300I6 Powered
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 708
Likes: 1
It was mostly just the pathetic cam and then retarding it 4 degrees from factory that made the 400 such a pig. 175 HP and 325 TQ. But it's incredibly easy from what I've read to unleash the potential of that engine. A better cam with a straight up sprocket, very minor head work, a small bump in compression. And you get over 300 HP and TQ around 450. But I already have the 300 performance parts, and the bellhousing and things I need to do the swap. Plus I don't want 400 CID mileage. The only thing I would miss by doing the swap is the exhaust sound.
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 708
Likes: 1
This is true if the stock EFI injectors were to flow as much fuel as a 4bbl, which I don't believe they do. Then, they're tuned with emissions in mind, not horsepower.
I imagine a different computer with even the same injectors could be tuned for way more power. The stock exhaust on the EFI was 2" IIRC. 25hp/30tq over stock EFI from a power tuned computer doesn't seem like that much at all.
Then, you've got a 1bbl carb motor that's way restricted. 50 horsepower from removing a restrictive intake and exhaust and then well over doubling the fuel input, and allowing it to rev another 1000RPMs. Dunno, seems reasonable to me.
I think if I was estimating 250hp or something ludicrous, that'd be up for big debate, but getting 175hp out of a 300ci engine with a full intake, exhaust, and fuel system upgrade doesn't seem like a stretch.
Again though, just estimations.
I imagine a different computer with even the same injectors could be tuned for way more power. The stock exhaust on the EFI was 2" IIRC. 25hp/30tq over stock EFI from a power tuned computer doesn't seem like that much at all.
Then, you've got a 1bbl carb motor that's way restricted. 50 horsepower from removing a restrictive intake and exhaust and then well over doubling the fuel input, and allowing it to rev another 1000RPMs. Dunno, seems reasonable to me.
I think if I was estimating 250hp or something ludicrous, that'd be up for big debate, but getting 175hp out of a 300ci engine with a full intake, exhaust, and fuel system upgrade doesn't seem like a stretch.
Again though, just estimations.
TO THE DYNO CAVE!!
oh wait, I don't have one
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 1
From: Mass.
Ford's exhausts are horribly restrictive, it goes down to extremely small piping in some places. With a cam to accompany the exhaust and headers i can see a 50hp gain being realistic, not sure if exhaust alone could do it.
And yes, the 400's can be built up to make lots of torque and power, they just came out in a smog era, so they have a horrible reputation. If they had been released in the 60s when high output motors were the hot ticket, i bet it would be a whole different story.
Dynos are useless.
And yes, the 400's can be built up to make lots of torque and power, they just came out in a smog era, so they have a horrible reputation. If they had been released in the 60s when high output motors were the hot ticket, i bet it would be a whole different story.
Dynos are useless.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,021
Likes: 4
From: Almost Heaven
You guys would probably know more than I do. My knowledge is all gained from driving my truck and from the knowledge other users have put on this website. I still say you're over estimating, but who cares? I hope you do have 175 / 290! I just can't see it.
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 708
Likes: 1
That's like a carpenter saying 'measuring tapes are useless'
I'm with you Bill. 50 HP sounds a little high for a 300 with a stock head, even with a 4V carb and intake and better exhaust. But also, 30 ft/lbs sounds even a little low for what he's done. I bet Abandoned has gained more torque and less HP than what he's estimating. And that carbed engine is a pretty different animal than the EFI. Even though the engine underneath is basically the same. Because the carbed is not constrained by injector flow rates and computer management and everything else. You can basically bolt it on, tune it up, and go with a carbed motor and see all the benefits. With EFI you have to do a lot more. Even more so with the 300 where injectors, sensors, computer, are not capable by design of supporting much more power than stock. That's why people do EFI to carb conversions on these engines.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,021
Likes: 4
From: Almost Heaven
That's like a carpenter saying 'measuring tapes are useless'
I'm with you Bill. 50 HP sounds a little high for a 300 with a stock head, even with a 4V carb and intake and better exhaust. But also, 30 ft/lbs sounds even a little low for what he's done. I bet Abandoned has gained more torque and less HP than what he's estimating. And that carbed engine is a pretty different animal than the EFI. Even though the engine underneath is basically the same. Because the carbed is not constrained by injector flow rates and computer management and everything else. You can basically bolt it on, tune it up, and go with a carbed motor and see all the benefits. With EFI you have to do a lot more. Even more so with the 300 where injectors, sensors, computer, are not capable by design of supporting much more power than stock. That's why people do EFI to carb conversions on these engines.
