M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction - Page 3 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > Pre-2005 V6 Mustang



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 08-05-2008, 03:05 PM   #71
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,834
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

i have a fantastic idea.....do what you want to your own car for yourself and not worry about what others think or say about it
Kyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-05-2008, 03:06 PM   #72
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

i would close this thread if i wasnt still waiting on an answer, nobody is upset...i want some actual ****ing logic and reasoning and have yet to see any, f-150 guys are not included because this was a stock v6 mustang that the original thread was ever about, trust me i know, i was one of the first ones to post in the original thread and have been following it since. i ask serious questions to get factsa anfd all i hear is, "on a 4.2L" that is considered a modification guys on a stock mustang...modification is considered not stock...get real or shut up,

im getting a little tired of, the insults and one-sided ****, im willing to accept the facts if they are ever presented.but so far all i hear is well its fair to compare a 4.2...is not!!!thats a modification so forget it, show me a 3.8 that makes more power from a stock eaton than a 4v 4.6 does, that is what the original argument was about.

i could give a **** less about whatever your comment was about hurting my v8 owner feelings, you have a long way to go before yours can even handle the power mine can much less make the power it will make so im not worried about any of these guys making more power than my car because first of all, im not running a piece of **** eaton on my cobra motor, im running a turbo to see real power numbers that a v6 cannot even reach with todays parts.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:11 PM   #73
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 45
Wink Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilRoush View Post
How did this thread turn into a pissing match? The idea was to put out the info related to using an M112 on the 3.8L block Mustang (and 4.2L F150 guys that might be reading this). How it's done, and the power being made.

Seriously, I never intended for V8 owners to get all upset that their power was being equated by guys using the V6 motor.
Ok - just don't let it happen again . . . . (jk)



There must be a lot of insecurity? v8er's "trolling" on the v6 forum . . . . (jk?)



Seriously, your thread & points are appreciated. (No jk)

4thMustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-05-2008, 03:12 PM   #74
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

the point is,all i see is hippocrites, you say less displacement is better , yet you want to use a stroked 4.2 to make the numbers to prove your point, news flash fellas, that is called cubic inch which the cobra already has, so you are upping it to make cobra numbers while still claiming it is better to have less cubic inch...while throwing out physics equations that have not a damn thing to do with combustion and leave out about 7 variables that are neccisary to make power with an internal combustion engine.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:21 PM   #75
Registered Member
Regular
 
1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Region: Missouri
Posts: 1,292
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

7 vairables?
I thought all you really need is air, fuel and spark. Air and fuel being the 2 main.
__________________
03 GT Charcoal Silver Metallic - Stolen
1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:29 PM   #76
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 45
Cool Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplyOrangeTPS View Post
the point is . . . .
Isn't the purpose of the v6 Forum to discuss v6's?

There are built small displacement 4 cyl Civic's out there that will beat good running Boss 429's, 454's & 426 Hemi's too . . . . so what? Does that diminish the big blocks?

V6 guys sometimes get no respect from v8 guys . . . . seldom (if ever) is it the other way around.

It's all good.

Vaya con Dios.
4thMustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:30 PM   #77
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4thMustang View Post
There must be a lot of insecurity? v8er's "trolling" on the v6 forum . . . . (jk?)

I wouldn't call it trolling as much as I would making sure accurate data is presented so this site doesn't just turn into a useless information source where people just post up what their calculations are without any actual data.

Accuracy of data presented is much more important than everyone's lame attempts to call those of us that own V8's insecure.

