Turbo 4.0 or N/A 3v?

[Speedboosted]

The 3V picks up a lot from minor suspension work (which you already have), and even a Bama tune. Completely different cars at that point. For me personally, the reliability of an NA car would take the cake since it would just see DD duty and you already have track cars. Just turn the key and go.

I keep going back to the ease and reliability of daily driving an N/A car. I know plenty of people DD FI cars, there's still less stuff to worry about.

Question about the 3v phaser issues...do running phaser limiters with comp cams get rid of that issue or could it still exist?

 

[NUTCASE]

IMO I would build the 4.0 just to make people bet against me and say WTF.

However the 3v will open up way more options for you. Also a 3v would be much easier to build if you don't have years of experience and knowledge making things go fast. The 3v has been done a thousand times over and nearly everything is known about that platform.

Significantly less is known and parts are not readily available for the 4.0, so you would have to know what you are doing to make that car fast. Going from 240-350hp is going to feel slow in a week. Especially if you get into a tangle with a full bolt on and cam 3v that you could have had with just a little more patience.

 

[NUTCASE]

Or if you want to stay v6 sleeper you could get a 3.7 and then save up for a turbo. The 3.7 is far superior to the 4.0 and comes with a 6 speed trans.

 

[BruceH]

I keep going back to the ease and reliability of daily driving an N/A car. I know plenty of people DD FI cars, there's still less stuff to worry about.

Question about the 3v phaser issues...do running phaser limiters with comp cams get rid of that issue or could it still exist?

Like you already said forced induction cars are used for DD. They aren't any less reliable than a na motor if done right. If fact a FI motor can be less tempermental than a more radical na motor. The reason is because you don't have to mess with heads, cams, tb, and other things to get more air into the motor. The turbo is going to force air past all the restrictions.

All of this means stock like driveability and reliability until you put your foot into it.

Bolting on a turbo and having 450 to 500rwhp on a stock motor with only a valve spring change sounds like a big win imo. Run it on e85 for even more reliability. A na 3v isn't going to touch those numbers.

If you add cams to the 3v you will probably be looking at a valve spring swap along with limiters or lockouts. By the time the cams, headers, and associated hardware are added you might be at 330rhwp or so and have the same amount of money into it as the turbo.

Speaking of the 3.7, I saw one make an even 450rhwp (owner didn't want any more) with a lower boost P1SC. Very impressive motor.

 

[TGR96]

I'd vote for the 3v, mainly because of the v8 sound and the reliability of a stock motor. Plus you'd have room to grow down the road with full bolt ons or even FI.

 

[JimC]

I daily drove my 2006 with the Xcharger - 203,000 miles with no problems.

And now that I have the turbo waste gate problem sorted out, I daily drive the 2013 with no problems.

 

[Speedboosted]

Or if you want to stay v6 sleeper you could get a 3.7 and then save up for a turbo. The 3.7 is far superior to the 4.0 and comes with a 6 speed trans.

Not going to spend money on a engine swap and not have a V8. The 3.7 is very impressive but I've got to cut ties with the 6 cylinder mafia at some point.

Like you already said forced induction cars are used for DD. They aren't any less reliable than a na motor if done right. If fact a FI motor can be less tempermental than a more radical na motor. The reason is because you don't have to mess with heads, cams, tb, and other things to get more air into the motor. The turbo is going to force air past all the restrictions.

All of this means stock like driveability and reliability until you put your foot into it.

Bolting on a turbo and having 450 to 500rwhp on a stock motor with only a valve spring change sounds like a big win imo. Run it on e85 for even more reliability. A na 3v isn't going to touch those numbers.

If you add cams to the 3v you will probably be looking at a valve spring swap along with limiters or lockouts. By the time the cams, headers, and associated hardware are added you might be at 330rhwp or so and have the same amount of money into it as the turbo.

Speaking of the 3.7, I saw one make an even 450rhwp (owner didn't want any more) with a lower boost P1SC. Very impressive motor.

Nobody is reliably making 500 whp on these. A few people did for like 2 months and blew them up. Even 450 whp didn't seem to last too long for a couple people. I think I wouldn't really want to go over 400 honestly with the stock motor, which of course would drag an N/A 3v but I'm still more concerned about road course power then drag racing power.

I daily drove my 2006 with the Xcharger - 203,000 miles with no problems.

And now that I have the turbo waste gate problem sorted out, I daily drive the 2013 with no problems.

What boost and power level were you at with the X charger? I don't want a blower, but it is nice to know that you had a bunch of success with it.

 

[JimC]

What boost and power level were you at with the X charger? I don't want a blower, but it is nice to know that you had a bunch of success with it.