I'm with you Bill. 50 HP sounds a little high for a 300 with a stock head, even with a 4V carb and intake and better exhaust. But also, 30 ft/lbs sounds even a little low for what he's done. I bet Abandoned has gained more torque and less HP than what he's estimating. And that carbed engine is a pretty different animal than the EFI. Even though the engine underneath is basically the same. Because the carbed is not constrained by injector flow rates and computer management and everything else. You can basically bolt it on, tune it up, and go with a carbed motor and see all the benefits. With EFI you have to do a lot more. Even more so with the 300 where injectors, sensors, computer, are not capable by design of supporting much more power than stock. That's why people do EFI to carb conversions on these engines.
I think when you're dealing with such relatively low numbers (in my case, not much over 100 horse at the rear wheels) small improvments can feel big (exhaust for instance). You're not going to feel ten horse to a one thousand horsepower V-10. You'll feel ten horse to a one hundred horse pick'em-up truck, though.
Am I making any sense?
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 1
From: Mass.
seeing as there are so many different types of dynos (Super Flow (901 or a 902)
-Stutska, DTS, and mustang dynos ar the most commonly known) that will all show different readouts, so you trying to tell me they are accurate? i could write paragraphs and paragraphs about this, but i dont think you would really understand it.
Dynos are great for getting a rough tune i suppose to get you close to what your looking for, but the real dyno, is REAL WORLD DRIVING in ACTUAL driving conditions, not strapping down to some rollers in a climate controlled room with a fan blowing through your radiator.
i know for a fact someone who lost about 15hp and 25 ft lbs on the lovely dyno, yet picked up .3 and 4 or 5 mph in the 1/4 mile . you want to explain that? The guy that ran the dyno shop himself couldn't explain it, so i dont expect you to either. I dont feel like arguing over a proven point, i can lead you to some websites with people that will laugh at you. street tuning, and race track data are all you need for tuning, dynos are pointless, and if you had setup a few 1/4 mile cars you would know that. I dont race dynos, no one i know does either.
Actually, heres a little statement from the owner of camshaft innovations (Jay allen) regarding chassis dynos, who designs custom camshafts.
I took a stone stock short block with GT-40 heads. Like an idiot I kept it EFI. I wanted to see just how fast I could go with a stock short block and unported GT-40's. This is well documented on other sites.
The baseline on the car was 12.30's. Typical STD junk.
But here is how I tuned it. I have what is called a RacePak. It is what we use in race cars to measure clutch slippage primarily. Clutch slippage is VERY useful in race cars and I also had a clutch (eventually) that I used in this POS too.
But I went out on the back roads here in SE Michigan. I would make several hits, go home and down load them. I was looking for the time spent in each gear and usable RPM. I could care LESS how much power I made. If I made a change that made the car "quicker" then that was a positive step. I made MANY dozens of changes that folks say "make power", fellas you might as well buy one of those Tornado do-dads! LOL
In the midst of all of thus, a "new breed" ~dyno~ kid want to be me that my car was making 330 RWHP as I just ran it at Milan Dragway. I went 11.50's if I remember correctly. I am old and this was 3 years ago. I told him I would be LUCKY if it made 300 RWHP.
FYI. The car weighed 3190 - 3210 depending upon the fuel.
So I attended this "dyno day"! Woo-Hoo! LOL I pulled the car up and we made 2 hits. It made 305 RWHP. Then here it come.......
-You are too rich. The A/F is way off.
-Your timing is locked out.
-The plugs are too hot.
All I could do was laugh.
So I sat down and told them to have at it. Tune the old girl up!
