perf-list-digest Tuesday, April 13 1999 Volume 02 : Number 085



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
FTE Perf - New to Performance list
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...
RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 08:56:19 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

It was mentioned that the Z28's are just blowing away the Cobra's, and that
the Chevy/Dodge trucks are blowin away the F-series all because of the OHC
engines. Someone on another list posted something one time that has kind
of stuck with me.

Why are cars that are just a bit slower suddenly so aweful ?

The point is that yes, the Z28 is a tenth or so faster 0-60 and maybe a
couple in the quarter. Same thing on the truck side, its got a touch more
on the other side than on our side. So what ? does that mean that our
trucks are slow ? NO it means that our vehicles are slowER. Compare them
with the trucks of 10 or 15 years ago. Everyone has come a long ways with
their fuel injection and computer controls.

There has also been talk of power vs. potential. I don't think that ANY
motor from the factory has been sent out with all of its potential used.
The marketeers at Ford and every other car company have to decide what the
market is looking for and what they can afford to put out. No one's going
to put out a vehicle running at maximum potential and put a 3-5year
warranty on it if they are gonna have to replace parts on it every year or
so, it just doesn't make good business sense, and to expect a company to do
that ... well you get the idea ...

At any rate, expecting a maximum power motor its first year out is just as
ridiculous, as there is not nearly as much real world testing of such a
motor when compared with the one that's been around for 30 years. This is
especially true when changing lots and lots of things, such as switching to
an OHC. I think someone mentioned this, that the first attmempts at OHC
had some major reliability problems, so why would you put out an OHC motor
that would run near its peak and have more reliability problems ?


Sorry I've started rambling. The point is that motors have come a long
ways in the last hundred and fifty years or so, and the OHC is just one
more link in the chain. It has been experimented with before, but never
released on quite this grand of a scale. I think it will take time for
everyone to get used to it, but once they do, just like the OHV, it will be
widely accepted when it is. Until then we're stuck with the nay-sayers and
doubting thomases who will take every chance to put down the new technology
until it has proven itself a hundred times over the old stuff.

I hope I haven't offended anyone too badly, I just think its time we all
take a step back and look at the larger picture.


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:27:06 -0400
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

Everyone has their thoughts and to see the light you have to hear both
sides! No offense takne here, but I did notice you own an OHC!!! J/K
I think anyone that has an opinion on this should jump in.
Something else that bothers me though is that Fords factory ratings seem
to be high and GMs seems to be under rated.

99 Mustang GT 4.6L 260hp....at the rear wheels 218HP..42hp lose through
a 5 speed? Doesn't seem right, that is about what I lose through the
E4OD!
99 Camaro Z28 5.7L 305hp....at the rear wheels 286HP..seems like Chevy
is under rating their motors or they are putting much more of a
percentage to the ground.
On a side note the Z is even heavier than the Stangs but still quicker!

OTOH If I had a chance to get either one I would take the FORD because I
hate GM products. Anyone like to take a shot at why the stang loses 42
hp before it gets to the rear wheels. I know GM is just advertising low
numbers thats why the got more a the rear wheels.
Chris
94 Lightning #381
NLOC #238
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:00:55 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

>Everyone has their thoughts and to see the light you have to hear both
>sides! No offense takne here, but I did notice you own an OHC!!! J/K

Yeah, and I didn't want it, til I drove a 5.0 and the OHC in the same day.
One white one purple, both GT's, a 95 and a 96 ... the OHC was so much
smoother I couldn't resist it. Also seemed quicker, but that may have been
due to the rear end gears, didn't check them at the time....You'll notice
my truck is still a pushrod too :) Since I can't find a 427 SOHC that I
can afford ... :)


>I think anyone that has an opinion on this should jump in.
>Something else that bothers me though is that Fords factory ratings seem
>to be high and GMs seems to be under rated.
>
This has happened on and off for the last ... well since they started the
hp war. I think I read somewhere that Ford had adopted a more modern way
of getting the hp and torque numbers from the crank ... maybe those
readings are higher or something ?