Also, I did the math for all of my mods last night, and I am officially making 618 hp now. I need to update my sig. So, I guess it is possible to make 600+ on an eaton. I'm so happy to finally make it.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:35 PM   #78
Registered Member
Regular
 
1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Region: Missouri
Posts: 1,292
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Damn 120hp over night nice.
__________________
03 GT Charcoal Silver Metallic - Stolen
1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:39 PM   #79
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1234 View Post
Damn 120hp over night nice.
Well, I realized I was measuring my output incorrectly, and went back and used math instead...and by doing so I realized I had a lot of power left on the table. So, I did the math, re-tuned my logic, and came up with my actual HP numbers. It was a great mod.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 03:48 PM   #80
Registered Member
Regular
 
1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Region: Missouri
Posts: 1,292
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

I think imma do the same thing.

So i have 310hp I like tha way alot better
__________________
03 GT Charcoal Silver Metallic - Stolen
1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 07:13 PM   #81
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1234 View Post
7 vairables?
I thought all you really need is air, fuel and spark. Air and fuel being the 2 main.
2:2: first of all since it makes since to you, explain how those 3 variables fit into PV=nRT

next thing, i think you are leaving out compression, octane, temperature,boost, and cubic inch in determining power... if fuel and spark, and air is all that is needed to make power,my .18 ci O.S. engine makes the same power as your car because it has all 3 in the proper ratio to run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4thMustang View Post
Isn't the purpose of the v6 Forum to discuss v6's?

There are built small displacement 4 cyl Civic's out there that will beat good running Boss 429's, 454's & 426 Hemi's too . . . . so what? Does that diminish the big blocks?

V6 guys sometimes get no respect from v8 guys . . . . seldom (if ever) is it the other way around.

It's all good.

Vaya con Dios.
now for you, you need to do more research before you post something like this , the original thread was posted just before your time on this site and was never about bashing v6s, its about a comparison between a stock eaton on both a cobra and a stock 3.8L v6, im tired of repeating this like a ****ing broken record..certain people are getting butthurt over it bacause we refuse to believe somebody calculating thier horsepower by adding what each mod"should give" and the ones claiming to know real,math can only tell me the physical properties of gasoline which we already know is liquid in is used state.there have been no dynoi sheets showing a 3.8 v6 performing better with a stock eaton than a cobra, every sheet posted had some sort of "extra thing"

i added up my power last night, im making 450 hp with a 125 shot of nitrous, im pretty excited now that i know a real number.i think we should just send our dyno back and buy more calculators.


and nobody will answer why they are increasing thier cubic inch if it is better to have less cubic inch in the name of creating more boost. btw a 4.2L mustang is not stock because they have never come off of the assembly line with them.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 07:30 PM   #82
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

You guys should be politicians. I've never seen anyone so adeptly take a statement, put it in an entirely different context, and then laugh and point because it is no longer true. I didn't put that equation to imply that it can be used to calculate horsepower. I was talking about the fact that an increase in PSI that is found by strapping a blower on a smaller motor does not mean that the blower is working any harder or moving more air.

As far as the "stock V6" argument goes... this thread is not about a stock V6. If there is another thread about stock V6's with Eatons, maybe you would have better luck there. As long as you are in this thread though, I wouldn't expect any discussion of anything other than pretty highly modified V6s.

Finally, for those who discount the use of "math"... Math and physics explain everything around you whether you like it or not. Can you use math/physics to predict how much horsepower a car will make? Not likely. But it is not because the limitations of math/physics. It is only because of our inability to measure all the variables.

As far as turning this site into a "useless source of information", I'm afraid that's exactly what you guys are doing.
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 07:42 PM   #83
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
As far as turning this site into a "useless source of information", I'm afraid that's exactly what you guys are doing.
Asking for solid proof of numbers and not basic calculations is us making this a site of useless info? Ok, you need to stay out of the sun.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 09:42 PM   #84
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
You guys should be politicians. I've never seen anyone so adeptly take a statement, put it in an entirely different context, and then laugh and point because it is no longer true. I didn't put that equation to imply that it can be used to calculate horsepower. I was talking about the fact that an increase in PSI that is found by strapping a blower on a smaller motor does not mean that the blower is working any harder or moving more air.