They removed my old school Extender. They sat the base timing at 10* and made up so hokey curve. Played with A/F so it read "12.5:1, gotta have 12.5:1".
It made right at 320 RWHP.
They were so excited.
That night I took the "dyno operator" out with me for some late night blasts. I made 2 hits and data logged them just the way he had it. He was impressed how smooth the junk pulled to 6500 RPM. I laughed. I told him it was so lean and that the timing curve was *****ed up. All I got was "the dyno said".......
I put it right back where I had it.
I pulled the spout, set total at 36*.
I set the base fuel pressure at 47#, vacuum line off.
I unplugged the chip and reinstalled my Extender.
I told him to hang on.
That POS would rev to 7500 RPM it would make your head spin. He was scared to death.
Now the good part.......
From 3500 RPM in second gear to 7200 RPM in 4th gear, the car was a FULL 2 seconds FASTER with dyno verified less power.
Seeing is believing.
Do Not race a chassis dyno.
The pile ended up going 11.19 at 119.
Like i said, dynos are useless.
-Stutska, DTS, and mustang dynos ar the most commonly known) that will all show different readouts, so you trying to tell me they are accurate? i could write paragraphs and paragraphs about this, but i dont think you would really understand it.
Dynos are great for getting a rough tune i suppose to get you close to what your looking for, but the real dyno, is REAL WORLD DRIVING in ACTUAL driving conditions, not strapping down to some rollers in a climate controlled room with a fan blowing through your radiator.
i know for a fact someone who lost about 15hp and 25 ft lbs on the lovely dyno, yet picked up .3 and 4 or 5 mph in the 1/4 mile . you want to explain that? The guy that ran the dyno shop himself couldn't explain it, so i dont expect you to either. I dont feel like arguing over a proven point, i can lead you to some websites with people that will laugh at you. street tuning, and race track data are all you need for tuning, dynos are pointless, and if you had setup a few 1/4 mile cars you would know that. I dont race dynos, no one i know does either.
Actually, heres a little statement from the owner of camshaft innovations (Jay allen) regarding chassis dynos, who designs custom camshafts.
I took a stone stock short block with GT-40 heads. Like an idiot I kept it EFI. I wanted to see just how fast I could go with a stock short block and unported GT-40's. This is well documented on other sites.
The baseline on the car was 12.30's. Typical STD junk.
But here is how I tuned it. I have what is called a RacePak. It is what we use in race cars to measure clutch slippage primarily. Clutch slippage is VERY useful in race cars and I also had a clutch (eventually) that I used in this POS too.
But I went out on the back roads here in SE Michigan. I would make several hits, go home and down load them. I was looking for the time spent in each gear and usable RPM. I could care LESS how much power I made. If I made a change that made the car "quicker" then that was a positive step. I made MANY dozens of changes that folks say "make power", fellas you might as well buy one of those Tornado do-dads! LOL
In the midst of all of thus, a "new breed" ~dyno~ kid want to be me that my car was making 330 RWHP as I just ran it at Milan Dragway. I went 11.50's if I remember correctly. I am old and this was 3 years ago. I told him I would be LUCKY if it made 300 RWHP.
FYI. The car weighed 3190 - 3210 depending upon the fuel.
So I attended this "dyno day"! Woo-Hoo! LOL I pulled the car up and we made 2 hits. It made 305 RWHP. Then here it come.......
-You are too rich. The A/F is way off.
-Your timing is locked out.
-The plugs are too hot.
All I could do was laugh.
So I sat down and told them to have at it. Tune the old girl up!
They removed my old school Extender. They sat the base timing at 10* and made up so hokey curve. Played with A/F so it read "12.5:1, gotta have 12.5:1".
It made right at 320 RWHP.
They were so excited.
That night I took the "dyno operator" out with me for some late night blasts. I made 2 hits and data logged them just the way he had it. He was impressed how smooth the junk pulled to 6500 RPM. I laughed. I told him it was so lean and that the timing curve was *****ed up. All I got was "the dyno said".......
I put it right back where I had it.
I pulled the spout, set total at 36*.
