HP and Torque for 1992 351

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 04:39 PM
  #16  
BMW325's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Cool

Uh Oh looks like I better step in here to defend my folks

Anytime any of you guys with 97+ 4.2s feel like racing me then just bring it on. Unless you've got a little nasal spray or forced induction then you're dead. I can do the same with a STOCK 4.6 2WD.

I'm not bragging but I've raced both a 98 4.2 and a 99 4.6 2WD Auto and the 4.2 was an absolute joke. I beat him down bad. As for the 4.6 I won by 1/2 a truck length in a 1/4 mile but we have a rematch planned for a nice little "road race" sometime soon. But I will certainly blow his doors off there to, when he gets bit by my Pirelli Scorpions

My trucks not all that and it's certainly not as nice as a 97+ but it will certainly run with all of the N/A V6s and 75% of the 4.6s. And I won't even bother to mention how well the Windsors respond to mods compared to the Modulars

------------------
1993 Ford F-150
Kustom Kreations Package
2WD, 5.0 (302), AOD, 3.55

K&N Drop In, Superchip, Dual 2.25" Exhaust & Pirelli Scorpion Zeros!

Eclipse CD Player, Eclipse 8-CD Changer, Eclipse Amp, Clarion front speakers, 8" Boston Acoustics Subwoofer

Future Mods: New Shocks and TransGO Shift Kit


 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 05:46 PM
  #17  
Bill Bateman's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Post

BMW325, you must have gotten ahold of a 4.2 with 4:10s. :-)

What's the horsepower/torque on that 5.0? 150/180? My granny's walker is faster. :-)
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 06:06 PM
  #18  
BMW325's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Exclamation

Bill: Well he said it was 3.08 rear gears.

And as for my 93 F-150 it's:

195HP @ 4,000 RPM
270TRQ @ 3,000 RPM

K&N: >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> 4HP
Dual Exhaust: >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>> 8HP
Superchip: >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; 24HP
Thicker Plug Wires & Platnium plugs: 1HP


Those are just estimates on HP gains not even counting the torque gains. So if those are close then I'm around 232HP at the flywheel. And my truck has NO traction problems in the dry. I am going to take it to the local track this spring and find out just what it will do in the 1/4 it's no speed demon but it's pretty quick.
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 06:11 PM
  #19  
Pastmaster's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan KS
Post

Bill, no I haven't ever ridden or driven a 4.2L, I just know by numbers. I don't know anyone where I live that have one, just on here.

Did you know that Ford put a 3.8L in the F-150? Did so in 1981-1982. It really SUCKED! they also had a 4.2L (255 cid) V-8 that also ran a total of 2 years. Before you blast the 302, remember that it paved the way for the 4.6L.

1993 Factory ratings for the 302 is

horsepower-195
Torque-270

I understand your meaning for 3.08 gearing. I couldn't/wouldn't have anything less than 3.55's out here because you can't tow or go over the hills out here with that high. One thing I have yet to see, is a 4.6L in a F-150 that gets 22mpg.

Fast46-Jeez, that 240hp that the 4.6L makes, acounts for something. It has to be ahead of the 4.8L and the 4.7L dodge, and that stupid toyota 4.7L, it shouldn't/doesnt even stand in the same league as the 5.0L.

 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 06:24 PM
  #20  
Bill Bateman's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Post

Pastmaster, the 302 is a great engine. Probably the greatest was the 289. I'm just joshing you fellows about your trucks. As for the 3:08s, I use my truck for the highway. I do pull a 4x8 trailer every now and then. It got 21 mpg pulling that trainer empty. But, again, it's a road truck. If I needed to do heavy towing I'd put 4:10s in it.

Dad used to have a 65 F100 and it had the 352 with 228 hp. That was a good engine. They used to call it the 'police interceptor' when they put it in Barney Fife's patrol car. You know Mayberry Barney?
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:01 PM
  #21  
Pastmaster's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan KS
Post

FE's were great Torque Monsters. My dad worked for Ford in Kc from 1966 to about 74. He knows a hell of a lot about them old FE's. I think the Fairlane had a 390 didn't it?
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:18 PM
  #22  
fast46triton's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
From: Fast46TritonVille
Post

BMW,

You have the superchip and all that and you only beat him by a half? Shows ya the 4.6l is a strong motor.
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:19 PM
  #23  
Pastmaster's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan KS
Post

FE's were great Torque Monsters. My dad worked for Ford in Kc from 1966 to about 74. He knows a hell of a lot about them old FE's. I think the Fairlane had a 390 didn't it?
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:37 PM
  #24  
Bill Bateman's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Cool

Torque monster? Yep. You wouldn't believe the crap I saw that old truck do. It TWISTED the drive shaft one time. Required a new one. I've personally driven it with enough load in the bed to pull the front wheels off the ground if you wanted to by bumping the accelerator. I even saw dad load a International tractor in the back and drive down the road with it. I think it was a Farmall A. I think it was more tractor than truck.
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:41 PM
  #25  
BMW325's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Post

fast46: Yea I had all the mods except the Exhaust when I raced the 4.6 I still had my factory exahsut. Also did I mention this guy is a weekend drag racer? So this guy has more racing experince than I ever thought of as well. The 4.6 is a stout little engine, just don't think the 5.0 can't hand the 4.6s it's a$$
 
Reply
Old Jan 11, 2000 | 07:56 PM
  #26  
Pastmaster's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan KS
Post

Wow, thats a load! Does anything think that a new truck could handle a load like that? I have a 16' Car hauler that I pull w/ a 76 Scout on it. My 302 isn't built to tow a load as much weight as that. We used my buddy's 92 Flareside, and it pulled better over the hills stock than my truck did. I guess it's true what they say, "There Is No Replacement For Displacement!"
 
Reply




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:28 PM.