Jakee's 4.0 SOHC Build up discussion and motivation thread

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aldive

Are you still saying than you can do a 5 sec 0 to 60?

No - I was all screwed up with my seconds when I thought I did a 5 second 0-60. I thought the old "one one thousand, two one thousand, three one thousand, method would work. Way off. I just went down to a bringe and tried it out again, (Level surface) and I remembered to bring the stop watch. Not even close. My bad, completly wrong on this one.

I'll post some better data when I have time to actually get better data.

*rocket 5979* · 09-03-2006, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakee

No - I was all screwed up with my seconds when I thought I did a 5 second 0-60. I thought the old "one one thousand, two one thousand, three one thousand, method would work. Way off. I just went down to a bringe and tried it out again, (Level surface) and I remembered to bring the stop watch. Not even close. My bad, completly wrong on this one.

I'll post some better data when I have time to actually get better data.

The best poor mans way to see what your 0-60 time is to have someone (or you, if your talented enough) video tape your speedo and tach. Then when you play it in the media player look at when the tach jumps (not the speedo for the start) and then mark the time stamp. Then look and see at what time the speedo hits 60 MPH and mark the timestamp. From there it is just simple subtraction. That will get you VERY close to being dead on.

Using a stopwatch is accurate enough for circle track laptimes where things usually don't come down to hundreds of a second, but it is not a good way to accurately measure a run that is such a short duration like the 0-60 runs are.

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 01:37 PM

Okay - With the stock tube, (The MAC is off right now) and an open air filter, here's some better data.....

Run 1 - 9.3
Run 2 - 9.5
Run 3 - 9.4

Because it was consistent enough for me I stopped @ 3

So 9.4 average, ouch that's slow. Now would be a good time to be able to delete some post. Oh well...

I guess on the positive side, I have a lot of room for improvement. I'm wondering what the times will be like with the MAC tube back on and the box on as well. Curious.

Reality, once again hits me. It's an explorer. It's not going to be fast. You have to make it fast and it's going to be tuff!

aldive · 09-03-2006, 02:06 PM

Jakee, you seem so fixated on HP and speed, why on Earth don’t you go to a track and to a dyno?

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aldive

Jakee, you seem so fixated on HP and speed, why on Earth don’t you go to a track and to a dyno?

Cuss of the 9.4 second 0-60. That sucks. If I can't get it down more than that with my next couple of mods I may trash this project.

aldive · 09-03-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakee

Cuss of the 9.4 second 0-60. That sucks. If I can't get it down more than that with my next couple of mods I may trash this project.

I would think that you would want some baseline numbers to determine if what you do actually does what you want.

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aldive

I would think that you would want some baseline numbers to determine if what you do actually does what you want.

I agree once it gets a little more in the respectable neighborhood. But, I don't need a dyno or track to tell me the trucks slow. I can find that our right here.

I think, when new, a stock 01 runs a 9.0 sec 0-60. I'm basically still stock when I did this and ran a 9.4. So, you can see what the miles does for you. Now, when I add everything back on I expect to atleast be in the 8 second range. Then again, I'm sure if I did this testing in the morning as opposed to doing it the middle of the day, it could be in the 8 sec range as is.

I don't know if this engine is going to do anything for me.
just frustrating.

*sn0border88* · 09-03-2006, 03:15 PM

id dosent matter if your slow, a baseline dyno before any mods would show us all what you are really gaining, not just the seat of your pants dyno.

spindlecone · 09-03-2006, 03:19 PM

You Still runnin your OEM size tires?

**JDraper** · 09-03-2006, 03:31 PM

Quote:

I agree once it gets a little more in the respectable neighborhood. But, I don't need a dyno or track to tell me the trucks slow. I can find that our right here.

Jakee, the reason for doing a baseline dyno run and 1/4 run is to see how much you improve your vehicle...swallow the pride and do it or you'll never know how much you really improved the truck. Anyone who is seriously into performance and modifying their vehicle will do a baseline, no matter how crappy they think it is.

Just fyi, several years back the national champion in 1/4 mile bracket racing was won by someone driving a Dodge Omni...not because it was fast, but because he was a very consistent driver...

Most of us here who have modified cars for a long time started with crappy times and low hp...we just kept at it and improved our vehicles as we learned...nothing to be ashamed of or get down about. There is a lot of knowledge on the board...listen to it and learn....

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spindlecone

You Still runnin your OEM size tires?

Yes - the speedo should be close.

*rocket 5979* · 09-03-2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDraper

Most of us here who have modified cars for a long time started with crappy times and low hp...we just kept at it and improved our vehicles as we learned...nothing to be ashamed of or get down about. There is a lot of knowledge on the board...listen to it and learn....

Yep. I remember going to the track years back when I was baselining my 2000 5.0 Explorer and pulling mid 16's. Yeah I felt slow, though there were others whom were slower, but I still bit the bullet for testing purposes. Don't feel bad if you go to the track and don't run a good time. There will ALWAYS be slower people there.

