Cheapest Horses? - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1996-2004 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 06-02-2013, 12:32 PM   #1
Registered User
Newbie
 
Mr GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Western
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 7
Thumbs up Cheapest Horses?

What are the cheapest (Priced) parts that give you the most horsepower? Also, what parts are recommended putting in first? Ex: CAI, Exhaust, etc.
Mr GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-02-2013, 12:33 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
Venomouz831's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seaside
Region: California
Posts: 8,133
I would go ahead and do exhaust first, offroad midpipe and the catback of you're choice.
__________________
)02 Gt, Founder of WE2G
Venomouz831 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 12:36 PM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
Venomouz831's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seaside
Region: California
Posts: 8,133
As for cheapest part that will give you the most hp I would say a bottle will
__________________
)02 Gt, Founder of WE2G
Venomouz831 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-02-2013, 12:38 PM   #4
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
lowflyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Region: Mississippi
Posts: 19,890
Send a message via AIM to lowflyn
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomouz831
As for cheapest part that will give you the most hp I would say a bottle will
I agree. Best bang for bucks would be nitrous and gears.
__________________
"I'm not driving too fast...just flying too low"
Mine:
-03 SB Cobra vert- 2552 of 5082 Born 02/25/03
Our's:
90 7up vert - new project-07 DSG Focus -DD
335
lowflyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 12:42 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
MidnightBlueGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Charlotte
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 3,887
In the long run forced induction will give you way more power than all the bolt ons and be cheaper when you price all them together.
MidnightBlueGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 12:43 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Region: Arkansas
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by MidnightBlueGT View Post
In the long run forced induction will give you way more power than all the bolt ons and be cheaper when you price all them together.
+1
Only problem is getting the money to go FI.
BackPressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 12:46 PM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
MidnightBlueGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Charlotte
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackPressure View Post

+1
Only problem is getting the money to go FI.
And supporting mods if you try to boost over 450hp in our cars.
MidnightBlueGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 02:52 PM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,001
Read the Beginners Guide to Bolt-ons "sticky"--see the link in my signature...
__________________
SOLD! - 2003 GT, UPR X, FRPP 24lb/h, Magnaflow, PP 70mm TB & plenum, Delta Force tuned,
Steeda UDPs, Ralco flywheel, RAM HDX clutch, 3.73s, 262 rwHP/305 lb-ft.

New ride (7/1/2013) 1998 Mercedes SL500-5.0L 32V VVT 326/347 HP/tq
cliffyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 03:00 PM   #9
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Region: Florida
Posts: 595
Send a message via AIM to tedness
Honestly there aren't any 'cheap' power parts (edit: that individually will do really anything for your car, but will work well when combined).

I'm only making 269rwhp/316rwtq and it's cost me a quite a bit.
- Drop-in filter - $45
- Magnapack catback, off-road x-pipe - $600
- 4.10s (which don't add to dyno numbers, just butt dyno power) - $500 (installed)
- Tune (SCT X3) - $350
__________________
tedness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 03:10 PM   #10
Registered Member
Regular
 
Venomouz831's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seaside
Region: California
Posts: 8,133
Tune and exhaust got you to 270?
__________________
)02 Gt, Founder of WE2G
Venomouz831 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 04:27 PM   #11
slow281
Regular
Supporter
 
sixpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cedar Rapids
Region: Nebraska
Posts: 3,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomouz831 View Post
Tune and exhaust got you to 270?
+1 maybe to the crank..
__________________
Need more Horsepower? Add a sticker. Contact me for vinyl stickers pre-made and custom!
Stick on Horsepower <- Click Here and like my Page!
2001 GT - True Blue
2003 V6 - Zinc Yellow
1990 LX 2.3 - project
sixpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 07:05 PM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomouz831 View Post
Tune and exhaust got you to 270?
+1, Where are people getting these numbers from?

Someone is packing them full of granola, come to Daytona Beach and use my dynamometer--I'll pay for the time on the rollers...
__________________
SOLD! - 2003 GT, UPR X, FRPP 24lb/h, Magnaflow, PP 70mm TB & plenum, Delta Force tuned,
Steeda UDPs, Ralco flywheel, RAM HDX clutch, 3.73s, 262 rwHP/305 lb-ft.

