Dyno Numbers For 331 Stroker In 93 Stang Gt

[1993_GT]

Well I finally got my motor completed and got it dropped into my Mustang last week. It is 331 stroker motor with E7TE Power Heads with 1.90 x 1.60 valves, and a ported, polished and port matched Explorer Intake, and 32LB Injectors. I had a Custom Cam made for it and I am running it all through FRPP T5 Transmission with 3:73 gears out back and all being hooked up by a FRPP King Cobra Clutch. I switched to a 1993 Cobra Computer as well . I switched to a Dyno-Max Exhaust system so the car even sounds stock. The Suspension has been completely redone.

The dyno numbers were not what I was hoping for though. I thought for sure I would break 300 rwhp, it did not happen. I did reach 289 HP and 306 Torque. So it is not so bad, just not what I was expecting. I am hoping with further tuning I can break that magic 300 hp barrier. Remember this car is basically a sleeper and looks bone stock so, I should be able to fool a few unsuspecting rice burners into racing me, then haveing all they see is my tail lights... when I leave them sitting there wondering how a stock looking mustang beat them. Should be fun...

I will get to the track this weekend if the weather holds and see how she runs in the quarter and report back....

I will upload the dyno sheet as soon as I figure out how. I wish I could just paste it here would be so much easier....

[90redgt]

I can tell you right now that the E7's are holding you back. If when you were building the engine those were all that you could afford then i understand why you went with them. However those heads are your biggest culprit right now. If you have the money get some out of the box GT40's and you'll be on your way to 300rwhp. If your low on cash. save a little bit up and get a 50 or 25 shot of dry nitrous. That should do the trick too.

Just for reference here's my setup.

331

AFR 185's and a comp cams camshaft. It put down 352rwhp at 6200rpm. Trust me you need to get new heads if you can afford it.

[1993_GT]

Originally Posted by 90redgt

I can tell you right now that the E7's are holding you back. If when you were building the engine those were all that you could afford then i understand why you went with them. However those heads are your biggest culprit right now. If you have the money get some out of the box GT40's and you'll be on your way to 300rwhp. If your low on cash. save a little bit up and get a 50 or 25 shot of dry nitrous. That should do the trick too.

Just for reference here's my setup.

331

AFR 185's and a comp cams camshaft. It put down 352rwhp at 6200rpm. Trust me you need to get new heads if you can afford it.

Thanks, but the E7TE heads are not stock they are E7TE Power Heads that have been fully ported and polished and I had larger valves installed as well. They are suppose to outflow GT40 heads by atleast 30 percent according to PowerHeads sales person. I also did not want to go with a set of aluminum heads because I wanted to keep the car as stock looking as possible, so it would be a good sleeper...

I still think with some more tuning on the dyno I can coax 300 RWHP out of the motor.

I thank you for your input though.

[CBFryman]

you have 383 cuing of displacement and are barely brakeing the 300 lb/ft of torque area...
i dont know what is holding you back as i am not a mustang guy (much less a v8 guy) but that is pathetic...no offence.

[Kamilpl3]

Nice, finally got it finished huh... Congrats.

EDIT: Well not exactly finished yet, since it looks like you're going to tune the engine soon.

[Muscletang]

11 horsepower isn't bad to reach. As you said a little tuning and you'll be there.

May not look stock but some electric fans, underdrive pullies, K&N filter, get your engine broke in and put in some synthetic oil, little things like that. I know it doesn't sound like much and seems like a waste, but 1 horsepower here and there adds up after a while.

Also, why didn't you go with a MSD ignition? I personally think it can't be beat. Also, I think if you went with aluminum it wouldn't lose much of the sleeper look. Sure if somebody knew what they were looking for probably could crawl in there and look but most people seem to just take a glance and that be it.

[Mr. Luos]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

you have 383 cuing of displacement and are barely brakeing the 300 lb/ft of torque area...
i dont know what is holding you back as i am not a mustang guy (much less a v8 guy) but that is pathetic...no offence.

Where did you see 383?

[carrrnuttt]

Brandon's (90redgt's) car can never be considered a sleeper any longer. The sound alone is a dead giveaway.

Hey, you still in town man? I lost your #. You need to give me a buzz.

[1993_GT]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

you have 383 cuing of displacement and are barely brakeing the 300 lb/ft of torque area...
i dont know what is holding you back as i am not a mustang guy (much less a v8 guy) but that is pathetic...no offence.

Well it is a 331 not a 383 not sure where you got that from, I am pushing over 100 more HP to the wheels than stock. I also still need to get it tuned and my chip burned. I am sure I will break the 300 RWHP mark. If I am right I am putting close to 340 HP to the fly wheel if I add back in the lose of power from the drive train.

