Quote from: AJP turbo on June 06, 2016, 11:44:49 PM
Quote from: sholxgt on June 06, 2016, 11:04:04 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on June 06, 2016, 10:01:59 PM
I doubt it....they were like 275hp with the crappy 4.6
As usual, you missed my point. As you do 90% of the posters on this forum. I was saying that it's a slow outdated platform that can be tuned to out accelerate modern cars, but can't run with anything on the top end.
The power you quoted and crappyness of the motor are correct. Keep in mind that there are plenty of crappy motors that do OK when needed.
The 5.0 Mustang in my garage put 532 to the back tires with the factory original 120k mile short block. No, it's not a modern 5.0. It's the factory 302 in a 1990 LX hatch. Runs ok when needed also since it's 3,200 lbs soaking wet with factory equipment, A/C, driver, etc.
I don't even know what to say...Your 5.0 that did 532 was really far from stock...Give me 50 grand and I could give a 1 liter 3 cylinder geo metro engine make 750 to the wheels...It's not the factory 302 if you almost tripled the power
How does one tune a crappy engine to "out accelerate modern cars" but also at the same time doesn't run with them on the top end?
There isn't much power to be had from a "tune" on a 4.6 N/A in a crown vic.
LOL. Maybe you are ignorant. A "short block" means block, crank, rods, and pistons. I never said all original 302. I said factory short block.
Maybe also you don't understand the concept of gearing, traction, and a decent running vehicle. Most of my rides through the years haven't impressed any dyno's or dragstrips, but yet somehow manage to bring home the bacon. Granted, none of my rides have ever given up what they have on a dyno or at a timed event either.
I think that, if you focused less on being an Internet super star, and instead realized that there are others that share your passion for automobiles, maybe you would choose to be less obnoxious.