1991 Mustang GT Vs. 1991 Z28 or IROC-Z

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by 1BAD305


or is it the fact that ur 5.0 is slower then my friends and my iroc and ur a little jealous perhaps?

WTF?
I hate when people say ''my car is faster than yours''
just shut the hell up

[1BAD305]

just to back up what i have, my best mph so far is a 100.2 BTW:


with:
Stock MAF
Stock Cam
Stock Heads
Ported Plenum
Centerforce Dual Friction
Poly Tranny Mount
Poly Torque Arm Mount
Stock 3.08 Gears
Modified Air Box
K&N Filters
Dynomax Headers
Dynomax Cat Back Exhaust
Hollowed Cat Delete
Throttle Body Coolant Bypass
IAT Sensor Relocated
Emissions Delete
AC Delete
Stock Timing
Rear Seats, Spare & Jack Removed For Racing

[1BAD305]

Originally posted by PWMAN


WTF?
I hate when people say ''my car is faster than yours''
just shut the hell up

well apparently hes implyn im a liar which im not, so wat other explaination is there for him to call BS on what i said?

[PWMAN]

I didn't say you were full of BS, I just hate when people say that kinda stuff.
I bet that clutch really shave your time down eh? They help a lot.

[GTStang]

Originally posted by 1BAD305



you callin BS on me buddy? which part didnt u understand so i can enlighten u on it. or is it the fact that ur 5.0 is slower then my friends and my iroc and ur a little jealous perhaps?

Your gonna enlighten me? Thats funny... oh yes your car is so much faster than mine
By the way you understand very lil about engines and stroker motors.

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by GTStang


By the way you understand very lil about engines and stroker motors.

What did he say that was wrong?

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by HiFlow5 0

The 305 is a junk motor. With it's long stroke and small bore, it takes the motor a while to wind up and make power, making the 302's shorter stroke and bigger bore far better at making power down low where it's needed.

Wow I can't believe somebody would make that statement. Wind up? WTF. A longer stroke will have more low end power.
I used to have a 383 stroker in my work truck that pushed approx. 425 HP and 450 ft/lbs. It did the 1/4 in 12.6 @114, it has 4.10 gears too. Needles to say the engine didn't need to ''wind up'' before it shot you like a bullet the instant you depress the pedal.

[DVS LT1]

Originally posted by 1BAD305
a 383 stroker motor wich uses a 350s 4" bore and a 400s stroke

You could also bore it over .030 and use a 3.75" stroke - this is the most common setup for stroker kits I've seen.

Anyone know why one way would be better/worse than the other?

[GTStang]

Originally posted by 1BAD305


lol dont try to enlighten me on either the 302 or 305s bore and stroke configuration. im well aware of a 305s disadvantages. not very bright when it comes to engines eh? if u knew what u were talkin about ud know that a logner stroke will create more torque then a shorter one. 302s are known for doggy bottom end and high rpm power. hense the reason why GM produced them for SCCA racing. their a great engine for waht they were designd for but sucked on the street. until ford came out with them again and improved the head design to make the 302s power band a lot more streetable. a 305 will create more lowend torque then a 302 will. the long tube runner design of tuned port injection is also designd for killer low end and midrange power. if a shorter stroke creates more low end then why are there kits to lengthen stroke in engines for more torque and HP? hense a 383 stroker motor wich uses a 350s 4" bore and a 400s stroke. a 383 is known for killer low end and midrange power. get ur facts straight buddy, ur one confused ford boy. and yes where i come from most 5.0s that are stock or slightly modded run the same times as thirdgens do.

Whats wrong with this statement... Here we go stroker motors make more torque? True But this is on to a misleading idea. Of course a stroker motor makes a ton of torque you have increased your displacement. So naturally you will have more HP and torque.

Here is the truth if you have two physically identical blocks, heads and intakes etc.., The only difference is one uses more bore to get 305 CU and one use more stroke to get 305CU. The engine with more bore will make more torque because piston surface area is more deciding factor on torque.

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by DVS LT1


You could also bore it over .030 and use a 3.75" stroke - this is the most common setup for stroker kits I've seen.

Thats what makes a 383. Just standard bore with 3.75'' stroke with give you 377 CID.

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by GTStang


Here is the truth if you have two physically identical blocks, heads and intakes etc.., The only difference is one uses more bore to get 305 CU and one use more stroke to get 305CU. The engine with more bore will make more torque because piston surface area is more deciding factor on torque.

