hey mustang geezer???

[Anonymous]

i was just curiouse if you knew how much HP you were getting?? and if you knew or could give a educated guess to how much HP gain the following parts would bring?

1.) 6qt high energy oil pan (one from this site)
2.) webber carb fit on the log intake with head mods so it fits on right
3.) DSII ignition swap
4.) header
5.) thin metal head gasket
6.) clifford port divider
7.) 252 comp cam

i am planing on doing all this to my engine i have already done the exhuast and i was just curiouse on if you knew the performence gains? i really want a 14 sec 6cyl i need guidence on how the best way on doing that would be. thanks alot to all who leaves some advice

 

[addo]

For a quick car, all-up weight is an important issue, too. XECUTE could probably calculate the difference in acceleration with two drivers differing by 90 pounds, driving the same car. Just another thought...

Adam.

 

[MustangSix]

With the mods you have listed, I'd expect your engine to dyno at about 135hp. That's a great street cam and a good carb, but neither will develop stratospheric power levels.

If the all up weight of your car was about 2800lbs (incl driver), to get to a 14.5 second 1/4 mile you will need about 190-195 hp at the rear wheels, provided traction is no problem. Frankly, that's a lot to ask of a street driven 200 with a log head and only one carb.

 

[Anonymous]

oh well that sucks....

see my problem is that i love old cars because of what they can do and how much fun they are to drive but if that is the kind of power i would get in a six with that much modifications i think i might wanna re-consider keeping a six in there or the hole car for that matter.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm making anywhere between 180-215 HP..... Nearest dyno is probably in Indy (5 hour round trip) and I'm not interested in making that far a drive

What you are proposing is a excellent street driven setup, but to get into the 14's you will have to forget the Weber and jump up to a 500 cfm Holley, MSD/Duraspark ignition, full port & polished 78 or newer head, Balanced rotating assy capable of 6000 rpm's, 270 or larger cam, 10:1 compression 2500 rpm stall convertor and some 3:20 or 3:50 gears.

It took me almost 3 years to build my engine up to what it is today, so dont give up hope

Best thing to do is to start with a rebuilt block, and make sure the bottom end is indestructable (balanced, ARP rodbolts, quality pistons) then slowly add the other stuff (cam carb etc) as time and money allows.

I 1st started out on Cliffords forum back in 1999 talking about what I wanted to do (certain people probably got tired of answering my questions) :roll:

I then got a junkyard block and did the following,

Hot tanked
Bored .060 over
Installed 2.3 litre HSC pistons
Turned crank and installed all new bearings
Complete balance
New oil pump
Clifford 272H cam, Double valve springs, Hardened locks & keepers
Fully ported & polished 1966 head (11:1 compression)
Carter YF off a 250
Ram Air

In 2000 I added a Duraspark (stock) ignition, Milled head to raise compression to 11.6:1, Carter YF off a 300, Clifford headers & chrome moly pushrods, Rebuilt transmission, B&M shiftkit & electric fan.

2001 I added the modified port & polished "big log" head (9.5:1 compression), dual 1 bbls at that time, new ram air system.

2002 I switched from dual carbs to the 500 cfm holley that I have now and installed roller rockers. (also realized at this time that you can shave off to much when milling head and head bolts wont tighten up (10:1 compression :roll: )

2003 Added deep sump oil pan, double roller timing chain & gears, MSD ignition, and another ram air system.....

Sometimes it takes a while but you can do it!

Later,

Doug

 

[Anonymous]

or just put a 100 shot of n.o.s. and hope it don`t blow up

 

[Mustangaroo]

Mustang_Geezer said:

I'm making anywhere between 180-215 HP..... Nearest dyno is probably in Indy and I'm not interested in making that far a drive

Hey, I think your Mustang is great but I'd be more impressed with DYNOJET results, I did a search of Dynojet locations and found many all over the state, surely you can find one within an hours drive? Hey, just buggin you because everyone wants to know if it's worth all that effort on a log head, when you can add a Aussie head to a 200 with a mild (ISKY 256) cam and stock head and get close to that 180 mark? I'll let you know later next week what our DYNOJET results are from Little Roo's buildup! But really would love to know DYNOJET numbers on your buildup!

Ya, that's a 650 cfm Holley Quadra-Jet mounted on an Aussie intake! Mounted on a little 200 six! Born to be bad!

Where else on the net can you get this kind of feed back?

