| ![]() | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#41 |
|
Enthusiast
1988 GT
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: chicago
Posts: 852
![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
reguardless of the weight unless it's hundreds of lbs difference it isn't going to make one damn bit of difference. The ls is a much better platform to work with stock/stock ls/5.0, and I find it hard that anyone could argue that. simply being biast to performance alone.
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#42 | |
|
Priest of the Car Gods
|
I think a lot of people get blinded by the potential of a motor, when they have absolutely no desire nor ability to utilize it any of that potential. Sure, an LS1 is gonna be 300+ hp stock, but for the price of the swap (especially considering the time involved), you could have a 302 that matched that. If you're shooting for more, well, not only do you have to swap the Chevy in, but you have to mod it, too. Now what's the total cost, and how much power would your 302 have made with that investment? I'm curious what the break-even point would be.
__________________
O o /¯/______________________ |BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!! \_\ Buy my Bronco, special deal for MM folks |
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Enthusiast
1988 GT
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: chicago
Posts: 852
![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
if you have money to boost the 302 then you have the money to do this swap(from the sounds of it)... I'm not arguing that the 302 can't get this guy to his goal, i'm just saying if he can get his hands on a ls1 for the same cost as a kit, why not do the swap?
with the same OTS parts I'm willing to bet that the ls would make butt loads more power |
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,387
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
I'd transplant a buick gn motor in after modifying it to my liking... i've seen it before and it's pretty damn sweet.
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
are you tlkin about gnx 3.8 turbo or something else?
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
MM Fanatic
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 4,627
![]() ![]() ![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
Stock for stock, sure the LS motor is better... it has more cubes, better heads, and was designed 30+ years more recently in history.
However, the LS motor is NOT Stock in a fox mustang, and that means $$$. If you want to swap a LS in, it is going to cost you at least $2000. Money you could spend doing heads cam intake, or a blower swap on the fox instead. With that in mind, the LS motor is just another option...not really any better and a whole lot more gay. You'll get no love from chevy owners or ford owners... A stock 302 block weighs in at around 80 lbs, slightly less than a LS1 block...
__________________
88 GT CHI headed 351w 10.8 @ 125 - still figuring it out. 03 Cobra 2.3 whipple 10.7 @ 129 - sold it 04 Mach 1 12.7 @ 109 mostly stock - sold it 89 LX procharged 302 515 hp 497 ftlbs 10.7 @130 mph - sold it
|
|
|
|
#47 | |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
secondly im probly wrong but i picked up and ls1 block bored for a 427 stroker the other day and i would have thot it was 80 lbs or over |
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
well i have already proven myself partialy wrong because i have found the ls1 to be 116 lbs from researching the interwebs but havent found the weight of 302 block yet
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
best i can come up with for a 302 block is 125.....which is still way close to the same as an ls1 then i thot it would be....so basically the 302 block is a lil heavier but if you had a t56 that would be a lil heavier on the ls1...then figure aluminum heads for both and then the average 5.0 intake would be heavier than ls1 intake....so all in all its pretty closer....closer than i realized
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,387
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
gnx wouldn't make sense, there was only 512 of them built and the price of them are through the roof.. plus they were basically identical engine/drivetrain wise as any 86 or 87m gn or ttype. So yes im talking about throwing a built 3.8 in
|
|
|
|
#51 | |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
(syclone).....but im not my on that 3.8....my ss(and all 04 05 impala ss's) is only making 240 hp with a supercharged 3.8 when most other cars are using 3.5 or 3.6 sized motors N/A and making more power...i never thot that would be a good starting point for a build....but idk just a whole lot about those engines...but there isnt much i can say since ur slowest ride is probly faster than my quickest
|
|
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Regular
|
your supercharged 3.8 is nothing like the Buick 3.8T
the Buick turbo 3.8 was ridiculously under rated like 220-240hp and it was one of the quicker american cars off the showroom floor in the mid 80's. That car is big and heavy and off the showroom floor run low 14's. With very little money they will literally haul ass. I am not a 3.8 fan, but I have many friends that live and breath turbo Buicks including the guy that runs and hosts turbobuicks.com he has had a couple 3.8 turbos in rx7's
__________________
U.S. Army Retired Owner: Crankgoboom Racing James G. Bilkey - "You will never be the person you can be if pressure, tension, and discipline are taken out of your life." |
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Priest of the Car Gods
|
If you're using 'ass' to mean a human butt, literally, all cars haul ass. If you're using ass to mean a burro/donkey, then you're only going to literally haul ass with a car that can fit your stubborn pack animal inside, so a GNX is only going to be able to literally haul a very young ass. An El Camino or Ranchero could haul a full grown ass though.
__________________
O o /¯/______________________ |BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!! \_\ Buy my Bronco, special deal for MM folks |
|
|
|
#54 | |
|
Regular
|
__________________
U.S. Army Retired Owner: Crankgoboom Racing James G. Bilkey - "You will never be the person you can be if pressure, tension, and discipline are taken out of your life." |
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Moderator
|
Put an LS1 in it.
My 89 five liter with a stock motor, 4.10s, shortys, off road h, flowmasters, rear seats and weight taken out, and slicks went 13.60s My stone stock 2000 Z28 with 2.73 gears on fuzion ZRis went 13.28 @ 108 with full leather and the ac on in the staging lanes.
__________________
There's a reason Ford codenamed them the Terminator
|
|
|
|
#56 | |
|
Priest of the Car Gods
|
__________________
O o /¯/______________________ |BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!! \_\ Buy my Bronco, special deal for MM folks Last edited by ReverendDexter; November 18th, 2009 at 03:02 PM. Reason: reworded for clarity |
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Regular
91' 5.0 LX
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 231
![]() iTrader: 1 reviews
|
|
|
|
|
#58 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,387
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() iTrader: 0 reviews
|
With a terry huston downpipe, custom chip and exhaust cutout I was hitting mid 12s with ease on 18psi with a completely stock car (full weight with options and sterio). Never had a chance to throw some meth injection it but that's the norm for them. The impalas etc simply don't compare. The 3.8 block has to be lighter then an ls1 so you'd be shaving some weight as well. |
|
|
|
|
#59 | |
|
MM Fanatic
|
__________________
"Whip out your dick you'll either get it sucked or get smacked..." "That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it... and it's worked out pretty well so far..." |
|
|
|
|
#60 | |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Threads Similar to: 300-325hp!!! =)
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 300 | Nick_Rapitis | The Clubhouse | 31 | August 16th, 2007 07:42 PM |
| 300 HP n/a | nba1341 | 5.0 Mustangs | 4 | July 24th, 2007 10:35 PM |
| 300 | B0mb3r645 | The Clubhouse | 16 | March 10th, 2007 10:44 PM |
| Shelby GT 325HP | oldernewbie | 2005 - 2010 | 11 | November 29th, 2006 09:34 PM |