I was running 10 - 12 lbs of boost, and with clogged cats the dyno came out to 295 RWHP and 313 torque on a very rich tune. After I replaced the cats the car ran much better and was quicker, but never got it back on the dyno. The current owner had it tuned again and said he was at 315 RWHP on the new dyno tune.

 

[Speedboosted]

I was running 10 - 12 lbs of boost, and with clogged cats the dyno came out to 295 RWHP and 313 torque on a very rich tune. After I replaced the cats the car ran much better and was quicker, but never got it back on the dyno. The current owner had it tuned again and said he was at 315 RWHP on the new dyno tune.

Did you ever race against a bolt on 3v? I'd imagine it would be a close race

 

[JimC]

I'm sure that I did -can't recall now. I do remember going up against a Roush convertible running the Roush tune and we were very close.

The car ran mid 12's on a rich tune - and was a convertible so heavier than a coupe plus I had a 6 point roll bar in it (as required for a convertible running quicker than 13.49) so was even heavier than a stock convertible.

 

[skwerl]

Since the car is 10 years old you need to look at your cost to get rid of it when you eventually replace it, which will likely be within a couple of years. I think as a short term ownership deal I'd probably lean toward the turbo setup on the 4.0. Yes, a v8 is more desirable but that is due to the entire package as much as the engine itself. By staying with the 4.0 you can have your fun and still part out the turbo and other stuff when you return it to stock to sell it. Selling price between a stock 6 cyl vs. a v8 swap will be a wash.

On your replacement car I absolutely recommend the v8, no exceptions.

 

[Speedboosted]

Since the car is 10 years old you need to look at your cost to get rid of it when you eventually replace it, which will likely be within a couple of years. I think as a short term ownership deal I'd probably lean toward the turbo setup on the 4.0. Yes, a v8 is more desirable but that is due to the entire package as much as the engine itself. By staying with the 4.0 you can have your fun and still part out the turbo and other stuff when you return it to stock to sell it. Selling price between a stock 6 cyl vs. a v8 swap will be a wash.

On your replacement car I absolutely recommend the v8, no exceptions.

Replacement will be a coyote of some sort. Not entirely sure whether it will be a cheaper route and grab an S197 or take on little bigger payments and grab an S550. Plan is to keep this 2-3 more years

I have been thinking about resale a little bit and I feel like a gt swap would be worth a little more then a v6. Sure, the vin wouldn't say it's a gt but everything else would be there...motor, trans, rear end. Already has the bumpers and brakes too. It's not like either one is a special car so the Vin thing doesn't seem like it would be a devastating blow like it does on the older 99/01 cobra's with 03/04 drivetrain. Maybe I'm wrong though

I could certainly take the turbo kit off the car if that is the route I went and get most of my money back. As for the 3v swap, maybe it would add $1000-1500 to the value of the car over a v6? I could probably unload the 4.0 swap on CL for some money and get a little back, which would then ultimately make it similar unless my math is way off.

To be completely honest, this is the last thing that is holding me up before pulling the trigger. I'm one of those people that always thinks down the line value if possible and while everything in me wants a 'murica V8 in that thing, I don't know if that is the best financial move compared to the turbo. A dumb question when talking about motor swaps and cars, but I can't help it. Lol

 

[skwerl]

I think the experience dabbling in boost will be worth something in the future once you get your replacement vehicle. I know I learned a bunch supercharging my Bullitt, and would have gone a different route if starting over with the knowledge I have now.

 

[Speedboosted]

I think the experience dabbling in boost will be worth something in the future once you get your replacement vehicle. I know I learned a bunch supercharging my Bullitt, and would have gone a different route if starting over with the knowledge I have now.

Well I've got some experience with boost with the GT500, so I have a decent understanding of the whole process. Granted it was factory boosted, but we did put a different blower on it. The idea of turbo 6 cylinder is interesting, as is a 3v swap to go screw around on a road course with.

 

[Speedboosted]

Little thread revival/update. Last weekend I went and bought a wrecked 2005 GT to begin the engine swap. Got it for a reasonable price and once I sell some of the stuff I won't be needing, I should be in it well enough. Guy I bought it from began pulling pieces off and quit, so it looks worse than it really is. It started and drove onto the trailer.

Already picked up an intake, UDP's, powder coated valve covers, and going to buy Pypes long tubes w/ O/R H tomorrow. Have a TR-6060 trans that I'm going to use as well with 4.10 or 4.30 gears. Now I need to decide on what cams/springs to get. Was set of Comp 127500s and then started talking to others and wonder if the 127300 or 127400 would be a better option. Any opinions? I want the car to do well on both the street and road course.


All loaded up and ready to head home


And finally home, begun the tear down almost immediately