347 hp? - Page 3 - MustangForums.com

Notices
5.0L General Discussion This section is for non-tech specific information pertaining to 5.0L Mustangs.

347 hp?

Reply

 
 
 
Old 04-27-2011, 11:37 AM
  #21  
w8less
6th Gear Member
 
w8less's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KY
Posts: 13,398
Default

It would depend on what heads and cam you choose. A 347 can make 300 to 500 rwhp na and just depends on how far you want to dig in
w8less is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 02:25 PM
  #22  
AdderMk2
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lil' Rhody
Posts: 22,376
Default

Originally Posted by jst98gtmustang View Post
what would it make with a good set of heads?
you are going to need alot more than a set of heads to save that car... You would need a full h/c/i, because all of those components listed... are crap.
AdderMk2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 04:01 PM
  #23  
Ten/Seven
 
Ten/Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 33
Default

Originally Posted by mjr46 View Post
I've had a 650 on it before, the 750 delivers more, btdtst!
Are you running a dual or single plane manifold with that?

Did you try changing up the carb to 675 or 725 before you went to 750??

My grandfather has a tote full of used carbs. Carter, Holly, Webbers. Single, two and four barrel. he also has a shoe box full of jets. I, in the past have try'ed several carbs on a set up. 25cfm can be a drastic change. when you get your cfm & jet size just right it can make a world of difference.
Ten/Seven is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 10:37 PM
  #24  
mjr46
D.R. THE PATHETIC DORK
 
mjr46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 30,809
Default

^^^it's running a rpm air gap ported by fti, I may switch to a single plane in the near future for giggles......but it has excellent low and mid pull that I'm not sure I'm gonna mess with it right now, my 89 s/c project is more priority right now
mjr46 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2011, 02:32 AM
  #25  
Ten/Seven
 
Ten/Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 33
Default

Originally Posted by 67mustang302 View Post
.....

It's too hard to say without knowing more about the heads. Ported to the max by a pro that 347 could make decent power, but not any more than a 302 with decent heads and a cam.

And the Edelbrock carbs aren't really a performance carb. And the 4150 Ultras are a way overpriced variant of the 4150 with the same tuning options as other carbs. You can do the same thing with a Quick Fuel etc, but for a lot less money.

And a 750 is fine for a 347, a 650 would strangle the life out of a properly built 347. Which by the way, would need a hell of a lot more head than GT40anythings. I wouldn't put anything less than AFR 185 comps or TFS 190's etc on a 347.
I know this is months old. But I was reading 5.0 mag on the john and it made me think of you dude. Did you read the June issue?? They did a Dart 351w based 427 stroker build with 225cc heads. They ran that bad dude on the dyno and made 617hp & 587tq. Guess what size carb they used?
They used a 650 Demon.
They strapped on the 850 and picked up less than 7tq & only 10hp.
Thats off the shelf, on hand, test unit. They didn't even jet the 650. If they had jetted the 650 they could have pulled bigger low end and hp numbers.
Ten/Seven is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2011, 11:15 PM
  #26  
tinman
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,103
Default

I've seen that story n the magazine.
I've got sort of a tendency to believe my E.T. slips from the 'strip instead of magazine dyno stories.
I kind of have trouble with the general lack of ethics I've seen over the years from the writers/editors of most automotive magazines........
tinman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2011, 01:48 AM
  #27  
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
Default

What Tinman said. Also, there's a difference between dyno numbers and actual performance....assuming the dyno they use is even accurate.

That said, you can get a crapload of power out of an undersized carb. Back under older rules they had 358cid engines making over 500hp at the crank at 6,500rpm through 390's. And even the Cup engines, ~800hp from 358's using 830cfm....on an engine that should be using 1,150 single or a pair of 550+ duals.

You can be sure they're playing around with cam design a lot to do that though. You can still get good performance out of a "too small carb," but for the typical build up for most people with ots parts(heads, intake etc) a 650 on a larger engine with larger heads is sub optimal. Especially depending on the cam.
67mustang302 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 11:40 PM
  #28  
tinman
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,103
Default

IMHO, if you build a 347 with just what's there for sale off the shelf, I'm not sure that any of the traditional carb size 'rules' even apply......
tinman is offline  
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Brett Ludlow
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
7
09-23-2015 07:59 AM
EASTIDEE123
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
5
09-15-2015 12:08 PM
EASTIDEE123
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
14
09-14-2015 04:52 PM
YoungStangsMan
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
15
09-05-2015 08:01 PM
90GT347
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
5
07-19-2004 01:36 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 347 hp?


Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.