New ride (7/1/2013) 1998 Mercedes SL500-5.0L 32V VVT 326/347 HP/tq
cliffyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 07:21 PM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
Michael.s.king's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: South Portland
Region: Maine
Posts: 209
The guy I bought my car from said the chrome fender flares he put on added like 45hp....
Michael.s.king is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 08:18 PM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael.s.king View Post
The guy I bought my car from said the chrome fender flares he put on added like 45hp....
Just 45 HP? Must have been el-Cheapos from eBay...
__________________
SOLD! - 2003 GT, UPR X, FRPP 24lb/h, Magnaflow, PP 70mm TB & plenum, Delta Force tuned,
Steeda UDPs, Ralco flywheel, RAM HDX clutch, 3.73s, 262 rwHP/305 lb-ft.

New ride (7/1/2013) 1998 Mercedes SL500-5.0L 32V VVT 326/347 HP/tq
cliffyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 08:23 PM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Region: Arkansas
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael.s.king View Post
The guy I bought my car from said the chrome fender flares he put on added like 45hp....
http://youtu.be/bXpFt4_Eawk
Dude, you need overnighted from Japan fender flares. They're good for 45 EACH. JDM ALL DAY BRAH!!
You're welcome for the video by the way
BackPressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 11:43 PM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
Venomouz831's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seaside
Region: California
Posts: 8,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffyk View Post

+1, Where are people getting these numbers from?

Someone is packing them full of granola, come to Daytona Beach and use my dynamometer--I'll pay for the time on the rollers...
Yea I know right
__________________
)02 Gt, Founder of WE2G
Venomouz831 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 01:48 AM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
2002VertGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffyk View Post

+1, Where are people getting these numbers from?

Someone is packing them full of granola, come to Daytona Beach and use my dynamometer--I'll pay for the time on the rollers...
You promise? I have Bbk cai, Bbk 78mm tb/p combo, Mac Pro chamber, Mac cat back and 93oct tune and the dyno said I had 252/299 to the wheels.
__________________
2004 F150 4x4 Lariat Supercrew, 5.4l, Black/Arizona Beige (daily driver)
2002 Mustang GT Convertible, triple black, mach 1000 system (Summer Car)
2001 Ranger Edge 4x4 xcab (sold to cousin)

4.10 Gear/RPM thread
2002VertGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 01:52 AM   #18
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Region: Florida
Posts: 595
Send a message via AIM to tedness
I'd be willing to throw it on another dyno because I've had to run on two different brand dynos so it's hard to get a proper reading.

I did a baseline run with her stock on a Dynojet and made 224/266 on 87.


Then I did a baseline run w/ exhaust and no tune on a Mustang MD500 and made 236/273 on 87.
Then we did a tune to the car and made 243/280 on 87.


Then we did another tune and went from 87 to 93 octane and made 269/316.


The only reason I think there's some validity to the numbers is because it was a dyno day and bone stock cars were making proper rear wheel numbers.

I want to drive down to VMP and throw it on their dyno to see what it does there. I'm sure the numbers are going to be different but I want to know just how different.

Cliffy, I would seriously take you up on that offer just to see what different dynos read my car at.
__________________
tedness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 01:56 AM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
2002VertGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by tedness View Post
I'd be willing to throw it on another dyno because I've had to run on two different brand dynos so it's hard to get a proper reading.

I did a baseline run with her stock on a Dynojet and made 224/266 on 87.

Then I did a baseline run w/ exhaust and no tune on a Mustang MD500 and made 236/273 on 87.
Then we did a tune to the car and made 243/280 on 87.

Then we did another tune and went from 87 to 93 octane and made 269/316.

The only reason I think there's some validity to the numbers is because it was a dyno day and bone stock cars were making proper rear wheel numbers.

I want to drive down to VMP and throw it on their dyno to see what it does there. I'm sure the numbers are going to be different but I want to know just how different.