It will make more PEAK torque, but the more stroke the more power you have at low RPMs.
I plugged everything into my desktop dyno, everything the EXACT same except bore and stroke. The one was factory bore and stroke of a 305-3.735X3.48. The other I made 4'' bore and 3.034'' stroke. The factory 305 make 1 more HP and 2 more ft/lbs at 2K RPM. But the 4'' bore made 6 more peak HP and 2 more peak ft/lbs. Low end power is what a longer stroke is for, high end goes to shorter stroke engines.

[HiFlow5 0]

Originally posted by HiFlow5 0

The 305 is a junk motor. With it's long stroke and small bore, it takes the motor a while to wind up and make power, making the 302's shorter stroke and bigger bore far better at making power down low where it's needed.

I can see how that second part caused so much controversy. When typically a stroker motor will make more torque cause of it's longer stroke compared to it's stock version. I was simply refering to the two sources I had, that compared two motors of similar displacement, showing the 302 made more torque then the 305.
Source one; 83 Camaro 305, 190 bhp at 4800 rpms, with 240 lbs-ft at 3200 rpms. 83 Mustang 302, 175 bhp at 4000 rpms, with 245 lbs-ft at 2400 rpms.
Source two; 91 Z28 305, 205 hp at 4200 rpms, with 285 lbs-ft at 3200 rpms. 91 Mustang 302, 225 hp at 4200 rpms, with 300 lbs-ft at 3200 rpms.
Actually if you go to this site http://www.phy.duke.edu/~hartley/iroc/iroc_specs.html, and look at the torque for all the 305's, then reference the 302, you will see that the 305 in some cases makes the same amount of torque, and the rest of the time makes less torque then the 302.

Now I still feel that the 305's long stroke and small bore is a big disadvantage compared to the 302's shorter stroke and bigger bore. That should make the 302 rev quicker cause it's pistons has less area to travel in the cylinder bore, making power quicker. Also just a side note. I never refereed to stroker motors, or anything other then the 302 vs. the 305. These motors have a similar displacement in common, whereas stroking a motor will increase the displacement making for more torque and hp. Not to mention, that most, not all, but most stroker motors have been bored to compliment the longer stroke for more cubes.

1BAD305, I'm sorry if you thought that you ruffled my feathers, but that could be farther from the truth. you came here with an attitude, so expect some hostility back, it's just natural when debates get heated. Also if you had taken the time to read my site, you would have known that my 60 ft times were horrible due to the lack of traction, and that is the main reason why I only went 13.8 at 101 mph. not to mention that my motor combo was still new to me and I was still feeling things out and how to drive the car properly. One last thing, I never said you were lying about your track times. I just said your mph seemed slow, and then asked what elevation you were running at? Cause you know, different elevations will effect what your car runs.

[DVS LT1]

Originally posted by PWMAN


Thats what makes a 383. Just standard bore with 3.75'' stroke with give you 377 CID.

I realise that - what I was getting at is which stroker setup is better:

4.030 bore x 3.75" stroke, OR, 4.000 bore x 4" stroke????

I don't hear of too many people who simply stroke it to 383 cid.

[GTStang]

Originally posted by PWMAN


It will make more PEAK torque, but the more stroke the more power you have at low RPMs.
I plugged everything into my desktop dyno, everything the EXACT same except bore and stroke. The one was factory bore and stroke of a 305-3.735X3.48. The other I made 4'' bore and 3.034'' stroke. The factory 305 make 1 more HP and 2 more ft/lbs at 2K RPM. But the 4'' bore made 6 more peak HP and 2 more peak ft/lbs. Low end power is what a longer stroke is for, high end goes to shorter stroke engines.

I said nothing about where in the RPM band torque is made. I did not say that stroke did not play an effect in torque curves. I was talking purely of peak torque. Of course stroke plays into where the torque curve is. So does rod ratios and other things. I was just trying to write about one simple part of it without bringing in all the other factors to confuse people. Thank you you did help to prove my statement was true.

[PWMAN]

Originally posted by DVS LT1


I realise that - what I was getting at is which stroker setup is better:

4.030 bore x 3.75" stroke, OR, 4.000 bore x 4" stroke????

I don't hear of too many people who simply stroke it to 383 cid.

A 4'' stroke and 4'' bore makes 402 CID. The 4.030 and 3.75 makes a 383. It depends on what you are using the engine for, in a car probably neither of those. In a light truck, the 383. And in a heavy truck you're going to want the 402. But the 383 would be much better suited for a car than that 402 would. A shorter stroke is better for a car. Thats why I said neither of those, for a car you would use a 355.(4.030X3.48)