[CBFryman]

im not saying it isnt a good jump, i was thinking a chevy 350 stroked...w/e...anyway, it still is kinda weak... the new Mustangs are throwing down thoes numbers stock... not to say over 10 years of tweaking couldnt add that...lol but ford isnt famous for its HP numbers out of the box for the most part (ford the brand, not ford motor company itsself who owns some hella sweet companies and has put down some nice numbers on their uber perfomrance cars like the cobra's who have a nice bang for buck and GT40 and all...damn thoes NoCal kids)

[-The Stig-]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

im not saying it isnt a good jump, i was thinking a chevy 350 stroked...w/e...anyway, it still is kinda weak... the new Mustangs are throwing down thoes numbers stock... not to say over 10 years of tweaking couldnt add that...lol but ford isnt famous for its HP numbers out of the box for the most part (ford the brand, not ford motor company itsself who owns some hella sweet companies and has put down some nice numbers on their uber perfomrance cars like the cobra's who have a nice bang for buck and GT40 and all...damn thoes NoCal kids)

Those are pretty good numbers for a lightly tuned 5.0... I say lightly tuned cause not much is done to it besides the longer stroke crank. Everything else is just 'tweaking'.

The new Mustang GT are 300hp, that's Crank Horsepower, 1993_GT has 289 wheel horsepower. Which, like posted is around 340 Crank Horsepower.

A big difference in performance. His car in all fairness should hand a new Mustang GT it's ass. Lighter weight, and about 35-45 more crank horsepower.

As far as I know, the new Mustang GT's aren't like their rival LS1 counterparts. The LS1's in F-Bodies were clones of the Corvette LS1 which we know made around 350+/- horsepower. That's why stock F-Body's could dyno at 300-315 wheel horsepower, when they were rated from Chevrolet at 305-325hp depending on model.

I haven't heard of the new Mustang GT's dyno'in in those ranges...

2005 Ford Mustang GT stock:


1993_GT, you just keep on what you're doing.

[2000LS1Z28]

Nice dyno, but what the other guy said earlier is true, your heads are holding you back. I believe I know someone from another board that is selling heads for a 5.0 for less then $300. Anyways, I just dynoed my Z06 cammed LS1 WS6 to 351whp, so i'm your daddy.

[1993_GT]

Originally Posted by RedNeck383

Those are pretty good numbers for a lightly tuned 5.0... I say lightly tuned cause not much is done to it besides the longer stroke crank. Everything else is just 'tweaking'.

The new Mustang GT are 300hp, that's Crank Horsepower, 1993_GT has 289 wheel horsepower. Which, like posted is around 340 Crank Horsepower.

A big difference in performance. His car in all fairness should hand a new Mustang GT it's ass. Lighter weight, and about 35-45 more crank horsepower.

As far as I know, the new Mustang GT's aren't like their rival LS1 counterparts. The LS1's in F-Bodies were clones of the Corvette LS1 which we know made around 350+/- horsepower. That's why stock F-Body's could dyno at 300-315 wheel horsepower, when they were rated from Chevrolet at 305-325hp depending on model.

I haven't heard of the new Mustang GT's dyno'in in those ranges...

2005 Ford Mustang GT stock:


1993_GT, you just keep on what you're doing.

Thanks for the kudos, I am still waiting to get my chip burned for it and get it back to the dyno for some more tuning and then to the track for the real test...

[1993_GT]

Originally Posted by RedNeck383

Those are pretty good numbers for a lightly tuned 5.0... I say lightly tuned cause not much is done to it besides the longer stroke crank. Everything else is just 'tweaking'.

The new Mustang GT are 300hp, that's Crank Horsepower, 1993_GT has 289 wheel horsepower. Which, like posted is around 340 Crank Horsepower.

A big difference in performance. His car in all fairness should hand a new Mustang GT it's ass. Lighter weight, and about 35-45 more crank horsepower.

As far as I know, the new Mustang GT's aren't like their rival LS1 counterparts. The LS1's in F-Bodies were clones of the Corvette LS1 which we know made around 350+/- horsepower. That's why stock F-Body's could dyno at 300-315 wheel horsepower, when they were rated from Chevrolet at 305-325hp depending on model.

I haven't heard of the new Mustang GT's dyno'in in those ranges...

2005 Ford Mustang GT stock:


1993_GT, you just keep on what you're doing.

How did you get pictures in your post I can not figure it out. I want to upload images of my engine and dyno sheet.

[pre98zetec]

[img]link[/img]


put the link of the picture inbetween them

forgot to put "link" in there so the god damn thing didn't show