I set the base fuel pressure at 47#, vacuum line off.
I unplugged the chip and reinstalled my Extender.
I told him to hang on.
That POS would rev to 7500 RPM it would make your head spin. He was scared to death.
Now the good part.......
From 3500 RPM in second gear to 7200 RPM in 4th gear, the car was a FULL 2 seconds FASTER with dyno verified less power.
Seeing is believing.
Do Not race a chassis dyno.
The pile ended up going 11.19 at 119.
Like i said, dynos are useless.
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 1
From: Mass.
If all that is too much for you to swallow 91bronc300, feel free to pm me and i can try to explain it to you. If that isnt enough to show how dynos are useless then i dont know what is
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,987
Likes: 104
From: Boise, Idaho
Torque is what makes a truck accelerate and pull so it's easy to over estimate actual horsepower. I agree with you.
I think when you're dealing with such relatively low numbers (in my case, not much over 100 horse at the rear wheels) small improvments can feel big (exhaust for instance). You're not going to feel ten horse to a one thousand horsepower V-10. You'll feel ten horse to a one hundred horse pick'em-up truck, though.
Am I making any sense?
I think when you're dealing with such relatively low numbers (in my case, not much over 100 horse at the rear wheels) small improvments can feel big (exhaust for instance). You're not going to feel ten horse to a one thousand horsepower V-10. You'll feel ten horse to a one hundred horse pick'em-up truck, though.
Am I making any sense?
Stock
(214tq * 3000) / 5252 = 122hp carb
(223tq * 3400) / 5252 = 145hp EFI
Modded with major increases in in/out breathing and nearly double the fuel delivery (~190cfm to 390cfm).
(260tq * 3500) / 5252 = 173hp
(250tq * 3500) / 5252 = 166hp
(240tq * 4000) / 5252 = 182hp
(240tq * 3500) / 5252 = 160hp
Again, this is purely subjective depending on when the torque drops off, etc.
However, it's one thing to take an already powerful engine and boost it further (that gets difficult). It's another to take a big engine that's completely restricted, remove the restrictions, and then boost it up. You're overcoming it's shortcomings, and then adding more.Not saying I HAVE 175hp, just saying how I calculate that it could have that much, and why it'd make sense.
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 1
From: Mass.
Nothing against putting your vehicle on a dyno just to see what its making for curiousity, the dyno tuning part however....isnt really worth the money. youd be better off tuning on the street or track, you dont need to drive 100 mph to do tuning, so its fine for the street, you just need to run through the entire rpm range and then tune accordingly. Thats how i tune all my stuff. Just my .02/
Postmaster
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,558
Likes: 2
seeing as there are so many different types of dynos (Super Flow (901 or a 902)
-Stutska, DTS, and mustang dynos ar the most commonly known) that will all show different readouts, so you trying to tell me they are accurate? i could write paragraphs and paragraphs about this, but i dont think you would really understand it.
Dynos are great for getting a rough tune i suppose to get you close to what your looking for, but the real dyno, is REAL WORLD DRIVING in ACTUAL driving conditions, not strapping down to some rollers in a climate controlled room with a fan blowing through your radiator.
i know for a fact someone who lost about 15hp and 25 ft lbs on the lovely dyno, yet picked up .3 and 4 or 5 mph in the 1/4 mile . you want to explain that? The guy that ran the dyno shop himself couldn't explain it, so i dont expect you to either. I dont feel like arguing over a proven point, i can lead you to some websites with people that will laugh at you. street tuning, and race track data are all you need for tuning, dynos are pointless, and if you had setup a few 1/4 mile cars you would know that. I dont race dynos, no one i know does either.
Actually, heres a little statement from the owner of camshaft innovations (Jay allen) regarding chassis dynos, who designs custom camshafts.
I took a stone stock short block with GT-40 heads. Like an idiot I kept it EFI. I wanted to see just how fast I could go with a stock short block and unported GT-40's. This is well documented on other sites.
The baseline on the car was 12.30's. Typical STD junk.