>99 Mustang GT 4.6L 260hp....at the rear wheels 218HP..42hp lose through
>a 5 speed? Doesn't seem right, that is about what I lose through the
>E4OD!
260*.15=39 ... so if you take the general 15% loss for drivetrain (20% or
so on the auto magic), then you end up right around 40, so I don't think
they're too far off ... averaging things of course. Break the motor in
now, and then see what happens ... from what I've heard on the various
groups, this is actually pretty well. It also means the 99's have more
rwhp than I have bhp! (stock for stock)


>99 Camaro Z28 5.7L 305hp....at the rear wheels 286HP..seems like Chevy
>is under rating their motors or they are putting much more of a
>percentage to the ground.

I have heard people who have driven them both say that the z is really
hooking up better, don't know where they are getting the extra bite, but
maybe they've figured something out on the gearing side of things to
improve their efficiencies.... most likely they're just underrating it so
they will act like they will turn in the same numbers as the Cobra, then
beat it by enough to blame it on the driver ... wouldn't that be just like
the general ?


>On a side note the Z is even heavier than the Stangs but still quicker!
>
It was heavier, and is again, but not sure about the 94-98, rumor was they
were actually very close in weight ... I know my 96 is heavy (can feel it
compared with an 87-93), and that they've lightened the 99's again ... not
sure where or how, but I know I'd like to put mine on a bit of a diet ...
think I'll start with an aluminum block and turn it into a cobra ... :)
Dream dream dream ...


hey we obviously would all take the Ford ! :) That's why we do ! :)


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:30:19 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

I would like to say a few words more.
I love OHC engines, especially 4 valve heads. I love motorcycles, and the
incresible performnces these engines offer from idle to 14,000 rpm. 2
strokes are also incredible. I've owned small 4 cyl cars, turbo'd, carbed,
and EFI. And all my own ford trucks have been push rod big blocks. A
small engine needs to turn faster to get the same power output as an
equally prepeared big engine. Consider this:

A newer sport bike engine will get 100hp per liter with no problem from the
factory retaining reliability. My approximately 8.5 liter pull truck
engine is just under the 100 hp/liter. yet it will never have the
reliabllity and streetability of a modern motorcycle engine. My dodge v10
is 8 liters, yet at 300 hp it is very far off its potential.

why is that? crhysler has sold in the past 2.2 L engines that pumped
almost 100 hp/L, thru 2 valve heads and OHC.

Well, quality of power might be important. MY pull truck engine will pull
hard from its surpriseingly smooth idle, all the way to 8,000 rpms. So
will many stock engines. But i have seen many newer small blocks or 4 cyl
engines that don't want to run below 2000 rpms once the power is upped in
the top end. This reduces streetability. The reasons for this might be
the problems incurred with the OHC head design. NOT that it uses OHC, but
the actual design of the ports, and combustion chamber. I do beleive
though that if ford engineers would take the time to study the modern
motorcycle engine they may find how to get alot more from the motor, from
the factory, without loosing relibility, or streetability.

sleddog

- ----------
From: William S Hart[SMTP:wish iastate.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 1999 9:56 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

smipped--------------

. I think it will take time for
everyone to get used to it, but once they do, just like the OHV, it will be
widely accepted when it is. Until then we're stuck with the nay-sayers and
doubting thomases who will take every chance to put down the new technology
until it has proven itself a hundred times over the old stuff.

I hope I haven't offended anyone too badly, I just think its time we all
take a step back and look at the larger picture.


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:48:36 -0400
From: Bryan G Sheffler
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

The Hp rating on the Camaro motor is advertised low because it is the
same motor that is in the Corvette which is rated higher. GM has been
playing this game with the Corvette since the 60's. Remember the LS 6
Chevelle's and Corvettes? Same motor different HP ratings. I guess GM
figures that the Corvette should always be top dog in HP. I guess it
needs to have something.

Bryan

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:09:46 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

>. I do beleive
>though that if ford engineers would take the time to study the modern
>motorcycle engine they may find how to get alot more from the motor, from
>the factory, without loosing relibility, or streetability.
>

A good point Sleddog, they've been doing this for quite a few years, may
have to factor some weight issues in, but that could probably be taken care
of quite easily...


