5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

Heads for 92 coupe

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-03-2009, 04:06 PM
  #11  
wrenchturner75
2nd Gear Member
 
wrenchturner75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: pa
Posts: 313
Default

hey im not arguing with ya! just too many stories of guys doing hci swaps and when they see it advertised put on this kit and itll get ya 350hp then they do it and the motors cant even muster 300? on a small displacement motor like the 302 id be more than happy with the ol 1hp per ci. yes there are wayy better heads out there i agree, but for 800 bucks considering a refresh on a set of cylindr heads with larger valves installed and zero port work will put ya up to at least 5 bills and still wont flow nearly as good as these heads hey id try em!
wrenchturner75 is offline  
Old 02-03-2009, 04:16 PM
  #12  
FivePointOhh
in limbo
 
FivePointOhh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 7,300
Default

Originally Posted by wrenchturner75
hey im not arguing with ya! just too many stories of guys doing hci swaps and when they see it advertised put on this kit and itll get ya 350hp then they do it and the motors cant even muster 300? on a small displacement motor like the 302 id be more than happy with the ol 1hp per ci. yes there are wayy better heads out there i agree, but for 800 bucks considering a refresh on a set of cylindr heads with larger valves installed and zero port work will put ya up to at least 5 bills and still wont flow nearly as good as these heads hey id try em!

i was refering to HCI set ups. for nearly the same cost you can net yourself more hp then any hci involving those flotek heads. its looking at the big picture. plus investing in a better set of heads or a quality set up will give you a better platform to expand rather than buying parts twice
FivePointOhh is offline  
Old 02-03-2009, 04:21 PM
  #13  
wrenchturner75
2nd Gear Member
 
wrenchturner75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: pa
Posts: 313
Default

well put!
wrenchturner75 is offline  
Old 02-03-2009, 04:58 PM
  #14  
hypersurf1
2nd Gear Member
 
hypersurf1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location:
Posts: 178
Default

I did the math over and over and over. I ended up with the AFR 165's. When you consider junk aluminum heads are 1,000 bucks I felt that for another 400 I could get a set that I would never outgrow and would be perfect out of the box. The AFR's with a explorer intake and 1.7 rr's absolutely screams. I will have some 1/4 mile times as soon as the track opens.
hypersurf1 is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 02:41 PM
  #15  
Ryans92Notch
Thread Starter
 
Ryans92Notch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 8
Default

lol no point in arguing guys i decided to just get the afr 185's ;] butt ty all.
Ryans92Notch is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 08:51 PM
  #16  
red87
 
red87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: pa
Posts: 8
Default

dont believe everything you read especially when its written by fivepointohhh
red87 is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 09:02 PM
  #17  
mjr46
D.R. THE PATHETIC DORK
 
mjr46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 30,863
Default

Originally Posted by verter2
Don't know what to tell you, but when I see techs take a particular test motor, run a base line dyno, swap heads, then report the difference, I tend to see those numbers as somewhat indicative of the results of doing such a swap.
I don't!!...why because you can not clearly draw a conclusion accurately without tunning the combo to that specific change made......if head "X" is capable of a little bit better flow than head "Y".....WOULD IT BE AN accurate result by failing to tune the carb or fuel injection system to each set up to maximize results??? what if head X flows better but is choked out by a mismatched intake and fuel metering system..ie carb or fuel injection??? would it be a correct conclusion to say head "Y" is the better choice??? hrmmmmmmmmmm maybe not....see magazine articles are often biased toward those who pay to be in the magazine , don't always believe what you read!!.....Flow is just one aspect to anylize on the heads there are other important aspects such as cross section, port volume ect ect...this could go on and on...but the important thing to realize is...what drives the reports the magazine articles produce??? Sponsors maybe???

Last edited by mjr46; 02-04-2009 at 09:09 PM.
mjr46 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GimpyHSHS
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
19
12-19-2023 01:12 PM
mustangheaven
Motor Swap Section
3
01-03-2016 11:20 AM
kevsgt
2005-2014 Mustangs
5
10-09-2015 10:12 PM
uedlose
The Racers Bench
4
10-01-2015 08:31 PM
Drastang
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
2
09-30-2015 03:48 AM



Quick Reply: Heads for 92 coupe



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 AM.