As far as the "stock V6" argument goes... this thread is not about a stock V6. If there is another thread about stock V6's with Eatons, maybe you would have better luck there. As long as you are in this thread though, I wouldn't expect any discussion of anything other than pretty highly modified V6s.

Finally, for those who discount the use of "math"... Math and physics explain everything around you whether you like it or not. Can you use math/physics to predict how much horsepower a car will make? Not likely. But it is not because the limitations of math/physics. It is only because of our inability to measure all the variables.

As far as turning this site into a "useless source of information", I'm afraid that's exactly what you guys are doing.
if it can be calculated through math, and i cant do it, maybe you should give it a whirl, i was making the point that there are way to many variables to try to figure it that way, this thread got started when the other thread turned into an insult war...
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 06:55 AM   #85
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplyOrangeTPS View Post
if it can be calculated through math, and i cant do it, maybe you should give it a whirl, i was making the point that there are way to many variables to try to figure it that way, this thread got started when the other thread turned into an insult war...
There are software packages out there that do just that, and fairly well considering. Of course they are not perfect, but they can get surprisingly close. Unfortunately, they rely on an ancient method of calculating numbers known as "math". This makes them a little shady in my book.
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 07:55 AM   #86
Moderator Emeritus
Legacy
Regular
 
SpectorV's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Alabama
Posts: 26,049
Send a message via AIM to SpectorV
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

one other thing to note, you talk about the same psi or X psi... but heat changes the amount of air you actually move as well as elevation and such~ you need to take those into account as well. As said above math can be used to calculate with 100% accuracy HP/TQ figures but... we dont have all the variables needed to correctly do this so.... what has been done is not accurate.
__________________
2003 Cobra Vert (Redfire) #3938 of 5082 @ 05/27/2003
472rwhp/493rwtq -Modification List - Dyno Sheet
2012 Mustang 3.7L M6 (Kona Blue)
2011 Ford Edge Sport (Red Metallic)
SpectorV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 08:02 AM   #87
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
There are software packages out there that do just that, and fairly well considering. Of course they are not perfect, but they can get surprisingly close. Unfortunately, they rely on an ancient method of calculating numbers known as "math". This makes them a little shady in my book.
im aware of these packages, one that i have is the desktop dyno, which is about 2% accurate when compared to actual dyno numbers, another problem is most people arent using these programs, they are saying"180hp stock+30hpCAI+120 hp eaton swap+10 hp exhaust+ 15hp TB= 355rwhp....yep im making over 350 hp right now" for me, id rather just see it on a dyno...

btw these programs also allow you to run a 1" lift cam in a stock 302 block and they dont consider piston/valve clearance and such.

either way, i know that the programs are much more complex than PV=nRT which is the ideal gas law and charles and boyle whos two laws are the bassis for the ideal gas law were not one bit interested in engines or horsepower, they created thier laws to define the pysical properties of gasses using pressure, volume, temperature and moles

oh and i forgot to reply to this yesterday, you are right the blower is NOT moving more air, therefore it is NOT making more power than if it were on a cobra.

still have not gottena response as to why people are increasing cubic inch close to that of a cobra and porting the heads to flow like a cobra, if the smaller cubic inch motor with more restrictive heads makes more boost resulting in better power...
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:08 AM   #88
Registered Member
Regular
 
LilRoush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Region: Florida
Posts: 91
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

I have not said the STOCK 3.8L motor flows better than the Cobra. I don't know where you got that idea from. I posted about modified V6s.


My math came from several cars, several motor set ups ON A DYNO (not some stupid "Get 15 hp" magazine ads). It also came from 4 years of trials and testing. I find it funny nobody argued about my math that said what a stock 3.8L would make, or a heads and cam 4.2L would make with teh M112... and then they went out and hit those numbers within 10 hp of what I said.

