Parts are gathered work starts now :D

Old Sep 15, 2003 | 05:29 PM
  #31  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Cool

This is like trying to have a mature conversation with a 2 year old.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 05:48 PM
  #32  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Thumbs down

Originally posted by sirket
David,

By the end of the year he expects to have a Naturally Aspirated 400 HP 5.4L engine. He decided to start with a clean block, strong crank, strong connecting rods, strong pistons and good heads. He has also upgraded is MAF, throttle body, and ported and polished _everything_ on his engine.

1ST : as was stated before, stock block, stock rods, stock crank, stock pistons and factory heads/cams. Running stock 80mm MAF, stock but ported TB. Just the TB and TB ELBOW have been polished.

Originally posted by sirket
David,

The advantadge to this approach is that Neal can bolt on a huge supercharger or turbo and not think twice about it. He knows his engine will be able to handle whatever he throws at it.

No plans for SC or turbo on this original 5.4 engine. It would surely blow with either.

Originally posted by sirket
David,

As for the fuel system, the bigger problem seems to be the injectors rather than the fuel line (at least initially). The stock injectors are good to something like 350 HP. After that you need to move up to something larger. Many of the people here are running 42lb injectors for example. It goes without saying that any of the changes to the fuel system require a bigger fuel pump as well.

The factory fuel injectors are 19# and have a bright orange body. They are capable of 304H.P at the flywheel at 80% duty cycle.
 

Last edited by Neal; Sep 15, 2003 at 05:51 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 05:58 PM
  #33  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Originally posted by BROTHERDAVE

Neal will have over $2000 in heads alone if he is doing the whole engine thing he will have invested at least $5000, he might make 400 hp but the torque of the s/c will not be there, also remeber that with the heads and cams that a looser convertor and gears are probably needed. i have done both n/a with cars, s/c with my truck, with the s/c i bolted on 100 in a day, instant smile
I have about $3100(U.S) invested in my heads/cams. If I were to do a complete "BUILT" 5.4 engine it would be more like $15,000 - $20,000(CAN) to build it properly to last. That's including the SC of coarse. With hitting the 400H.P (flywheel) # , 450FT/LBS of TQ (flywheel) will not be a problem, which is basically the same amount of TQ the current LIGHTNING produces. I already have a 2500 stall converter and 4.10 gears.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 06:05 PM
  #34  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Thumbs down

Originally posted by sirket

Neal is not going to be stopping at 400HP. That is simply phase 1. Mike Troyer would like to see Neal make 700HP and considers it easily done. You aren't doing that with stock parts. As to it costing $5k, that would be a significant underestimate in my opinion. From what I have read, a racing crank alone will cost you almost $3k.

-Don
Actually on this particular engine that's currently in my truck, it most likely WILL stop at 400-425H.P MAX. What MIKE would like to see and what I would like are two different things. I am going to build another 5.4 with a SC but my goal for that will be 600H.P at the flywheel. I agree on the $5000 point. If you know what your doing and are serious about building a engine that will make a ton of power and have reliability then your looking at about $15,000 - $20,000(CAN) easily.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 06:22 PM
  #35  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Cool

Originally posted by BROTHERDAVE
Neals estimates are from 1/4 mile runs that he did over 2 years ago and has since done more parts and work.
based on what i have seen in the form of dynos and 1/4 mile times on 2v 4.6 mustang,340 h.p. is a tall order, but i have been wrong before. cosidering that lightings go mid 13's with 380, 3.73 and mph at 99 to 101 (mph is the true measure of power, e.t can be your trans, gear and weight.) picking up 80 hp without cams, head work or intake is a tall task.
Actually my estimates for my 1/4 mile runs 2 years ago were a 14.12E.T not a 13 second E.T. My truck almost (95%) all the time would run a 60FT time of 2.0?. The fastest time I had was a 14.52E.T with that same 2.0? 60FT time. Then I ran another 14.52E.T with a horrible tire spinning 2.41 60FT time and went 1.5 MPH faster trap speed. Do the math. The estimates "NOW" are high 13's because of the mods I have done since those runs 2 years ago.

Yes 340H.P (flywheel) IS a tall order on a 2v 4.6L MUSTANG engine, but not for a 5.4. You have more cubic inches, and a longer stroke for more low-end TQ. I've seen guys drop into their MUSTANGS a stock 5.4 TRITON "P.I" engine and go high 13's. Same H.P stock as the 4.6 (260H.P) but more TQ.

