Correct, that's my 95 351w 5.8L EFI.

 

Uummm.. Thats not exactly true.. I mean yes the 460 is a guzzler for sure but there are lots of ways to make it more efficient. I myself got 15.5 mpg highway and 11-12 city when I had my 460. (regret selling it)

Check this out, FOUR WHEELER Magazine's Project M.P.G.

They finished with 343hp, 684 ft lbs torque , 12.23 city and hwy combined mpg, 13.51 hwy mpg, didnt touch any internals of the engine, And that battleship of a truck is a crew cab dually centurion...

 

Good places to study are BIG BLOCK FORD'S or 460 Ford Forum for ideas........big block fords make outstanding racing engines but they take considerable $$$$$$ doing it.......there is very little you can "bolt on" to get places with the 460........

 

While this setup MIGHT reduce the restriction on the air intake, it also means you're pulling in hot underhood air rather than cooler outside air. Hot air is less dense than cool air, so you need more of it to make the same amount of power. So it's not clear how the gains and losses will balance out.

And I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating acceleration from horsepower. Newton tells us that force = mass x acceleration. In this case force comes only from horsepower, so you can't gain acceleration without adding power (except by removing weight).

Interestingly, in a recent issue Fourwheeler included this project as one of the 10 worst projects in the magazine's history, citing the huge investment needed for what they described as relatively minor gains. Not sure that I agree with them, but it was interesting to note, especially when I see the project touted here so frequently.

HEI will give significant gains over an LEI (low energy ignition), but that hasn't been an issue in vehicles since sometime around 1980 (give or take a bit). All factory ignition systems since then have been pretty darn good, with very little room for improvement. If you are looking to squeeze the absolute best performance you can out of an engine, regardless of cost, it's a place you can throw some cash. But it's not a place for easy gains anymore.

 

I knew there would be someone who had to have an issue with what I said.

It's funny how I know for a fact that the acceleration improved because I actually drive the truck every day, but someone always knows otherwise. Every truck is different.

I had a sluggish response and poor acceleration before installing, and afterwards I noticed a clear increase. Sure, if you say you can't increase either horsepower or acceleration separately, then their must have been an un-noticeable gain of horsepower not worth mentioning.

Sorry about that.

 

I read that entire article a few times and applied some of the information to my truck. My 351 has topped out at 18 MPG on the highway. But, that's Canadian gallons so probably closer to 15 or 16 US. That's pretty good considering it was only getting 9.5 when dad gave it to me.

For what it's worth, the article also mentioned that simply replacing the standard air filter with a freer breathing one made a difference on low and midrange power. However, when they put on a K&N high performance kit (similar to a pair of cone filters) that used air from under the hood the huge amount of air available was able to offset the lower density and provide a horsepower boost at higher RPM. It's not stated clearly in the article but it's stated in one of the sidebars. I missed it the first couple of times I read the article.

 

I'm not saying you didn't increase horsepower. For all I know you increased it significantly. All I was saying was that I didn't understand separating acceleration and power. If it helped acceleration it must have helped power.

And my comments on your hot air intake were exactly what they look like on the surface, no hidden digs. Hot air is less dense which hurts power and acceleration, less restrictive intake might help, it's not clear where the balance would be. But if you're getting more power, then that shows where the balance is in your truck.

 

What is your budget? That determines everything. Seems the common ground is start with headers and exhaust, adjustable fpr, bbk throttle body, then after that its a camshaft, ported intake and head work.

 

This is the most realistic reply! Everyone searching for MPG that are not to be found! And the money spent searching for MPG's will never be recovered.

 

Forget all that diesel time.

 

Thats crazy cause they gained almost 100hp, almost 200 tq, and nearly doubled the MPG without touching the engine internals... Thats pretty awesome in my book.

 

If the air flow increase is enough, it offsets the negative effects of the warmer air that makes it less dense. For example, say the increased air flow without the negative effects of it being warm air adds 10 hp, but the air being warmer takes off 4 hp, you still have a gain of 6 hp over the stock cold air box.

If the stock cold air box could flow as much as the ram air, then that would give you the full 10 hp increase.

 

Check this out, FOUR WHEELER Magazine's Project M.P.G.

I did this to my 460 when i had it and it is legit, it worked.

They finished with 343hp, 684 ft lbs torque , 12.23 city and hwy combined mpg, 13.51 hwy mpg, didnt touch any internals of the engine, And that battleship of a truck is a crew cab dually centurion...

 

That article is such a load of BS it is not even funny. I have supecharger an I am not putting out 343hp. SO i will say their CLAIMS of full milage are BS oo

 

In the August 2014 issue of Fourwheeler which had the five worst (sorry, I had said 10 earlier) projects in the magazine's history, they summarized the projects results as going from 4.6 to 8.9 mpg city and from 8.9 to 12.3 mpg highway. They go on to say that at 1999 fuel prices that would have taken 8-10 years to pay back the $4,822 investment. That's how they classify it as a bad project.

I said earlier that I'm not sure I'd agree with their assessment, and having done the math on it now, I'd say I disagree. To figure the payback you need to assume a price of gas, and what percentage of the driving is city and what is highway. Picking $1.50/gallon (my recollection of 1999 gas prices) and a 50/50 mix of city/highway gives a payback of 47,000 miles by my calculations. I'd call that a 3-4 year payback rather than a, 8-10 year payback, and I'd say that's pretty darn good for any attempt to gain mileage.

Changing the driving mix to 25% city / 75% highway stretches the payback out to about 65,000 miles, so that's maybe getting iffy as a reasonable investment. But then again, gas didn't stay at $1.50/gallon for that long after 1999, so that improves the payback too.

Anyway, Brad's comment about the believability of the results aside, I certainly wouldn't stack this up as one of Fourwheeler's 5 worst projects. It's got to rate better than Dr. Dooley!