I agree my math isn't perfect - and I've said that repeatedly. Nobody believed I was running a mid 200 hp N/A V6 that looked stock on the outside either. But read the title of this thread again. It does NOT read "Hey look at my 600 hp V6"... it is about the basic bolt on set up for the M112 on a V6. I posted some of the history of how it came to be, and the numbers people are putting down at various levels of boost etc.... I have yet to have a complaint about the set up that is valid. And the V6 owners are very happy to make stock Terminator numbers with less out of pocket expense on a stock 3.8L.

The immaturity of some of the members on this forum amazes me.
__________________
~Matt
2000 Roush #5004 M112'd V6
1970 Mach 1 351W 5 speed swap
2001 Explorer Sport 4.0L
LilRoush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:17 AM   #89
Road Trip!
 
Cajun JungleBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,147
Send a message via AIM to Cajun JungleBoy Send a message via Yahoo to Cajun JungleBoy
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilRoush View Post
(I hope I'm not stepping on toes with this thread.)

I just wanted to get some facts out there about the use of the Eaton M112 on the split port V6 motors.

History:
The M112 off the 03/04 Cobras is a pretty straight forward install on the V6. Back in like 02/03 I was working on making a custom lower intake that would use a water to air IC and mount the M90 on top of it. I wanted a roots set up for my car since it lacked in low/mid range power. I could care less about making power at 4500 rpm or more. When the company I was working with pretty much just walked out on me (and my money), I decided to make something using the M112. I wanted it to meet several goals. 1 - It needed to maintain all the pollution controls (I lived in Texas at the time). 2- I didn't want to use a custom fuel rail, so it had to work with the stock one. 3- I wanted the install to be so easy any novice could do it in a day or two. (Especially with 90% of the V6 owenrs being new to Mustangs.) 4- It had to be cheap.

I came up with the boxed upper idea, had it made and tested it out on my car. I went that route b/c it didn't need a custom fuel rail, didn't mess with the EGR, and didn't need custom plumbing of the coolant line in the lower. Obvisouly, it made it very tall. After having it on about 5 cars and running well, I got with Super Six to mass produce the upper. They are doing so, but it's a taller version. Also, they didn't want to mess with a kit. Nathan (MySteed) and I got together with it, and I'm making the boxed uppers, sending them to him, and he is selling a full kit for it. All you supply are the boost gauge and dyno tune. It will work on any similar spilt port V6 (Windstar 3.8L, F150 4.2L etc...) And yes, there is one installed on a Windstar already. It's a SC'd handicap set up vehicle.

Facts:
Biggest thing to point out is that it will not fit under a stock hood. There have been many issues with this idea. Mine is under a 2 1/2" Y2K Cobra R cowl. The Super Six Motorsports version doesn't fit under a 3" cowl. There are things like cowl design and company that play a role in it. Also, condition of the car itself, if you have worn out motor mounts, a shift in the K member or anything like that, it could impact how it fits. I know mine is close enough to the hood that when I lean on it, I can flex the hood enough to hit the blower pulley.
The M112 is very large when compared to the size displacement of the V6 motor. It will be more than enough supercharger for 99% of the V6 guys out there. However, with that in mind, any Cobra blower upgrade (KB, Whipple etc...) will work with this set up if you are aiming for more than 600 hp.
Intercooling comes up alot. Neither myself or Nathan are running intercooled set ups. Neither of us have seen major heat soak issues like so many people warn about. Both of us have seen a lot of street use, and never had issues with idling temps in traffic or anything of that nature.

Power:
On a stock bottom end - we suggest staying under 350 hp for starters. There have been cars as high as 450 rwhp with stock bottom ends, but why push luck? The best pulley combo we've seen to start with is the stock blower pulley and use of a 42% Underdrive crank pulley. That will give a stock motor about 300 rwhp. Most of the people installing it are starting with lower boost levels, getting a feel for it, then swapping around pullies to make more power. As far as we know, the only built bottom end this set up is being used on it mine. Others are still using stock bottom ends.