Yes LIGHTNING's go mid to high 13's with 380H.P (flywheel), BUT they also weight about 5000lbs with the driver. My truck weights 4450lbs with me in it and I weight 200LBS. I am also running 4.10 gears which really helps with my 1/8 mile times compared to say a 3.73. MPH is a good way to judge the power you are making but the last time I was at the track I was getting massive fuel starvation because of the stock fuel pump and no way of regulating fuel pressure. I still almost hit 95MPH trap speed with these problems and NO SC.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 06:26 PM
  #36  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Cool

I rest my case.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 09:47 PM
  #37  
BROTHERDAVE's Avatar
Senior Member
25 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 4
From: Friendswood Texas
This is like trying to have a mature conversation with a 2 year old.
you got that right, calling people a dumba$$ and saying dont talk about my truck ..no reason for calling anyone a dumba$$ when they are just talking trucks and the old what if game. i cant speak for sirket but i would imagine that most of his thought he got from you and Mike T so if you dont want anyone talking about your truck then quit talking about it, tell mike to not refer to your truck anymore either, i am with you i am sick of hearing about your truck tool, people, like sirket, give you and your truck way to much credit and since you will not take it to the track, there ideal seem to grow.

last time i checked $3100 was over $2000 and considering that that includes cams and possibly otherthing my "over $2000 for heads" is in the ball park.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 09:55 PM
  #38  
BROTHERDAVE's Avatar
Senior Member
25 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 4
From: Friendswood Texas
quote from mike:
However, in the meantime............he'll still be picking up very nice power gains from these heads in N/A trim, so if you happen to see & hear a '99 5.4 F-150 with an idle strangely reminiscent of a '68 Hemi only more so......... steer clear - it's Neal, and he won't be taking any prisoners.
mike a nice guy and probably got a little carried away, between this and what you say it is no wonder people assume.

like i said no reason to call him or me a dumba$$.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 10:53 PM
  #39  
Neal's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
Cool

HI!... Well if you consider $1100(U.S) away from your original estimate in the ball park, I'd hate to do your taxes.

Hey, what gets me mad is people who talk about me and my truck and don't get the facts straight. 90% of the time when I see myself or my truck mentioned on this site or others the things people are saying are not even close to the facts. That's what really pisses me off. The DUMBA$$ comment was right on as far as I'm concerned, as proven in my above thread, hardly anything that was said was accurate or even true. BROTHERDAVE : You are well known on this board as being a trouble maker, your name comes up a lot in the chat room and other sites I visit. I frankly have never liked you from what I have seen you post. Your strengthening that feeling even more now. This will be my last post in this thread on this subject because I am the mature one here. If it makes you feel better to respond to this or continue it in anyway........ well that just proves how childish YOU really are.

See-ya and hope not to chat with you again, I hope.
 
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2003 | 11:26 PM
  #40  
sirket's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 179
Likes: 2
From: New York, NY
What I have done to my truck and what I am planning to do to my truck is my buisness, so please reframe from making comments or using me or my truck in discussions that they should not be in and when the info being used, is not close to being accurate.
Neal,

First, let me apologize for dragging you into this. It was meant to be a simple off-handed comparison and not a full-on analysis of what you are doing.

I never meant to imply you were going to be making these modifications with your stock engine. Anyone who has seen your truck page can see the pictures of your engine buildup.
What MIKE would like to see and what I would like are two different things.
I thought that I had made that clear but obviously I implied something that I did not mean to. The point was to make a simple comparison and was not meant to be gospel.
I am going to build another 5.4 with a SC but my goal for that will be 600H.P at the flywheel.
Again I apologize for the confusion. As I said I have seen your buildup pictures and never thought to clarify that there was a second engine involved.
as was stated before, stock block, stock rods, stock crank, stock pistons and factory heads/cams. Running stock 80mm MAF, stock but ported TB. Just the TB and TB ELBOW have been polished.
I actually said that you were starting with a "clean block" and I thought that made it sufficiently clear that you were going with a "built" engine. Obviously I was mistaken. (I have no idea where I got the MAF change from. I had a discussion with someone about it and for some reason attributed it to you. That was not my intention).

As I said, I was not trying to drag you into this thread other than as an off-handed comparison and I should have kept my mouth shut when I realized where the thread was headed.

