I came across this while looking for something else and thought some might enjoy it. This guy has done it right. The car is on a rotisserie and not on its suspension which is what most people do so it's almost never right. Beyond that he just does nice work. Short cuts in body work equals a waste of time.

 

Ohio, did you get a HP at crank readout or only the corrected at the wheel reading?

 

It's been tested only on the chassis dyno. For anyone interested, the N/A motor produced at-the-wheel results of 272/302 (corrected).

 

Ohio, just curious about your gears... my Buddy has a Kenne Bell S/C on his 92, and he wants to go to a 3.08 because he feels the 3.55's are too low for boost. I'm actually keeping my eyes peeled for a 3.27 SN95 axle for my 89, and then I could just slap the 3.55 Fox axle in my 88 after.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, my Buddy found two passenger side doors that are perfect in his stash, but they are both 79-86 doors. There are some differences between those and the 87-93 doors that I'd rather not deal with, so he's going to see what he can find for me. Crossing my fingers!

EDIT 2: Hell yes.... I just got a message that my E303 is on its way to the Post Office! I really wanted an E303 for the 351... I love the sound, but I dind't think it was enough cam for it.

 

I think the 3.55's are just about perfect for my setup, White, especially since the centrifugal blower takes some time to spin up. I wish I could try a 3.73 ratio, though, just for comparison. Keeping in mind your buddy has the KB, 3.08's or 3.27's might be better since the the KB is "instant-on." Sometimes I long for a PD blower, but the Vortech is so smooth in its power delivery, I just don't know. It's almost like it's not there, if that makes any sense.

I had 3.27's in my almost-all-stock '87, but later wished I'd gone deeper. I was (unnecessarily) concerned about revs on the highway when I installed them. I think it's the ratio that should have been offered from the factory, but I'm sure Ford was worried about CAFE ratings.

What I've seen on the "commonly-recommended ratios" list is 3.55's for boost, 3.73's for a N/A manual, and 4.10 for N/A autos. I'd have to drive a 4.10/auto combo before I'd slap that in, though.

EDIT: Why 3.27 for the '89?
..

 

The 3.27's for the 89 is because of the 351. My Buddy with a 351'd Capri has 3.55's, and he thinks they are too low to use the torque. Plus I'm going 5 lug on the 89, and then I'll just put all of my newer (and in much better shape) brakes, wheels, etc. on the 88. I did a cam spec comparo between the XE274HR that's in the 351, and the E303 going in the 302.

EDIT: Adding the stock HO cam:

 

I didn't think to mark it but I was reading this morning an article by Dave Stribling that the SN95 Mustang K member is a fairly easy swap to the Fox Body Mustang for big power. He wrote the "How to Swap Ford Modular Engines" Book and specializes in Mustangs. I you're interested anyway.

 

Just wondered. The mechanics were always looking to recover some of the loss between the crank and the rear wheel. Your engine and 400 rear wheel is impressive as I said.

 

Modulars cost too damn much money to build, or I'd do it in a heartbeat.

My transmission Buddy called me all excited yesterday because he thought my 88 is an auto. He wanted to build me a trans to play with in it. Still might do it if this T5 is junk. He says he's already got everything laying around, and he'll basically do it for nothing.... so I'll just need a controller (I want a 4R70W). Just some random thoughts that go on in my brain, LOL.

 

Thought that might be the thought about what I was getting at but no. Put that in to acknowledge he's not just some guy on you tube. He was also referring to both big and small blocks and referenced shops that fabricate parts for putting the engines in.