance with me, look at the link someone else posted and I re-posted, think about both of them, think about my 27% loss (about 2% higher than keith quoted due to the heavier fluide and my heavier transmission internals and my flex fan, yeah, all that is = to AT LEAST 2% im sure). and THEN post up a reply. Think then type. (244whp from 340 engine dyno #'s is = to 27%, 260hp (what I think I would make with an electric fan and a PERFECT TUNE) is about 23%).