You already set your mind to do this project. Now is not the time to give up and look like the 50,000 other dorks in here who talk smack about modding and then give up 1/4 way through. Of course your truck isn't going to be fast yet, it is a relatively stock V6 SUV that doesn't have the greatest power to weight ratio. If anything, that should motivate you that much more to want to make your vehicle faster. The battle is half the reward, though I personally think it is more like 75% of the reward. If it were easy there would be less satisfaction gained in the end. Take the hard route for once and stick it out. Stay humble and be patient. That is the best words of advice I can offer to someone who is getting frustrated in the surmounting complexity of a vehicle project.

If you still feel bad just throw a 50 shot of nitrous on there and it will cheer you up.

**JDraper** · 09-03-2006, 05:56 PM

Actually, what's more embarrasing is going to the track with a good car and posting a crappy run. I was out at Numidia (near Bloomsburg, PA) with the Mach (stock at that point) and I missed 2nd gear and posted a 15.8 with a Mach....D'OH!!!!!

. Thankfully I backed it up with a 13.8 at 104 the next run. I still haven't had the Mach on the track with all the mods I've done, so I don't know what I can run with it now...should be in the high 12's though...as long as the driver doesn't screw up... :p

Oh, and Rocket is right...be patient and don't expect to gain everything that the mfgs claim. I've added a CAI, intake spacer, aluminum flywheel, electric water pump, custom tune, and a Cat back to my Mach and went from 269 rwhp to 302 rwhp. If you add up all the claims from the manufacturers, I should be at around 330 rwhp...the claims they make are either under ideal conditions or sometimes outright lies. Keep your eyes open and a tight rein on your wallet...research, research, research...

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 08:15 PM

I guess I thought that taking off almost 200 pounds would do something other than stock, or even worst.

I do have to remember what I'm doing here. This is the challange I wanted cuss it ain't easy making a block of metal fast. The easy way out would be to get something else.

Yes, I should have dyno'd from the start. I know I've gained something, now I'm concerened more about where I started from.

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 09:51 PM

Night time date with 1/4 tank gas.

1. - 8.6
2. - 8.7
3. - 9.3

8.8 AVG

Back to back so that's probably why the times we're going up.

Now, one run with a full tank of gas....

1. 8.4

hopefully will have the MAC back on tomorrow with the custom trash can.

*sn0border88* · 09-03-2006, 09:53 PM

it shouldnt be to hard to bolt back to stock, you havent done much yet? (Not including the weight reduction for dyno purposes.)

*Jakee* · 09-03-2006, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0border88

it shouldnt be to hard to bolt back to stock, you havent done much yet? (Not including the weight reduction for dyno purposes.)

Shouldn't be hard at all. As many times as I've taken it off, back on, back off, I could probably change between the two in 5 minutes.

*Jakee* · 09-04-2006, 07:21 PM

8.4 Sec 0-60 on average with the MAC set-up. Slow as a turtle...

**JDraper** · 09-04-2006, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakee

8.4 Sec 0-60 on average with the MAC set-up. Slow as a turtle...

Hey, could be worse...my old Sammy wouldn't even reach 60 mph..topped out at 52...

*Jakee* · 09-04-2006, 07:30 PM

I will dyno at the end of this project. I really don't have anything to prove to anyone. So far, the little things I've done up until this point has amounted to squat. Enough with the little bull crap things I thought would make a difference. Maybe they do make a differnence in the mind but the bottom line is you get what you pay for. I haven't sunk to much money in this yet so I try to keep telling myself that. However, I've sunk a bunch of time in it gaining really nothing.

Anyways, the intake is done, and I feel and can't get any better. I'm moving on to the exhaust side now.

I've got one question. I've been told by a number of people to keep it single exhaust to keep the back pressure. My question is; will a single in duel out muffler hurt anything. Only reason is I like duels and don't expect a gain from it. Just the looks and the sound. Help me out here guys, i need opinions.

09-03-2006, 02:06 PM	#244
aldive Elite In Memoriam 1999 XLT Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 25,271 Vehicle Specs	Jakee, you seem so fixated on HP and speed, why on Earth don’t you go to a track and to a dyno? __________________ Al Franklin My truck My Quest for 30 RIP Al Franklin! 1947-2010. Gone but not forgotten! :(

09-03-2006, 03:15 PM	#248
sn0border88 Master Apprentice Souderton, PA 1992 XLT Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,342 Vehicle Specs	id dosent matter if your slow, a baseline dyno before any mods would show us all what you are really gaining, not just the seat of your pants dyno. __________________ My Photos---Emily Rose---SAS Thread---My Mug 1992 4dr XLT. SAS'ed HPD44/9" 5.13's Locked F/R 36" SX 1999 4.0 5spd sport on 31" BFG Muds

