Mustang Bullitt Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was looking at making the densecharger my first mod, but am not sure on which one would be best to get for our BULLITT. Should it be the System # 3: Part # 469601-7
96-01 4.6 2V & 4V, OR THE System # 4: Part # 469601-2 96-01 4.6 2V & 4V, OR THE System # 5: Part # 4696100 96-01 4.6 4V Cobra 100mm System? Which one's do other BULLITT owners have, and how do they work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,455 Posts
I just installed the 100mm densecharger system and I think it works great. No problems and definately a noticeable difference at higher rpm's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,691 Posts
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-09-25 00:09, rodsbullitt wrote:
I just installed the 100mm densecharger system and I think it works great. No problems and definately a noticeable difference at higher rpm's

</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm of the same opinion. It a great first mod.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,235 Posts
The 100mm unit is the 4 inch dia. setup. I have dyno tested both on my Bullitt,and it seems to be a bit better at higher RPM,than the 3 inch system. I will plan on going to the track this weekend and get some runs in with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,353 Posts
I'm so confused...
I've seen posts about the C&L system.
I went out to their website and looked around and see that their set up has a different MAF unit. Is this necessary?
Is the Densecharger the way to go then.
The 100m says it's for cobra 4v...Can we use it on our Bullitts?
Suggestions?
Thanks,
Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
I just ordered the DenseCharger 100mm system from John. After emailing him with questions he assured me that he's been recommending the new 100mm system for twin-throttlebodied engines (i.e. Bullitt). I don't see the purpose of the meter in the C&L, though I assume it must breathe better than stock...How much I don't know. Figured I'd stay with the simple DenseCharger system for now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
i have system #4 - i'm not sure if it 100mm or not. When i put it in i noticed the difference when i revved the engine - it's breathes alot better now
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,593 Posts
I also have system #4 and it isn't the 100mm system. I haven't been able to install it yet but will let you all know how #4137 responds to it sometime later this week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,353 Posts
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-10-02 17:38, Dennis wrote:
I just ordered the DenseCharger 100mm system from John. After emailing him with questions he assured me that he's been recommending the new 100mm system for twin-throttlebodied engines (i.e. Bullitt). I don't see the purpose of the meter in the C&L, though I assume it must breathe better than stock...How much I don't know. Figured I'd stay with the simple DenseCharger system for now.

</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

I think I'll go with system #5 the 100m setup for twin TBs. thanks again for your help

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Has anybody put the densecharger in conjuction with the C&L MAF, and if so, what are your opinions of have both. Do you recommend just getting the Densecharger or just the C&L, or Both? Thanks for the feedback so far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
You can't run a cold air induction with the C&L meters. I've had customers combo the smaller diameter DENSECHARGER with the PRO-M meters. We didn't feel that the performance increase justified the expenditure, but in all fairness to PRO-M if you do upgrade the throttle body at the same time as the meter, ie. a matched set, you will achieve much larger gains.
The Bullitt intake system was designed and built through racing. I wish I had the Bullitt system on my 5.0. It is state of the art. We've got to remember this is a 286 c.i. engine. When it comes on cam around 4500- 5800 there is no way you'd believe this is only a 286. Conversely my simple 55mm MAF system, the forerunner to the 80mm current systems, still works perfect after 140,000 miles, with only cleaning my K&N once a year. Just ten years ago how many people would have believed an intake system would be so efficient that the spark plugs could go 100,000 miles!
I thought it interesting in the current 5.0 magazine issue the article on the Saleen 427 motor for the S-7. Guess what meters sit atop the carbon composite intake? The factory meters in a twin configuration setup. They're going to run just a single meter on the road version of the S-7. I imagine Steve Saleen could use any set up he desired on this motor. The factory meter will support 485 hp.
The Cobra owner who has been using the 3" system with the 87mm PRO-M is now installing the 100MM system and will dyno the results. this will be with the factory twin TB so the results will be indicative of what to expect without having the expenditure required for upgrading the whole MAF system. I'll let everbody know the results.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JP DEMOLET on 2001-10-04 20:20 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
I personally went with the 80mm on my Bullitt because:

I wanted better low end power rather than high end,
It was cheaper, and
The inlet area of the twin 57mm throttle bodies is 5100 square millimeters and the inlet area of the 80mm tube is 5024 square millimeters. Although slightly smaller than optimum (which would be 80.61mm), I felt it was right, especially considering that the 80mm tube is bigger than the maf tube where all the air has to go through anyway. Just my opinion.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top