>from Brian
The Hp rating on the Camaro motor is advertised low because it is the
same motor that is in the Corvette which is rated higher. GM has been
playing this game with the Corvette since the 60's. Remember the LS 6
Chevelle's and Corvettes? Same motor different HP ratings. I guess GM
figures that the Corvette should always be top dog in HP. I guess it
needs to have something.


That's what it was, you're right, I heard one of the z owners complaining
about that the other day. I guess some of those new vettes are doing
really poorly at the track, lots of Cobras and Z's eating them up ... in
the 1/4 that is, can't say for a-cross or anything ...


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 17:24:54 -0400
From: "Speed Racer"
Subject: FTE Perf - New to Performance list

I have a 92' F-150 XLT. I have been on the 87-96 list, but was hoping to
find more performance oriented info. I have the 300 inline engine. I'm
considering lowering the truck (just a little) and putting an exhaust and
perhaps a chip in it. Any suggestions are welcome.


Trenton Munsell
DLST Performance

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 18:15:26 -0400
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

> The Hp rating on the Camaro motor is advertised low because it is the
> same motor that is in the Corvette which is rated higher. GM has been
> playing this game with the Corvette since the 60's. Remember the LS 6
> Chevelle's and Corvettes? Same motor different HP ratings. I guess GM
> figures that the Corvette should always be top dog in HP. I guess it
> needs to have something.

Here is one to think about...It is really close to the vette motor in
reality about ten horsepower off...but they did make 100 Z28 with the
identical engine and guess what...It was a tenth quicker in the quarter
than the vette...go figure...imagine driving around in your twice as
expensive GM junk and get beat(barely) by its little brother!
Oh well now for Ford content, they ned a cobra R again...i guess that is
what they have saleen for though!
Chris
94 Lightning #381
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 18:29:06 -0500
From: "Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

Funny, I worked for Ford when the Mark VIII came out. It had that neat DOHC
alloy motor and I asked a guy, "Why don't they put that in the Mustang"?
The answer was that they had tried it and it was either quicker or higher
top speed than the Mark VIII, and they couldn't have that. Maybe this is
just folklore, but sometimes companies make decisions that seem strange on
the outside.

Everyone on this list wonders why all 'stangs can't deliver 12 second time
slips, but the bulk of the sales are V6 models. Clearly, raw performance is
not the reason why people buy Mustangs--for the most part.

Eventually the Mustang did get the DOHC, but they sure took their time
getting around to it! What they really need to do is put the Mustang on a
diet. Can you imagine how much better it would perform if it weighed in at
something like 2600 lbs.?

Regards,
Dave Baldwin
Dallas, TX


> -----Original Message-----

> Here is one to think about...It is really close to the vette motor in
> reality about ten horsepower off...but they did make 100 Z28 with the
> identical engine and guess what...It was a tenth quicker in
> the quarter
> than the vette...go figure...imagine driving around in your twice as
> expensive GM junk and get beat(barely) by its little brother!
> Oh well now for Ford content, they ned a cobra R again...i
> guess that is
> what they have saleen for though!
> Chris
> 94 Lightning #381

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 18:02:19 -0700
From: George Miller
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

OHC has been around for a long time. As personal experience, I did a
frame-off on a '60 Benz 190SL and it was a 4cyl OHC. US Manufacturing
has stuck with the pushrod engine for this long solely due to retooling
costs. All that went to the bottom line until the smog nazis, our gas
approaching $2/gal and imports with tiny compared to a 385 series
displacement and 30mpg w/275hp started driving the market. I'm agreeing
with you, I just have little patience in waiting for aftermarket
improvements to hit the street.

Maybe somebody else has heard of the V10 potential. Other lists have
followed mods on the smaller modular engines with blueprinting, forced
induction and new processor chips seeming to be the popular route. These
newer engines, like any contemporary mass produced machinery, are costed
out down to the last drop of alloy casting material. How much extra was
built into the crank, rods, etc. to absorb HP beyond the produced
design? I doubt that much extra is there or we'd be seeing blower kits
for them being advertised with boost beyond 6lbs. Which means demand for
those pricey items will have to be established before the aftermarket
commits itself to production. The racers, if feasible, will create that
market, just like always. I don't know what a crate V10 goes for but
would guess, other than street rod novelty, it has a wait before being
picked over the proven 560HP out of the boxes 460 Ford offered by Ford
Motorsport or the 610HP Daimler/Chrysler Hemi. Both under $10k ready to
roar.