But here is how I tuned it. I have what is called a RacePak. It is what we use in race cars to measure clutch slippage primarily. Clutch slippage is VERY useful in race cars and I also had a clutch (eventually) that I used in this POS too.
But I went out on the back roads here in SE Michigan. I would make several hits, go home and down load them. I was looking for the time spent in each gear and usable RPM. I could care LESS how much power I made. If I made a change that made the car "quicker" then that was a positive step. I made MANY dozens of changes that folks say "make power", fellas you might as well buy one of those Tornado do-dads! LOL
In the midst of all of thus, a "new breed" ~dyno~ kid want to be me that my car was making 330 RWHP as I just ran it at Milan Dragway. I went 11.50's if I remember correctly. I am old and this was 3 years ago. I told him I would be LUCKY if it made 300 RWHP.
FYI. The car weighed 3190 - 3210 depending upon the fuel.
So I attended this "dyno day"! Woo-Hoo! LOL I pulled the car up and we made 2 hits. It made 305 RWHP. Then here it come.......
-You are too rich. The A/F is way off.
-Your timing is locked out.
-The plugs are too hot.
All I could do was laugh.
So I sat down and told them to have at it. Tune the old girl up!
They removed my old school Extender. They sat the base timing at 10* and made up so hokey curve. Played with A/F so it read "12.5:1, gotta have 12.5:1".
It made right at 320 RWHP.
They were so excited.
That night I took the "dyno operator" out with me for some late night blasts. I made 2 hits and data logged them just the way he had it. He was impressed how smooth the junk pulled to 6500 RPM. I laughed. I told him it was so lean and that the timing curve was *****ed up. All I got was "the dyno said".......
I put it right back where I had it.
I pulled the spout, set total at 36*.
I set the base fuel pressure at 47#, vacuum line off.
I unplugged the chip and reinstalled my Extender.
I told him to hang on.
That POS would rev to 7500 RPM it would make your head spin. He was scared to death.
Now the good part.......
From 3500 RPM in second gear to 7200 RPM in 4th gear, the car was a FULL 2 seconds FASTER with dyno verified less power.
Seeing is believing.
Do Not race a chassis dyno.
The pile ended up going 11.19 at 119.
Like i said, dynos are useless.
-Stutska, DTS, and mustang dynos ar the most commonly known) that will all show different readouts, so you trying to tell me they are accurate? i could write paragraphs and paragraphs about this, but i dont think you would really understand it.
Dynos are great for getting a rough tune i suppose to get you close to what your looking for, but the real dyno, is REAL WORLD DRIVING in ACTUAL driving conditions, not strapping down to some rollers in a climate controlled room with a fan blowing through your radiator.
i know for a fact someone who lost about 15hp and 25 ft lbs on the lovely dyno, yet picked up .3 and 4 or 5 mph in the 1/4 mile . you want to explain that? The guy that ran the dyno shop himself couldn't explain it, so i dont expect you to either. I dont feel like arguing over a proven point, i can lead you to some websites with people that will laugh at you. street tuning, and race track data are all you need for tuning, dynos are pointless, and if you had setup a few 1/4 mile cars you would know that. I dont race dynos, no one i know does either.
Actually, heres a little statement from the owner of camshaft innovations (Jay allen) regarding chassis dynos, who designs custom camshafts.
I took a stone stock short block with GT-40 heads. Like an idiot I kept it EFI. I wanted to see just how fast I could go with a stock short block and unported GT-40's. This is well documented on other sites.
The baseline on the car was 12.30's. Typical STD junk.
But here is how I tuned it. I have what is called a RacePak. It is what we use in race cars to measure clutch slippage primarily. Clutch slippage is VERY useful in race cars and I also had a clutch (eventually) that I used in this POS too.
But I went out on the back roads here in SE Michigan. I would make several hits, go home and down load them. I was looking for the time spent in each gear and usable RPM. I could care LESS how much power I made. If I made a change that made the car "quicker" then that was a positive step. I made MANY dozens of changes that folks say "make power", fellas you might as well buy one of those Tornado do-dads! LOL
In the midst of all of thus, a "new breed" ~dyno~ kid want to be me that my car was making 330 RWHP as I just ran it at Milan Dragway. I went 11.50's if I remember correctly. I am old and this was 3 years ago. I told him I would be LUCKY if it made 300 RWHP.