 

[MustangSix]

What's faster - a 300 hp car or a 150 hp car? It depends on how much car that hp has to carry. I think that a lot of people focus too much on the numbers, not realizing what the true effect is. Our cars are light.

So you look at the numbers and go "crap, only 135hp?". But that's not a bad number, especially in light of the fact that your 66 coupe is almost 700 lbs lighter than a 2003 Mustang. A stock 2003 Mustang GT carries about 15lbs/hp. If you built a 150 hp engine, in a 66 coupe you'd be at about 18 lbs/hp. Not that far removed in terms of performance.

BTW, my 200 crosfloww should only make about 165 hp. That's 7 lbs/hp - Viper territory.

 

[CobraSix]

You also have to remember...a stock 302 in a 70 mustang only dynod at 120 RWHP...so making 135 RWHP is not bad at all.

Slade

 

[xctasy]

Lets step back a little guys. The real issue is that if you want hp you've got to increase the speed at which this little 200 will do its work. The ways to do this are well covered:

Nitrous,

Bigger cam, carb and mods which allow the head to flow.

But one option to look at is three IDA 44 Weber carbs and 38mm chokes. All on a stock log head. This is what the South American guys are doing. In some ways, this is the neatest infusion of Ricer'n' Rodder around. Adding Latino passion to what is a fairly basic engine. If I was not going to supercharge, not going to nitrous, and not going to a 2V/ME/SP head, then why not shove the best carbs on money can buy and do minimum elseware? A sound engine rebuild, an Al style T5 speed on a Toploader bell housing and a screaming cam is just right there. If the idle and progression circuits are right, then you have your hipo machine all sorted.

25 years ago, David Vizard used just one twin choke Weber IDA 48 on a 85 cubic inch siamesed port head with the best cam, and got 126 bhp net at the wheels. And it was streetable with a 4-speed gearbox.

Jack and Al, consider getting a Clifford -style plate, and drill it up for these carbs. Killer V8 Chevies and GT40's have been using them since the mid to late sixties.This is a LeMans winning Shelby/Gurney Lola idea which is American as apple pie. And triad of Danny De Veto carbs will do the business!

Bathurst winning Holdens won races for years between 1975 and 1984 with just two of these very carbs on 5000 cc V8's.

My prediction? A log headed 200 with :-

a 280 degree cam with 500 gross lift, 220 ish at 50 thou,
+30 thou overbore flatop pistons
Stock rods with ARP bolts
and a set of these carbs with a gas-flowed head and ugly race preped AOD-E,
will easily do 235 flywheel ponies, almost 175 at the bags,
and a 2800 pounder will do a 13.5 second 1320 dash.

9 port 208 cid Holdens have done 245 net flywheel HP with stock twin branch extractors and triple HS6 SU's for years. Cams were not much more than wild street cams of about 300 duration. Webers pulse tune even better. 12-porters go up to a legit net 348 hp, even in the early 1970's. And it all started with a cast off 186 with a welded crank. Sub 12's were a walk in the park in this old 56 FJ Holden

Read about it on http://www.gassermadness.com/downunder/ The first five are less than 200 cubic inchers with worse breathing than what I'm suggesting. Plate 17 is the Ron Harrop special which killed v8's dead becasue it was light, simple, and it screamed

 

[Anonymous]

If I may interject gentlemen, I completely agree with MustangSix on the issue of weight versus requested HP as far as quick acceleration is concerned but (and not to sound negative) Fords’ 200 and 250 just where not designed for TOTAL performance. Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t that what most of our members are looking for in their six cylinder vehicles? Especially our younger members?

I LOVE the inline six! It’s beautifully designed. Heck, for that matter any inline engine is a work of art. BUT we have to come to terms with what we want from our vehicles, eventually. Some may not like this or never admit to it but if you want TOTAL performance out of a 2800 – 3000 pound vehicle you cannot get that out of the 200 without MAJOR modifications – just as Mustang Geezer, Mustangaroo and 76maverick has pointed out in their responses. By no means is this a small investment.

I guess what I’m trying to say is this – we need to be honest when someone asks questions such as Ponyrider66 did with is post. We need to be “frankâ€￾ when they ask these types of questions. I’m not saying we didn’t (because you did, Jack) but if it’s gut wrenching power and torque someone wants then they have to understand that time and a lot of money will be involved (just as MustangGeezer has mentioned). And quit possibly they may never reach that plateau with their inline motor. These engines are not like V8’s where it’s a simple bolt on job and “boomâ€￾ you just added 70 or 90 more horses.

