Mustang HO Intake
Thread Starter
|
Freshman User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Mustang HO Intake
What would i have to do to use a mustang HO intake into a 91 302? Any electrical that needs changing? Can i use the truck sensors or do i need the mustang sensors? Any help would be appreciated.
thanks
jaime
thanks
jaime
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
The intake will bolt right on and the truck sensors can be used. The biggest problems will be with the intake plumbing(single blade TB on the HO versus dual blade on the truck), the throttle control cable and possible tranny control cable depending upon what transmission you have. A HO intake complete with EGR valve, TB and control cable plate would be the best way to go. Maybe compare the 2 systems yourself before you take the plunge so you know what you're up against.
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
Originally Posted by 12secondstang
I was under the impression that the Truck intake flows as well if not better than a Mustang's stock intake.
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by 12secondstang
I was under the impression that the Truck intake flows as well if not better than a Mustang's stock intake.
The truck intake has long runners and by driving mine, it feels like it's dead after 4200rpm's. The Mustang intake should pull up to 5500 rpms.
Now when you look at port volume, the standard 87-93 302HO intake off the Mustang GT is small. The truck intake has more port volume.
Bottom line, the truck intake is made for pulling, so if that is what you're doing with your truck, then keep it on there.
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Conanski
Yes, but a high flowing intake on a wheezer motor like the truck 5.0 makes for very weak low rpm TQ production. The HO intake will make 300lb ft TQ from 2000rpm, the truck intake is much less at that rpm.
Like I said before, the truck intake has more port volume. So if I did do a HO type setup, it would be a GT40 style like the Gen1 Lightning had, or something like the Trick-Flow, Edelbrock, etc. I'd skip right over that 5.0HO intake with its smaller port volume.
Last edited by DOHC330MustangGT; Jun 13, 2007 at 10:39 PM.
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
The rule of thumb about longer intake runners is valid, but TQ production it's also tied to runner volume, smaller runners generate more intake velocity at lower rpms and more torque as a result. It's been my observation that the 5.0 truck intake is just simply too big to produce usefull low rpm power. This is backed up by recent dyno results from another user here, the 5.0 truck intake actually made more HP than the HO intake. The fact that the HO motor makes more TQ than the truck motor is more fuel on the fire. The 5.8 intake uses smaller runners than the truck 5.0 and produces substantially more low rpm TQ, some of that resulting from the increased displacement, but the rest is from the intake. IMO, the HO intake is a step in the right direction for a stock or mildly upgraded truck 5.0, adding a 1" spacer between the upper/lower lengthens the runners and should boost low rpms even more. Lots of others have already built 5.0's with the GT40 or other aftermarket big volume intakes, and every time they report it absolutely killed low rpm power.
Last edited by Conanski; Jun 14, 2007 at 10:05 AM.