FYI. The car weighed 3190 - 3210 depending upon the fuel.
So I attended this "dyno day"! Woo-Hoo! LOL I pulled the car up and we made 2 hits. It made 305 RWHP. Then here it come.......
-You are too rich. The A/F is way off.
-Your timing is locked out.
-The plugs are too hot.
All I could do was laugh.
So I sat down and told them to have at it. Tune the old girl up!
They removed my old school Extender. They sat the base timing at 10* and made up so hokey curve. Played with A/F so it read "12.5:1, gotta have 12.5:1".
It made right at 320 RWHP.
They were so excited.
That night I took the "dyno operator" out with me for some late night blasts. I made 2 hits and data logged them just the way he had it. He was impressed how smooth the junk pulled to 6500 RPM. I laughed. I told him it was so lean and that the timing curve was *****ed up. All I got was "the dyno said".......
I put it right back where I had it.
I pulled the spout, set total at 36*.
I set the base fuel pressure at 47#, vacuum line off.
I unplugged the chip and reinstalled my Extender.
I told him to hang on.
That POS would rev to 7500 RPM it would make your head spin. He was scared to death.
Now the good part.......
From 3500 RPM in second gear to 7200 RPM in 4th gear, the car was a FULL 2 seconds FASTER with dyno verified less power.
Seeing is believing.
Do Not race a chassis dyno.
The pile ended up going 11.19 at 119.
Like i said, dynos are useless.
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 708
Likes: 1
I know that if you look at a dyno graph the HP and TQ always intersect at 5252 RPM because that's dictated by the conversion formula.
But doesn't that mean (correct me if I'm wrong, I may be, I'm only hypothesizing) that any increase in torque below 5252 has to have a corresponding SMALLER increase in HP and any increase in torque above 5252 has to have a corresponding LARGER increase in HP?
Say for example you add 10 ft/lbs at 2000 RPM that's an increase of 3.8 HP. If you add 10 ft/lbs at 3500 RPM that's 6.6 HP. Add 10 ft/lbs at 5252 RPM and you add 10 HP. Add 10 ft/lbs at 6000 RPM and you add 11.4 HP and if you add 10 ft/lbs at 9000 RPM you add 17.1 HP.
So under 5252 RPM isn't it impossible to add more HP than you do TQ? (at any given point anyway, not averaging the whole curve). And anywhere over 5252 RPM it's impossible to add more TQ than you do HP? Just a hypothesis.
So adding 50 tq and 30 hp is more likely for a low revver like a 300
But doesn't that mean (correct me if I'm wrong, I may be, I'm only hypothesizing) that any increase in torque below 5252 has to have a corresponding SMALLER increase in HP and any increase in torque above 5252 has to have a corresponding LARGER increase in HP?
Say for example you add 10 ft/lbs at 2000 RPM that's an increase of 3.8 HP. If you add 10 ft/lbs at 3500 RPM that's 6.6 HP. Add 10 ft/lbs at 5252 RPM and you add 10 HP. Add 10 ft/lbs at 6000 RPM and you add 11.4 HP and if you add 10 ft/lbs at 9000 RPM you add 17.1 HP.
So under 5252 RPM isn't it impossible to add more HP than you do TQ? (at any given point anyway, not averaging the whole curve). And anywhere over 5252 RPM it's impossible to add more TQ than you do HP? Just a hypothesis.
So adding 50 tq and 30 hp is more likely for a low revver like a 300
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 1
From: Mass.
Then why dont you head over on to sbftech.com, and talk to the master himself, Jay allen? because he will laugh at you, and so will everyone else over there, because they are experienced engine builders.
Maybe i should just stay out of the engine sections of this site, or just leave this site altogether, since all the misinformation is making me sick sometimes.
Maybe i should just stay out of the engine sections of this site, or just leave this site altogether, since all the misinformation is making me sick sometimes.