Big Bore Boss build

[JeremyH]

Against my better judgement we could put a cat on it lol. It's all good its not for everyone and I know what ya mean about enjoying the car na. But you will get bored...again... I suspect... lol

I cringe every time you mention that turbonetics disaster of a kit, but yes it does have you cut the stock h pipe and reuse oem cats.

 

[BruceH]

Against my better judgement we could put a cat on it lol. It's all good its not for everyone and I know what ya mean about enjoying the car na. But you will get bored...again... I suspect... lol

I cringe every time you mention that turbonetics disaster of a kit, but yes it does have you cut the stock h pipe and reuse oem cats.

I have my own theory on cats and cat failure. Whenever the rear o2 sensors are turned off so is the cat and valve protection. This allows temps to get hot enough to melt cats. I've had stock and aftermarket cats (even ceramic) and not experienced a cat related failure. But, I have the protection logic still turned on. I do modify it to come on at 1750 iirc which is the same as a GT500.

Since turbos are used in a variety of factoy applications it has to be doable.

For now I just need to get on the dyno with a gasoline tune. The car is running great. The linear power delivery is really nice too. With all of these things going for it why do I still have thoughts of changing it up? Wrong meds is all I can come up with.

 

[JeremyH]

 

[BruceH]

Hi,

I'm just adding a follow up for anyone researching a similar build. I've recently swapped the FRPP intake manifold out for a stock intake with cmcv. It's still very driveable and mpg has gone up with both e85 and pump gas. Cold motor driveability is a little better with the stock cmcv also.

I have no idea how it will affect power output but the butt dyno has only detected a little more low end. In fact I'm wondering what, if any gains are obtained by deletes with a stock intake?

 

[skwerl]

Holy hell, look who stopped in!!! Good to see you still kicking around, Bruce. You've been missed around here.

 

[KatoS197]

"Butt Dyno"

 

[Doug M]

Holy hell, look who stopped in!!! Good to see you still kicking around, Bruce. You've been missed around here.

Agreed! Great to hear from you Bruce!

 

[AutoXRacer]

Where you been Bruce? Been wondering where you were.

Good to hear from you.

 

[v8venomgt]

Great to see you back in the fold Bruce. Your posts are always interesting, and your contributions are always appreciated.

 

[GallopingFord]

he lives!

 

[Johnf78]

I have always enjoyed reading your posts. Good to see you posting again and thanks for the update.

 

[BruceH]

Thanks for the kind words. I'm thinking this needs to get back on a dyno. I'm feeling more torque at low and mid rpms and I'd like to verify.

At this point I'm wondering why I always went with deletes when most of my driving is on the street. I haven't been to a track in two years and never was a trackrat. Once again I'm finding that Ford engineering is pretty tough to beat and that they must of had a reason for putting cmcv on the motor.

 

[BruceH]

A short update. Since putting the stock intake with cmcv the gasoline mpg has gone from 16.5-17 to 18.5-19. I'm driving the same urban route in the same traffic conditions. I can't figure out why in the world I always used deletes in the past.

 

[AutoXRacer]

More mid to top end power?

 

[BruceH]

More mid to top end power?

I'm not sold on that idea anymore. I'm not convinced that the cmcv make a difference in what the stock intake manifold can flow. Even at higher rpms.

I am convinced that the cmcv make a noticeable difference in normal street driving. Not only does it feel better to me but the mpg went up about 12%. The mpg increase means more efficient combustion in my mind.

The conspiracy theory part of my mind is thinking that deletes are something that we mindlessly do without thinking about it because they are an aftermarket part that everyone puts on their cars. We are sold on the idea by aftermarket advertising. The logical part of my mind thinks that they cost money to produce so Ford wouldn't put them on unless they really helped with something. More efficient combustion would also mean reduced emissions and better mpg along with more power.

I'm just posting my thoughts on the subject. I am aware that I could be wrong, this is more of a thinking out loud and reporting an experience. In fact I think I was wrong in the past when I thought that cmcv were an absolute must.

 

[SStang]

Does anyone know what the max displacement this block can go? Looking for about 350ci.

Thanks.

 

[Dillon Dollar]

I thought 326 => 5.3 was about the max

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[BruceH]

Does anyone know what the max displacement this block can go? Looking for about 350ci.

Thanks.

You would need to look at a 2013-14 GT500 block. You won't get 350 out of this one.

Do you have a hp goal?

 

[weather man]

Thanks for the kind words. I'm thinking this needs to get back on a dyno. I'm feeling more torque at low and mid rpms and I'd like to verify.

At this point I'm wondering why I always went with deletes when most of my driving is on the street. I haven't been to a track in two years and never was a trackrat. Once again I'm finding that Ford engineering is pretty tough to beat and that they must of had a reason for putting cmcv on the motor.

I always thought the deletes were for guys going F/I. I think I remember seeing F/I guys breaking the pedals off and doing not nice things to the motor.

 

[SStang]

I would like to see about 425hp, 425tq. The only problem with the 5.4 is the lack of intake options.

Thanks.