09-03-2006, 05:56 PM	#253
JDraper Elite Garage Builder McVeytown, PA '11 XLT Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 15,396 Vehicle Specs	Actually, what's more embarrasing is going to the track with a good car and posting a crappy run. I was out at Numidia (near Bloomsburg, PA) with the Mach (stock at that point) and I missed 2nd gear and posted a 15.8 with a Mach....D'OH!!!!! . Thankfully I backed it up with a 13.8 at 104 the next run. I still haven't had the Mach on the track with all the mods I've done, so I don't know what I can run with it now...should be in the high 12's though...as long as the driver doesn't screw up... :p Oh, and Rocket is right...be patient and don't expect to gain everything that the mfgs claim. I've added a CAI, intake spacer, aluminum flywheel, electric water pump, custom tune, and a Cat back to my Mach and went from 269 rwhp to 302 rwhp. If you add up all the claims from the manufacturers, I should be at around 330 rwhp...the claims they make are either under ideal conditions or sometimes outright lies. Keep your eyes open and a tight rein on your wallet...research, research, research... __________________ Moderator..Home Improvement/Explorer 911/2011 Explorer Forum You took my breath away....and now I want it back.... '66 Mustang Coupe, '04 Mustang Mach 1, '08 Focus, '11 Explorer XLT "Ex"plorer's: '92 Sport, '94 Sport, '01 XLS Our Crappy Website

09-03-2006, 09:53 PM	#256
sn0border88 Master Apprentice Souderton, PA 1992 XLT Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,342 Vehicle Specs	it shouldnt be to hard to bolt back to stock, you havent done much yet? (Not including the weight reduction for dyno purposes.) __________________ My Photos---Emily Rose---SAS Thread---My Mug 1992 4dr XLT. SAS'ed HPD44/9" 5.13's Locked F/R 36" SX 1999 4.0 5spd sport on 31" BFG Muds

09-03-2006, 01:37 PM	#243
Jakee Elite Explorer Huntsville, Texas 01 Sport Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,814 Vehicle Specs (Original Poster)	Okay - With the stock tube, (The MAC is off right now) and an open air filter, here's some better data..... Run 1 - 9.3 Run 2 - 9.5 Run 3 - 9.4 Because it was consistent enough for me I stopped @ 3 So 9.4 average, ouch that's slow. Now would be a good time to be able to delete some post. Oh well... I guess on the positive side, I have a lot of room for improvement. I'm wondering what the times will be like with the MAC tube back on and the box on as well. Curious. Reality, once again hits me. It's an explorer. It's not going to be fast. You have to make it fast and it's going to be tuff!

09-03-2006, 03:19 PM	#249
spindlecone B San Jose, Calif 2003 sport trac Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,921 Vehicle Specs	You Still runnin your OEM size tires?

09-03-2006, 08:15 PM	#254
Jakee Elite Explorer Huntsville, Texas 01 Sport Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,814 Vehicle Specs (Original Poster)	I guess I thought that taking off almost 200 pounds would do something other than stock, or even worst. I do have to remember what I'm doing here. This is the challange I wanted cuss it ain't easy making a block of metal fast. The easy way out would be to get something else. Yes, I should have dyno'd from the start. I know I've gained something, now I'm concerened more about where I started from.

09-03-2006, 09:51 PM	#255
Jakee Elite Explorer Huntsville, Texas 01 Sport Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,814 Vehicle Specs (Original Poster)	Night time date with 1/4 tank gas. 1. - 8.6 2. - 8.7 3. - 9.3 8.8 AVG Back to back so that's probably why the times we're going up. Now, one run with a full tank of gas.... 1. 8.4 hopefully will have the MAC back on tomorrow with the custom trash can.

09-04-2006, 07:21 PM	#258
Jakee Elite Explorer Huntsville, Texas 01 Sport Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,814 Vehicle Specs (Original Poster)	8.4 Sec 0-60 on average with the MAC set-up. Slow as a turtle...

09-04-2006, 07:30 PM	#260
Jakee Elite Explorer Huntsville, Texas 01 Sport Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,814 Vehicle Specs (Original Poster)	I will dyno at the end of this project. I really don't have anything to prove to anyone. So far, the little things I've done up until this point has amounted to squat. Enough with the little bull crap things I thought would make a difference. Maybe they do make a differnence in the mind but the bottom line is you get what you pay for. I haven't sunk to much money in this yet so I try to keep telling myself that. However, I've sunk a bunch of time in it gaining really nothing. Anyways, the intake is done, and I feel and can't get any better. I'm moving on to the exhaust side now. I've got one question. I've been told by a number of people to keep it single exhaust to keep the back pressure. My question is; will a single in duel out muffler hurt anything. Only reason is I like duels and don't expect a gain from it. Just the looks and the sound. Help me out here guys, i need opinions.