Gains on a stock motor set up range up to roughly 16 rwhp per psi of boost from a stock blower. Modified split port Mustangs can see mid 20 rwhp per psi of boost. As long as the motor is openned up enough to move the air, and you have a large enough fuel system to supply the gas, you can make more than enough power for the street.

With a built low compression motor, fully ported blower, 2.76" blower pulley, 10% over drive crank pulley(custom made) I was set to push close to 20 psi into my motor. As posted in the other thread, I was seeing 24 rwhp per psi in the lower RPM range, which dropped off to 22 rwhp per psi in the upper RPM range. My N/A 4.2L dyno'd at 247/256 at the wheels prior to blower install.
Using 18 psi as a rough peak boost number and using the lower 22 rwhp per psi to be safe - that puts my car at roughly in the neighborhood of 640ish when it stretched the ARP head studs on the drivers side. Even using the lower gain numbers, it's still upper 500s. Granted there will be nay sayers - and I'm fine with that. I'm not out trying to set records or anything. I just like playing with my car to see what new stuff I can come up with.

That motor will soon be going into another car, a better "blower friendly" cam, tuned again and back to see what it will do. The plan is a Whipple upgrade soon there after.... pending the sale of the Roush.

ummm you do know this whole power thing you talked about is all about "stock motor". and my immaturity level is sky high, especially on this thread. all you have to do is throw up a dyno sheet, and all will be done. if that's your car with the little eaton on it, why don't you do it? i ended following this thread a while back, but it keeps popping up, and the redundancy is ridiculous. never in your opening arguments did you say, the 4.2L... infact all i read is stock motor, stock bottom end, stock stock stock. you should have restated, with forged rods and pistons, and this and this done and this and this done, we were able to get this.

Yes you used words like your 4.2.... butttt read the main part you posted..
Cajun JungleBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:33 AM   #90
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilRoush View Post
I have not said the STOCK 3.8L motor flows better than the Cobra. I don't know where you got that idea from. I posted about modified V6s.


My math came from several cars, several motor set ups ON A DYNO (not some stupid "Get 15 hp" magazine ads). It also came from 4 years of trials and testing. I find it funny nobody argued about my math that said what a stock 3.8L would make, or a heads and cam 4.2L would make with teh M112... and then they went out and hit those numbers within 10 hp of what I said.

I agree my math isn't perfect - and I've said that repeatedly. Nobody believed I was running a mid 200 hp N/A V6 that looked stock on the outside either. But read the title of this thread again. It does NOT read "Hey look at my 600 hp V6"... it is about the basic bolt on set up for the M112 on a V6. I posted some of the history of how it came to be, and the numbers people are putting down at various levels of boost etc.... I have yet to have a complaint about the set up that is valid. And the V6 owners are very happy to make stock Terminator numbers with less out of pocket expense on a stock 3.8L.

The immaturity of some of the members on this forum amazes me.
actually, i dont disagree with anything you posted in the opening comment, this thread has taken the direction of the previous thread(the one you came in a the the end, i understand they are making the cobra numbers with a 4.2 becaus eit is almost a 4.6 and when you port the heads and such i would expect it to make cobra numbers with close to the same ci and flow characteristics...

here is how things went starting from the original thread... it was stated that an eaton makes more power on a v6 than an intercooled procharger, cobra owners wanted to know how when it is the opposite effect on a cobra, it was stated that the 3.8 has less cubic inch so makes more boost with a stock blower despite the higher intake temps, but when you change the ci to 4.2L it is directly contradicting the previous statement. it was also stated that if you take a stock 3.8 mustang(because that is what came in them) and bolt an eaton on it and race a stock cobra, there is no doubt who would finish the 1/4 first..incinuating a stock v6 with an eaton can beat a stock cobra.that is why we are at this point in the thread, i think your original comment was accepted by most on here and the thread has just taken a different direction.

