Mustang Bullitt Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
If one was to take a 1968 Fastback with the stock motor, and money wasn't an issue, and he/she modded the crap out of the car, forged the internals, did everything money can do to the car, except change the motor, then did everything money can buy the a Bullitt, i.e. forge the internals as well, and pretty much mod the crap out of it, which would be the better engine? Lets assume no other factors, just raw power, which engine would come out stronger after all the mods? Also, generally speaking, which would be a better motor to mod, a top of the line motor from back in the day, say, a Hemi, or like a 440 block, vs a current motor? I hope you understand my question. Pretty much, it's two questions. One for the '68 motor vs the Bullitt motor, then the other question being classic motor vs current (near top of the line) motor. The main reason I ask is because I saw a video of a 1968(?) Charger with 950 HP N/A.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,248 Posts
old motor... why? cubic inches. You can only go so far with 281cu. I think the farthest I have seen is around 400-470hp n/a. With a 390 (I don't know much) but right off the bat you have nearly 110 more cubic inches to play with. I don't see why pulling all the stops on it wouldn't produce more power. I imagine it could easily do 500hp+.

but then you also gotta look at what is the car going to be doing? If you want to run high RPMs, the new motor might be better for you. I am not sure on weight, but the new one could be lighter as well.... however, once you factor aluminum heads on the 390, etc, that point may be negligible.

also though... just off hand, I would lean toward the 390 feeling like it has more power. With a larger V8 the torque is going to be stronger and more potent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
This opens a larger window for opinions...

To me...

The 68 Fastback was a way about it that is unique to that car. It would depend on why you were building the car that determines the parts.

If I were looking for pure power, My bet would be to ditch the 390 and slide a 428 in it's place. Build the snot out of the 428 and toss a power adder at it. It would be an awesome straight line monster, but I fear that it would have a very heavy nose.

If I were looking for spooge your pants handling... I'd be more apt to go with a 302. Through out Mustang's racing history, a lot of Small Block VS. Big Block reviews stated the smaller motors dance better.

If I were looking to build a daily driver, I'd go with a 302 EFI motor.

In the end... It's my opinion... There are many write ups about making 1000HP on a 4.6, and I'm sure, with the same thoughts, 1000HP could be achieved with a 390-428.

My goal... A 67 GT-350 Clone with a 302 EFI with a 6spd.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Easy answer.... The old school engines,with all the new aftermarket cylinder heads and cam technology. Look at the current NASCAR engines.
Better yet... Attend a F.A.S.T. racing event,like I will this weekend at VMP, and watch how quick those old muscle cars are going with the stock appearing package,but with unlimited cubic inches and camshaft, using the stock type induction and exhaust.
A certain black 1969 Hemi Roadrunner is currently running consistent 10.80's at over 131 MPH,with auto trans and on SKINNY F-70-15 repop redline tires!!!
However, the only modern engine package I really like is the LS2...3 and 7 GM engine package. Simply and improved design of the old pushrod design.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
Mr. Dave Dudeck,in his black 1969 Hemi Roadrunner, ran an awesome 10.74 at over 132 MPH tonight at VMP. The weather and track conditions being almost perfect. Not bad for old school F-70-15 tires!
What's funny to watch is the reaction from the local spectators/racers,who know nothing about these stock appearing muscle cars! Some of them thought it was some car club having a show in the pits!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
I'm enjoying Yall's discussions here. Yall's point(s) coincide much with mine regarding my disappointment with Ford not offering a 5.4 in the 2008 BULLITT. There is simply NO susbstitute for cubic inches. The 5.4 won't weigh enough to make much of a handling difference. I feel Ford should at least offer a small, medium, and larger V-8(s) in Mustangs and Crown Vics.

I rode in and on occasion had the opportunity to drive both an original 70 Boss 302 and a 68 GT 500 KR ragtop, both owned by the same owner. This was back in the mid 70(s) when you could get real gas and neither car had much mileage.

By far, the Boss 302 handled better than the Shelby, and of course the Shelby had (very obvious) more power. NEITHER CAR PERFORMED OR HANDLED BAD.