Cliffy, I would seriously take you up on that offer just to see what different dynos read my car at.
This makes me wonder about my numbers. I have more done besides gears and am making less hp...
__________________
2004 F150 4x4 Lariat Supercrew, 5.4l, Black/Arizona Beige (daily driver)
2002 Mustang GT Convertible, triple black, mach 1000 system (Summer Car)
2001 Ranger Edge 4x4 xcab (sold to cousin)

4.10 Gear/RPM thread
2002VertGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 02:01 AM   #20
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Region: Florida
Posts: 595
Send a message via AIM to tedness
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2002VertGT View Post
This makes me wonder about my numbers. I have more done besides gears and am making less hp...
It makes me wonder how much effect different octane gases make on our cars. Ideally I'd like to make these runs on the same dyno within a short period of time:
- 87 octane, stock tune
- 87 octane, loaded tune
- 93 octane, stock tune
- 93 octane, loaded tune.

That way I can get a reasonably accurate/consistent rating on my car.

Edit: I know numbers don't mean anything without being able to transfer them to the ground properly, etc, but if someone asks how much power I'm making, I'd like to be able to tell them lol.
__________________
tedness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 03:46 AM   #21
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: JB MDL
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 16,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr GT View Post
What are the cheapest (Priced) parts that give you the most horsepower? Also, what parts are recommended putting in first? Ex: CAI, Exhaust, etc.
1 - There is no "cheap" horsepower, you have to pay to play, you can pick up 5hp here and there but you're looking at $1k minimum just to get a catback and some gears in. I always tell ppl figure on $2k to do all the "bolt ons" and another $300 for a mail in tune or $600 for a dyno tune.

2 - There is a sticky at the top of this forum as cliffy already said, please read

3 - We are not mind readers (yet... I need more bodies to experiment on...) and have no idea what you have and if you are auto or stick.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 06:17 AM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2002VertGT View Post
You promise? I have Bbk cai, Bbk 78mm tb/p combo, Mac Pro chamber, Mac cat back and 93oct tune and the dyno said I had 252/299 to the wheels.
That is a believable number. Do you have the dyno chart?

I ask because I'd be interested in seeing the torque curve after its peak. The 78 mm TB could be costing you some power at higher revs...
__________________
SOLD! - 2003 GT, UPR X, FRPP 24lb/h, Magnaflow, PP 70mm TB & plenum, Delta Force tuned,
Steeda UDPs, Ralco flywheel, RAM HDX clutch, 3.73s, 262 rwHP/305 lb-ft.

New ride (7/1/2013) 1998 Mercedes SL500-5.0L 32V VVT 326/347 HP/tq
cliffyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 06:18 AM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
2002VertGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffyk View Post

That is a believable number. Do you have the dyno chart?

I ask because I'd be interested in seeing the torque curve after its peak. The 78 mm TB could be costing you some power at higher revs...
No but I can get it...haven't been back in the area since. Their printer was broken when I was there

However I have. Pro charger that will be installed as soon as I get the $ for supporting mods
__________________
2004 F150 4x4 Lariat Supercrew, 5.4l, Black/Arizona Beige (daily driver)
2002 Mustang GT Convertible, triple black, mach 1000 system (Summer Car)
2001 Ranger Edge 4x4 xcab (sold to cousin)

4.10 Gear/RPM thread
2002VertGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 06:21 AM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
2002VertGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,876
Did find this in my pics...hard for me to see
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image-2142437271.jpg
Views:	61
Size:	148.1 KB
ID:	111908   Click image for larger version

Name:	image-2198852583.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	235.3 KB
ID:	111909  

__________________
2004 F150 4x4 Lariat Supercrew, 5.4l, Black/Arizona Beige (daily driver)
2002 Mustang GT Convertible, triple black, mach 1000 system (Summer Car)
2001 Ranger Edge 4x4 xcab (sold to cousin)

4.10 Gear/RPM thread
2002VertGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 10:26 AM   #25
Registered Member
Regular
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by tedness View Post
I'd be willing to throw it on another dyno because I've had to run on two different brand dynos so it's hard to get a proper reading.

I did a baseline run with her stock on a Dynojet and made 224/266 on 87.
These are numbers inline with what I have seen stock New-Edge GTs deliver on the DynoJet 248 (NASCAR approved) chassis dyno--which BTB is the closest to "real" and accurate power readings in the industry.