Sincerely,
-Don
 
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2003 | 01:03 AM
  #41  
sirket's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 179
Likes: 2
From: New York, NY
The factory fuel injectors are 19# and have a bright orange body. They are capable of 304H.P at the flywheel at 80% duty cycle.
In my original post I wrote 350 HP which was supposed to read 305 HP. I have corrected the original post.

-Don
 
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2003 | 01:39 PM
  #42  
BROTHERDAVE's Avatar
Senior Member
25 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 4
From: Friendswood Texas
Neal, this absolutely rediculous that this thread went in the crapper, I said nothing to degrade you or your truck, i did not ask for your input and the whole tread was about N/A vs. S/C. call me a troulbemaker or whatever but when you pipe in and start calling people dumba$$, i dont go for that. sirket is a nice guy and i like the way he is apoligising to you for getting some fact in accurate yet you have no apology for calling him a dumba$$. you came looking for this, i have left your bragging post alone for a while know.


HI!... Well if you consider $1100(U.S) away from your original estimate in the ball park, I'd hate to do your taxes
so are the cams free? i said heads, not heads and cams, (dumba$$ would be appropriate here but i am more mature than that)

and the way i phrased it was over $2000 in heads so i ask again. is "over $2000" a correct statement.

"BROTHERDAVE : You are well known on this board as being a troublemaker, your name comes up a lot in the chat room and other sites I visit. I frankly have never liked you from what I have seen you post. Your strengthening that feeling even more now. This will be my last post in this thread on this subject because I am the mature one here. If it makes you feel better to respond to this or continue it in anyway........ well that just proves how childish YOU really are."

i could give a rats A$$ what somebody (espesially you) say about me on in chat room and i bet the people who talk about me, talk about you when your not around, saw a post on YOU on another board and i told the people involved that they should post it were you could see it. takes a real mature person to get on a chat board, or in a crowd, to join the crowd talking about someone, they do it everyday, at the local junior high school.

i love your childish comments, this from the guy who calls people dumba$$, gets upset if anyone talks about his truck and now tells me people call me names and he dosent like me.

This will be my last post in this thread on this subject because I am the mature one here. If it makes you feel better to respond to this or continue it in anyway........ well that just proves how childish YOU really are."
what up with that, when is the last time anybody had that conversation with another guy, "i'm the mature one" "you are childish".
 

Last edited by BROTHERDAVE; Sep 16, 2003 at 03:54 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2003 | 10:06 PM
  #43  
BROTHERDAVE's Avatar
Senior Member
25 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 4
From: Friendswood Texas
P.s : I just read that "OTHER" thread, I luv it when people prove I'm right about them and their too (DUMBA$$?) comes to mind to notice it. Well I guess in a world without those kinds of people we would have a boring place to live. Well I'm also glad that thread is now dead too. Mabey some people will think twice before posting about things they know NOTHING about.
read you post genius, if it dead, why are you still talking about it?

cant let it go can you chief
 
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2003 | 11:06 PM
  #44  
JMC's Avatar
JMC
Technical Article Contributor
25 Year Member
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 11
From: Windsor,Ontario,Canada
zturboo,

Will you be planning any upgrades to the rear end. The 8.8 is pretty weak and combined with the power of your turbo and the 35s I predict that it will not last long. I destroyed 3 before I decided to upgrade it to a 9.75. Is your tranny an auto or stick? Last one if you please; Do you plan to offroad with it?

Regards

Jean Marc Chartier
 
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2003 | 04:13 PM
  #45  
zturboo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
From: Washington
zturboo,

Will you be planning any upgrades to the rear end. The 8.8 is pretty weak and combined with the power of your turbo and the 35s I predict that it will not last long. I destroyed 3 before I decided to upgrade it to a 9.75. Is your tranny an auto or stick? Last one if you please; Do you plan to offroad with it?

Regards
I thought about keeping the 8.8 cause with some work they can be made very strong but I have decided to do a 9" with back brace and put on disc brakes in the rear. I like the 9.75 but a 9" can be made cheaper and be dang strong. (plus having 2 extra center sections it should be very cheap)

Turbo system is finished up and looks pretty cool just need to get my camera back from olympus and i can snap some photos

Trany is manual, Yes I plan to do a bit of offroading the truck is just too much fun to drive to not.

Looks like there is some heated discussions on this post of mine lol.

Have a great weekend all
Steven
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:44 AM.