I also rode frequently in a 67 GT 350 and a 68 GT 500; both were about the same as the aforementioned cars with the exception of the Boss far exceeding the power of the HP 289.

Again ... NEITHER CAR PERFORMED OR HANDLED BAD AT ALL.

I also agree the pushrod motors are cheaper to build; there was more demand for peformance parts for them longer than there has been yet for the MOD motors so therefore there is more supply and the supply of course for the pushrod motors is cheaper. Cams alone for MOD motors can be very pricey.

I don't know that much about MOD motors compared to what I learned through the years about the pushrod motors, carburetion, Toploader 4-speeds, C-6(s), etc., but I'm sure the MOD motors don't have anything special us old timers can't figure out.

I also think the pushrod motor performance technology is still more advanced than for MOD motors now. The bottom line is I am still convinced the 335 series BBF are the most capable to date.

Just my opinion anyway ... It's been a pleasure to share Yall's discussion ... :~))
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Well let me try the same question in a different point of view...which engine can have more HP/torque squeezed out of it after extensive modding? I'm sure there's eventually a max limit an engine can achieve, so which has the potential? The reason I think a newer motor can squeeze out more is simply because it's...newer! There's more engineering involved in them, and they're about 35 years apart. I think it's like comparing a Nintendo to a PS3, am I right? If I'm wrong, please correct me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
DiZzyBonne said:
Well let me try the same question in a different point of view...which engine can have more HP/torque squeezed out of it after extensive modding? I'm sure there's eventually a max limit an engine can achieve, so which has the potential? The reason I think a newer motor can squeeze out more is simply because it's...newer! There's more engineering involved in them, and they're about 35 years apart. I think it's like comparing a Nintendo to a PS3, am I right? If I'm wrong, please correct me.
That's a good point of view also. I got something to add to that (kinda like "food for thought") but I got to go to an old book of mine first. I'll get back to Yall later. :~))
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I was asking my friend the same question I just asked, he said an older motor is better simply because back then they were made for speed whereas today they're made for economy. I was Googling top fuel dragsters, they're based off the "second generation Chrysler Hemi 426 "Elephant Engine" made 1964-71." Well, I still think a current motor can get more top end. How many classic muscle cars do you see pushing out 2000 HP?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_6OG4xQEjQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NOcI4U1sb4

http://www.answers.com/topic/top-fuel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,111 Posts
Interesting question.Just for the pure fact of making raw power.I would say for N/A it would be close,yeah the old school have been proven.Todays engines like our beloved 4.6L's have proven just the same buy tuning with slight bolt on to make good horsepower,especially the 4V's.Even taking the 2V with a built bottom end,a set of cams,ported heads,aftermarket intake like a Reichard Intake,full exhaust,and a custom tune have proven to be good hp'er makers.I'm a firm believer in todays technolodgy.For example,take an all out stock old school (390 cid),and fine tune it,then take a modern mustang all stock (4.6L 2V,or 4V),and fine tune it,i would almost say that the modern has it hands down.
You can only go so far with the old school before you hit a dead end,and that is building it,tuning it,then spraying it,then where do you go,with the modern you can go a little further,especially in the fine tuning,(todays tech is all about tuning with computers,wich back then it was a screw driver,and timing light),then after that,you can take your modern engine further by going blower,and spray.
Yeah the old school blocks seem to better in strength,but today they are not far in strength i would believe.If a block is going to blow,it's going to blow regardless.And again,it's all about the tuning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,109 Posts
I agree with statement derrick made that more C.i. makes more power. But I like the "under dog" aspect of the mod motors ( 281,289,302) making some serious power aswell either n\a or power adder.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
My opinion is H.P. cost big $ either way, but larger C.I. engines produce more torque easier. Point look how much H.P. 750+? NASCAR engines make 355 c.i. with a 4 bl. carb. If I wanted to go fast I would go (old school) older car push rod route the cheaper way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
What about today's big engines? Like I said, if money wasn't an issue, which would be better? I heard from most people that older engines would be better simply because they're cheaper to work on and much easier to tweak.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top