actually none of my posts are even directed to you because so far, you seem to have the best knowledge of the swap and as of now, i think your statements are making the most sense out of everything i read.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:44 AM   #91
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cajun JungleBoy View Post
ummm you do know this whole power thing you talked about is all about "stock motor". and my immaturity level is sky high, especially on this thread. all you have to do is throw up a dyno sheet, and all will be done. if that's your car with the little eaton on it, why don't you do it? i ended following this thread a while back, but it keeps popping up, and the redundancy is ridiculous. never in your opening arguments did you say, the 4.2L... infact all i read is stock motor, stock bottom end, stock stock stock. you should have restated, with forged rods and pistons, and this and this done and this and this done, we were able to get this.

Yes you used words like your 4.2.... butttt read the main part you posted..

actually mikey is correct here, when i think stock, i think a motor that has not had the main caps loosened to throw in a crank, which is another point i was trying to make, saying that a motor with almost the same cubic inch as the next motor and almost the same flow numbers makes almost the same power is nothing short of believable.and actually still doesent provide an answer as to why a 4.2 is capable of making more power with a stock eaton, than a cobra is...

dont get me wrong, i think the m112 on a v6 is a cool *** swap no doubt, im just looking for a few answers as to why they say certain things and i cant get an explanation. but very few of the comments are direct to you. im actually very open minded to any aspect of making power as long as i know how it is done...but every explanation for the eaton being able to make more power on a v6 than a cobra at 0.4L difference has been directly contradicted by somebody else telling about a combination that makes XXX power, im not so much worried about the dyno sheets as i am the information making sense.

example: a v6 makes more power because it creates more boost because its only filling 3.8Linstead of 4.6, Jim Bob is making 389hp with his eaton 4.2L with full port work..

this is the type of information i have been fed.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:45 AM   #92
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectorV View Post
one other thing to note, you talk about the same psi or X psi... but heat changes the amount of air you actually move as well as elevation and such~ you need to take those into account as well. As said above math can be used to calculate with 100% accuracy HP/TQ figures but... we dont have all the variables needed to correctly do this so.... what has been done is not accurate.
Actually, the heat we are talking about with an eaton has the same amount of air whether it is 200 degrees or 30 degrees...because it is all post compression. With a positive displacement blower, it moves a set amount of air per revolution and compresses it. So, with a V6 and a V8 sitting right next to each other in the shop, that 20 psi V6 with 210+ degree IAT2 temps will have the same amount of O2 as that 16 PSI V8 with 115 degree IAT2 temps. It will just pre-ignite a whole lot sooner than the V8 due to the super high temps.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:54 AM   #93
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

rob and spector, both of yall are right actually, yall are just wording it different, spector is saying what i said earlier that its nearly impossible to calculate every single varialble with a calculator that goes into making power, he is referring to the density of air, air is less dense with oxygen at a higher altitude than at sea sevel, so although you are moving the same air, it is two totally different calculations when you do the math.and since the air is heated after it enters the blower, it is part of the reason they see more boost because heated air takes up more space than cool air, still doesent mean it makes more power though.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:56 AM   #94
Road Trip!
 
Cajun JungleBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,147
Send a message via AIM to Cajun JungleBoy Send a message via Yahoo to Cajun JungleBoy
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

:pancake:
Cajun JungleBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 10:12 AM   #95
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

^^what does that mean anyway?
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 10:18 AM   #96
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

It means this debate is retarded until someone posts true data. And my post was strictly talking about the heat differences between the two blowers....which is pretty much the reason I started my sentence with "Actually, the heat we are talking about with an eaton..." and also made the comment of "sitting next to each other in the shop".
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 10:22 AM   #97
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

yea, but you are right..thats all that counts, but he is too just saying two slightly different points, i agree about the heat which is why i still have no answer to my original question of why the heaton is preferred over the procharger.
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 10:30 AM   #98
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