From personal experience (an I know I’ll get flamed for this) building a mild V8 has cost me LESS to build then what it would cost me to build up a wild inline 6 (I ran the numbers several times). This includes everything, from suspension to drivetrain.

It’s how you want to appear in the end. I think one of our members once told me that if it’s uniqueness you want, stay with the six but if it’s 300 hp you want go with a V8.

I hope I haven’t rocked the boat too much. I take ALL responsibility for my posts.


-Chris

 

[xctasy]

Great point, stang200

You are clearly right in the context of just a mild 200 in a 3000 pound Falcon. ponyrider66 and formerly 70 Falcon are dealing with that issue of getting grunt without cubic inches. For most in the USA, it's seen as a goal unreachable, because a V8 is so well suported, and addictive! There is no country in the world that know more about V8's than the USA. Period!

In Australia, people have turned back to these old six-cylinder engines, and have added similar $$$ values which the V8 mob raise. The results are just amazing. The point I'd like to make is that for 95% of us here, we're looking for that elusive 90 hp bolt on. My assertion is that while it doesn't exist for one item, packages, cost effective, ones, do. And even if only 1% of the people here achieve that goal of TOTAL PERFORMANCE for there I6, then my ramble will have substance. But for the other 99%, it will permeate there goals and give people something to aspire to.

And unlike a magazine, the people here really care about getting what you want without pulling swiftees, mind games or spin tactics. It's a community of diverse backgrounds which does amazing things, weather it be a stock 144 I6 XK Falcon, or a full house 300 with a 600 hangin' off an Offy!

For me, the Ford six is the best TOTAL PERFORMANCE engine around. And believe me, I've been in the quickest Falcon 351 V8's around, and guys I know are looking for sixes. Theres some bizzare Six Swing happening the world over, and if it has to start 10 000 miles away in Nu Zealand, then it's gonna be a freight train by the time it hits your home, brother.

 

[Anonymous]

It would be nice to see that freight train! Especially when it comes to cost. Here in the US we defeniately could use some more after market products for the inline 6's, at a reasonable price.

I think this why some go to the V8, parts are everywhere and readily available. This maybe why I've been dabbling with the "dark side".


-Chris

 

[Anlushac11]

What's faster - a 300 hp car or a 150 hp car? It depends on how much car that hp has to carry. I think that a lot of people focus too much on the numbers, not realizing what the true effect is. Our cars are light.

So you look at the numbers and go "crap, only 135hp?". But that's not a bad number, especially in light of the fact that your 66 coupe is almost 700 lbs lighter than a 2003 Mustang. A stock 2003 Mustang GT carries about 15lbs/hp. If you built a 150 hp engine, in a 66 coupe you'd be at about 18 lbs/hp. Not that far removed in terms of performance.

BTW, my 200 crosfloww should make about 165 hp. That's 7 lbs/hp - Viper territory.

Your post has been my exact argument all along. I have 5.0L Mustang friends telling me my car will be a dog becasue his 66 Stang 200 was a dog. I tell him all about my car and what Im doing and tell him I will have a comparable power to weight ratio and torque to weight ratio as a stock or slightly hopped up 85 Mustang GT. He doenst believe me. Im pushing for 175-200rwhp and hopefully more than 240ft lbs of torque with a ported and polished Oz head, 450cfm 4bbl 200 I6 in a 2550lb car (80 Stang but its being lightened) with 3.55:1 gears.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, the only things that impress me is chrome and smoky burnouts

Doug

 

[Anonymous]

Hey Roo,

Was wondering if you had some detailed pictures of the linkage for that 4bbl carb. Depending on the performance/mileage you get out of that puppy , I might go with the 4bbl route when I get my aussie head.

Thanks!
Mike

 

[Mustangaroo]

Sure but it's just the same linkage as before, a 1978 Fairmont cable to pedal using the cross over the valve cover bar. Both Jason (little Roo) and I are using it and we love how you can change it around from the side or rear and still works without re-inventing your throttle system again!

You just hook it up like you take it off the 78 fairmonts!

 

[Anonymous]

Linkage was my biggest problem when I added my 2bbl weber. I might have to drive up to bakersfield when i'm ready to get my linkage set up. Know anyone that could help .

Mike

 

[Mustangaroo]

Sure be happy tp help, but really it's very simple nothing to make just get the Fairmont linkage and pedal and take your old linkage and pedal out and replace with the new one just as it was in the fairmont, give me a call or stop by when your passing thru Bakersfield and we'll get you fixed up!