Inertial dynamometers are inherently more accurate than absorption dynos as there is nothing to calibrate. The drum has a fixed mass and therefore rotational inertia, power is simply determined by how fast the engine under test can accelerate the drum.

Quote:

Then I did a baseline run w/ exhaust and no tune on a Mustang MD500 and made 236/273 on 87.
Obviously the Mustang dyno provided a higher value, some 12 HP. This is likely a "percentage" difference rather than fixed, in this case +5.4% (12/224).

Applying this difference to the later numbers (below) we get:

243 = 231 HP ("Dynojet")
269 = 255 HP ("Dynojet")

Both of which are "dead-on" to what I would expect from your mods with the car up on the Dynojet 248's roller. BTW, it is not uncommon for dynamometer operators to pump up the numbers a bit to make customer's happier--with an absorption dyno it's a real easy thing to do...

Quote:
Then we did a tune to the car and made 243/280 on 87.


Then we did another tune and went from 87 to 93 octane and made 269/316.
...
__________________
SOLD! - 2003 GT, UPR X, FRPP 24lb/h, Magnaflow, PP 70mm TB & plenum, Delta Force tuned,
Steeda UDPs, Ralco flywheel, RAM HDX clutch, 3.73s, 262 rwHP/305 lb-ft.

New ride (7/1/2013) 1998 Mercedes SL500-5.0L 32V VVT 326/347 HP/tq
cliffyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 01:20 PM   #26
slow281
Regular
Supporter
 
sixpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cedar Rapids
Region: Nebraska
Posts: 3,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffyk View Post

These are numbers inline with what I have seen stock New-Edge GTs deliver on the DynoJet 248 (NASCAR approved) chassis dyno--which BTB is the closest to "real" and accurate power readings in the industry.

Inertial dynamometers are inherently more accurate than absorption dynos as there is nothing to calibrate. The drum has a fixed mas and therefore rotational inertia, power is simply determined by how fast the engine under test can accelerate the drum.

Obviously the Mustang dyno provided a higher value, some 12 HP. This is likely a "percentage" difference rather than fixed, in this case +5.4% (12/224).

Applying this difference to the later numbers (below) we get:

243 = 231 HP ("Dynojet")
269 = 255 HP ("Dynojet")

Both of which are "dead-on" to what I would expect from your mods with the car up on the Dynojet 248's roller. BTW, it is not uncommon for dynamometer operators to pump up the numbers a bit to make customer's happier--with an absorption dyno it's a real easy thing to do...
Good info!
__________________
Need more Horsepower? Add a sticker. Contact me for vinyl stickers pre-made and custom!
Stick on Horsepower <- Click Here and like my Page!
2001 GT - True Blue
2003 V6 - Zinc Yellow
1990 LX 2.3 - project
sixpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 06:52 PM   #27
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Region: Florida
Posts: 595
Send a message via AIM to tedness
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliffyk View Post
These are numbers inline with what I have seen stock New-Edge GTs deliver on the DynoJet 248 (NASCAR approved) chassis dyno--which BTB is the closest to "real" and accurate power readings in the industry.

Inertial dynamometers are inherently more accurate than absorption dynos as there is nothing to calibrate. The drum has a fixed mass and therefore rotational inertia, power is simply determined by how fast the engine under test can accelerate the drum.

Obviously the Mustang dyno provided a higher value, some 12 HP. This is likely a "percentage" difference rather than fixed, in this case +5.4% (12/224).

Applying this difference to the later numbers (below) we get:

243 = 231 HP ("Dynojet")
269 = 255 HP ("Dynojet")

Both of which are "dead-on" to what I would expect from your mods with the car up on the Dynojet 248's roller. BTW, it is not uncommon for dynamometer operators to pump up the numbers a bit to make customer's happier--with an absorption dyno it's a real easy thing to do...
That sounds more believable to me as well. I'm betting in this instance it was more of a miscalibration than a dyno fluffing for ego.

Thanks for the info! I've always been a bigger fan of Dynojets anyway but our town lost our only one shortly after I got my car and did the initial dyno.
__________________
tedness is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1996-2004 Mustang GT

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


» Like Us On Facebook



09:19 PM


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.