All the facts you need to understand why it is so much better are provided here:

http://www.mustangevolution.com/foru...32/#post469476
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 10:37 AM   #99
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

you my friend...are a smartass
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 11:12 AM   #100
Registered Member
Regular
 
1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Region: Missouri
Posts: 1,292
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplyOrangeTPS View Post
2:2: first of all since it makes since to you, explain how those 3 variables fit into PV=nRT

next thing, i think you are leaving out compression, octane, temperature,boost, and cubic inch in determining power... if fuel and spark, and air is all that is needed to make power,my .18 ci O.S. engine makes the same power as your car because it has all 3 in the proper ratio to run.
Sorry went brain dead for a minute.
__________________
03 GT Charcoal Silver Metallic - Stolen
1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 11:16 AM   #101
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1234 View Post
Sorry went brain dead for a minute.
lol, i knew what you meant...just clarifying for everybody else..dont take that the wrong way
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 11:22 AM   #102
Registered Member
Regular
 
1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Region: Missouri
Posts: 1,292
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Its all good.
__________________
03 GT Charcoal Silver Metallic - Stolen
1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 04:16 PM   #103
Road Trip!
 
Cajun JungleBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,147
Send a message via AIM to Cajun JungleBoy Send a message via Yahoo to Cajun JungleBoy
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

fiyahhhh
Cajun JungleBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 07:03 PM   #104
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplyOrangeTPS View Post
im aware of these packages, one that i have is the desktop dyno, which is about 2% accurate when compared to actual dyno numbers, another problem is most people arent using these programs, they are saying"180hp stock+30hpCAI+120 hp eaton swap+10 hp exhaust+ 15hp TB= 355rwhp....yep im making over 350 hp right now" for me, id rather just see it on a dyno...

btw these programs also allow you to run a 1" lift cam in a stock 302 block and they dont consider piston/valve clearance and such.

either way, i know that the programs are much more complex than PV=nRT which is the ideal gas law and charles and boyle whos two laws are the bassis for the ideal gas law were not one bit interested in engines or horsepower, they created thier laws to define the pysical properties of gasses using pressure, volume, temperature and moles

oh and i forgot to reply to this yesterday, you are right the blower is NOT moving more air, therefore it is NOT making more power than if it were on a cobra.

still have not gottena response as to why people are increasing cubic inch close to that of a cobra and porting the heads to flow like a cobra, if the smaller cubic inch motor with more restrictive heads makes more boost resulting in better power...
Dynos aren't accurate either. All they are is more silly math. They differ greatly from one to the next. If you want to compare two cars, take them to the track.

And since when did P/V clearance make a difference in power???

I've already explained the reason I wrote the pv = nrt formula. If you want to continue misconstruing what I wrote, that's fine. Anyone who can read will be able to understand what I meant. I also didn't realize that laws of physics apply only when you are trying to solve the exact problem that they were originally created for. I guess I don't need to check the air in my tires in the winter months after all.

There is more to making power on a blown car than just getting the blower to move as much air as possible. You still have to have heads that can move the air equally as efficiently, without impeding air velocity. You have to have the right spark. Even little things such as spark plug design can change horsepower in significant ways when dealing with blown cars. Not to mention what is perhaps THE most important part: The cam. None of these effect how much air the blower will move, but they can have a huge impact on performance. Then there are parasitic losses due to other components (A/C, smog pumps, steering pumps) that must be considered. There are differences in exhaust scavenging capabilities (what good is getting air in if you can't get it out?). Differences in valvetrain weight... the list goes on and on.

So to say that the V6 cannot make more power with the blowers moving the same amount of air is unrealistic. To give some extreme examples of this, suppose the V8 has a compression leak... or a distributor that isn't sending fire to one coil wire... or a leaking head gasket. Now, is the "little V6" making more power? It's very likely.