George Miller

William S Hart wrote:
>
> It was mentioned that the Z28's are just blowing away the Cobra's, and that
> the Chevy/Dodge trucks are blowin away the F-series all because of the OHC
> engines. Someone on another list posted something one time that has kind
> of stuck with me.
>
> Why are cars that are just a bit slower suddenly so aweful ?
>
> The point is that yes, the Z28 is a tenth or so faster 0-60 and maybe a
> couple in the quarter. Same thing on the truck side, its got a touch more
> on the other side than on our side. So what ? does that mean that our
> trucks are slow ? NO it means that our vehicles are slowER. Compare them
> with the trucks of 10 or 15 years ago. Everyone has come a long ways with
> their fuel injection and computer controls.
>
> There has also been talk of power vs. potential. I don't think that ANY
> motor from the factory has been sent out with all of its potential used.
> The marketeers at Ford and every other car company have to decide what the
> market is looking for and what they can afford to put out. No one's going
> to put out a vehicle running at maximum potential and put a 3-5year
> warranty on it if they are gonna have to replace parts on it every year or
> so, it just doesn't make good business sense, and to expect a company to do
> that ... well you get the idea ...
>
> At any rate, expecting a maximum power motor its first year out is just as
> ridiculous, as there is not nearly as much real world testing of such a
> motor when compared with the one that's been around for 30 years. This is
> especially true when changing lots and lots of things, such as switching to
> an OHC. I think someone mentioned this, that the first attmempts at OHC
> had some major reliability problems, so why would you put out an OHC motor
> that would run near its peak and have more reliability problems ?
>
> Sorry I've started rambling. The point is that motors have come a long
> ways in the last hundred and fifty years or so, and the OHC is just one
> more link in the chain. It has been experimented with before, but never
> released on quite this grand of a scale. I think it will take time for
> everyone to get used to it, but once they do, just like the OHV, it will be
> widely accepted when it is. Until then we're stuck with the nay-sayers and
> doubting thomases who will take every chance to put down the new technology
> until it has proven itself a hundred times over the old stuff.
>
> I hope I haven't offended anyone too badly, I just think its time we all
> take a step back and look at the larger picture.
>
> Just my 2cents
>
> wish
>
> Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
> '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
> '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 21:45:08 -0400
From: Brad Smith
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

At 06:02 PM 4/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>Maybe somebody else has heard of the V10 potential. Other lists have
>followed mods on the smaller modular engines with blueprinting, forced
>induction and new processor chips seeming to be the popular route. These
>newer engines, like any contemporary mass produced machinery, are costed
>out down to the last drop of alloy casting material. How much extra was
>built into the crank, rods, etc. to absorb HP beyond the produced
>design? I doubt that much extra is there or we'd be seeing blower kits
>for them being advertised with boost beyond 6lbs. Which means demand for
>those pricey items will have to be established before the aftermarket
>commits itself to production.

I have seen a 12 lb. Vortech on a 98 Cobra... Pretty impressive too, It hit
468 HP at the rear wheels... So they are making the stuff, and the engines
are able to handle it, I just hope to see more of it out there soon!

Brad

The two best times to go fishing are when it is raining, and when it is
not...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:55:19 -0400
From: Bryan G Sheffler
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

snipped

>Oh well now for Ford content, they ned a cobra R again...i guess that
>is
>what they have saleen for though!
>Chris
>94 Lightning #381
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
>http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

What Ford needs is a V8 Ranger!!!! I had one, a lot of fun, but then
again, Ford probably wouldn't sell any Mustangs then!!!!!!!

Bryan

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:59:12 -0400
From: Bryan G Sheffler
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

The Mustang just needs the 5.4 mod motor!!!! there is no replacement for
cubic displacement!!!!

Bryan

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 02:27:17 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Speed rules...

except maybe cubic dollars
sleddog....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.