Now let's go less extreme... the V6 has a blower-friendly cam with lower overlap while the idiot V8 owner threw in a cam that is meant for low-end torque in N/A applications? Who's making more power now? It's hard to say.

Finally, I'd much rather work with the higher cubic inch motor. All other factors equal (and I mean ALL other factors equal), of course the higher cube motor will make more power. That does not mean that every 4.6L modular V8 with an Eaton will make more power than every 4.3L pushrod V6 with an Eaton. That's just silly.

Now, since I have nothing more intelligent to say...

:pancake:
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:27 PM   #105
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 1,434
Re: M112 V6: Fact vs Fiction

1) a dyno may not be 100% accrate but if you dyno both cars on the same dyno, you have a good idea of what the difference is between them.

2) im saying the programs are not very good at measuring power because it lets you use unrealistic combinations, and if you dont have enough piston/valve clearance,i doubt you make any power with valves pushed through your pistons.

3)sorry to break it to you but PV=nRT has NOTHING to do with this discussion, not even related, yes physics and some chemistry can be used to guess power but that would take entirely too much math because you have to go as far as figuring the exact octane of the fuel you just bought.

4)"There is more to making power on a blown car than just getting the blower to move as much air as possible. You still have to have heads that can move the air equally as efficiently, without impeding air velocity. You have to have the right spark. Even little things such as spark plug design can change horsepower in significant ways when dealing with blown cars. Not to mention what is perhaps THE most important part: The cam. None of these effect how much air the blower will move, but they can have a huge impact on performance. Then there are parasitic losses due to other components (A/C, smog pumps, steering pumps) that must be considered. There are differences in exhaust scavenging capabilities (what good is getting air in if you can't get it out?). Differences in valvetrain weight... the list goes on and on."

this is directly contradicting the statements that you are arguing for, originally it was better for it to be more restrictive because it makes more boost. and the comparisoon was originally about a stock 3.8, with no other mods.

5)"So to say that the V6 cannot make more power with the blowers moving the same amount of air is unrealistic. To give some extreme examples of this, suppose the V8 has a compression leak... or a distributor that isn't sending fire to one coil wire... or a leaking head gasket. Now, is the "little V6" making more power? It's very likely.

Now let's go less extreme... the V6 has a blower-friendly cam with lower overlap while the idiot V8 owner threw in a cam that is meant for low-end torque in N/A applications? Who's making more power now? It's hard to say."

this is the most rediculous thing that has been posted in this thread yet...you are saying the v8 has to be broken for the v6 to make more power? i now realize that you are unfamiliar with the argument. it is about a 99-04 v6 and a 03-04 cobra, the cobras do not have distributers, and they have 4 cams that are blower friendly.

also, the argument was about a stock v6 and you keep bringing up mods, im not saying a v6 CANNOT make more power than a v8 which i have clarified several times, you need to calm down and go read the explanation of the argument. stop already with all the cams/heads/crank mods, it is about a stock 3.8 and a stock 4.6 both with just an eaton...NO HEADS,CAMS,OR CRANK, if you bore and stroke the 3.8 to a 4.2 and port the **** out of it, then you are only agreeing with waht im arguing because it is no longer stock, now try to find another loophole but you have accomplished nothing, just 3 paragraphs of information that is irrellevant to this argument as was your physics comment that you cannot back up with numbers"but somebody can"
SimplyOrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > Pre-2005 V6 Mustang

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fact or Fiction iwannagofast General Mustang Discussion 10 03-12-2008 02:10 AM
This must be fiction... MarkuzLS1 The Bar 17 11-10-2007 08:26 AM
The 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction JROC The Bar 11 11-05-2007 12:06 PM
Calling All Pulp Fiction Fans likwuddeath06 Pictures and Videos 2 09-21-2007 11:39 AM
MAF FACT or FICTION 70mm stock eagle05 1979-1995 Mustang GT 12 09-06-2006 10:56 AM

» Like Us On Facebook



07:18 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.