need more power

[pparsons]

which would give you more hp per dollar, a supercharger or a motor buid?

 

[rocket 5979]

which would give you more hp per dollar, a supercharger or a motor buid?

A turbocharger... Let me know if you need one.

 

[Xan]

Depends on alot of things, what engine how much are you willing to spend if you buy a turbo are you gonna still do some engine mods ect ect. if you jsut rebuild and put in a mild cam i think you could get more power with a turbo/supercharger. but i've never been impressed with the reliablity and such with forced induction. But then again you could build a very powerfull 5.0 by making it a stroker and putting in a huge cam and big heads and new intake and such.
Its all about what you want and what you're going to use it for
But to anwser your question $3500 just for starters on a turbo vs about $2500 worth of parts and another $1000 on machine work for an engine build i think you'd have about the same power

Edit: with both theres probaily gonna be more $$$ for tuneing and misc parts and such

 

[MONMIX]

Mustang

 

[Exploderpilot]

the big question is, HOW MUCH POWER? do you wanna climb hills on the freeway easily, or turn 9 second quarter miles?
if you have the 5.0, a baby turbo setup at like 5-6 psi will give you a big boost in top end power, without too many worries about blowing the motor apart. but like they said in the posts above, anything more than that, and you have to rework everything.
the idea about the stroker motor is probably the best one for reliability, but you just spent like 4 grand for quality parts, heads etc. i just purchased an aluminum 347 short block, and it cost me 4300 bucks. by the time i put the whole thing together, i'm gonna spend ten grand.

 

[pparsons]

i would be fine with mid 13's

 

[CDW6212R]

I'd say either a very nice stroker(and trans) similar to Jon's(high compression 347), or a cheap turbo. The turbo would be more complicated, many more parts and much tuning required. You would need to price used turbos and/or do custom installation work, but the stress on the stock engine would be less than a supercharger or nitrous. Then the engine/trans would be a question mark. Good luck,

 

[chriswells78]

I agree with everything your saying Don, but I think a low boost centrifigural supercharger would do just as well as a low boost turbo set up. They can be had for decent prices used as well and might require a little less fab work.

 

[CDW6212R]

The turbos you can get a good bit more boost out of without hurting the engine, compared with a centrifugal supercharger. Turbos boost can get out of hand like anything else, but if the boost is limited properly, they are the best. I may try a couple of Talon (OEM 9psi) turbos on a rebuilt 302 for my 91 LSC, way down the road.

 

[Xan]

I agree with everything your saying Don, but I think a low boost centrifigural supercharger would do just as well as a low boost turbo set up. They can be had for decent prices used as well and might require a little less fab work.

Superchargers are belt driven they put more stress on the engine. plus this means you don't get as much power.
But yeah as you said probaily alot less fab work.

 

[Exploderpilot]

well pparsons, as you can see, there's no shortage of options, it just comes down to how much money you wanna throw down the HP hole!

 

[Turdle]

I would like to see you build the motor.

 

[CDW6212R]

Ditto, doing just the engine is the least risky choice. The other ways will either rely on the stock engine surviving much more power, and/or a lot more money. Regards,

 

[rocket 5979]

I agree with everything your saying Don, but I think a low boost centrifigural supercharger would do just as well as a low boost turbo set up. They can be had for decent prices used as well and might require a little less fab work.

A turbo will give much much better low-mid-top end range power than a centri running on the same boost. The centri takes a while to reach full boost because it is driven off the crank whereas the turbo will spool before 3,000 rpm's and hold full boost until redline. There is no comparison when looking at a low boost centri vs low boost turbo. Turbo will win.

Turbo boost will not get out of hand as long as you use a wastegate with the right spring in it for the total boost you want to hit. Just do that and make sure that your pressure/vac lines are ran properly to the WG and that all connections are solid and overboost will not be a problem. Very simple.

Front mounted turbos will require a decent amount of fab work to get them to work. However, a remote mounted turbo has less than 1/4 the amount of fabrication required to get it to operate with a vehicle. And the fabrication that is required is pretty minor and with minimal welding too. It gets more complicated with the smaller and lower the vehicle you are putting them into, but a Ford Explorer has PLENTY of room underneath to make the job pretty straightforward.

Front mount turbos be wary,.....remote mount turbos aren't scary at all for most normal garage enthusiasts.

 

[rocket 5979]

Oh and by the way...

 

[chriswells78]

The problem I have with remote turbos on an explorer is the fact that a good majority of us use our explorers for off-roading. Anything mounted under the vehicle is prone to mud, submersion, tree stumps, rocks, etc. If you put a remote turbo in there, kiss even mild off-roading good-bye.

 

[rocket 5979]

The problem I have with remote turbos on an explorer is the fact that a good majority of us use our explorers for off-roading. Anything mounted under the vehicle is prone to mud, submersion, tree stumps, rocks, etc. If you put a remote turbo in there, kiss even mild off-roading good-bye.

Most people who turbo their vehicles do not drive them in serious offroad trails anyways. However, when installed in a proper location they are out of the way enough where it is unlikely that they will get damaged easily unless you are really having some fun in the mud or splashing around quite a bit. I have seen people make shields that go up and cover the turbo so that it isn't exposed to all that stuff. Still, I would not go rock crawling with one.

 

[Xan]

Most people who turbo their vehicles do not drive them in serious offroad trails anyways. However, when installed in a proper location they are out of the way enough where it is unlikely that they will get damaged easily unless you are really having some fun in the mud or splashing around quite a bit. I have seen people make shields that go up and cover the turbo so that it isn't exposed to all that stuff. Still, I would not go rock crawling with one.

Alot of guys make thier tow vechiles and that special vechile to get you unstuck turbo what you're saying is 100% true i just think forced induction is a little more expensive, just because there needs to be prep to the engine too for longevity. Personaly I want a turbo for both my vechiles and have been dreaming of ways to put one on both for years

 

[rocket 5979]

Alot of guys make thier tow vechiles and that special vechile to get you unstuck turbo what you're saying is 100% true i just think forced induction is a little more expensive, just because there needs to be prep to the engine too for longevity. Personaly I want a turbo for both my vechiles and have been dreaming of ways to put one on both for years

On a low boost setup most stock engines will be just fine assuming they are still in good working order. No rebuilds, forging or any other stuff needed if staying with mild boost and a good tune.

What determines if forced induction will be more costly or engine work will be is dependent on the ability of the owner. Turbo systems are not very complex in operation and as long as a person knows metal fabrication and has a basic understanding of the do's and dont's of turbocharging then things will be fine, and the turbo system will be done inexpensively. The same can be said of rebuilding an engine too, except that rebuilding an engine requires a finer touch than fabricating the tubing and mounts for a turbo system. If people buy full on pre-engineered turbo kits then they are really expensive. If they do some of the work themselves, or locally hire a small town welder to buzz some welds out then things get allot cheaper.

 

[CDW6212R]

Bingo Rob, most people think of turbo kits that cost $5000 on the low side. There are many hundreds of dollars of unseen or unexpected costs, but those exist for any significant power level increase.

The greatest advantage we have these days are the wonderful vehicle PCM's since 1995. The OBDII and newer PCM's can handle almost any power adders. Prior to then any modified engine ran like crap, compared to the same modifications to a later engine. The programming is very important when altering the engine(adding 20%+ power), but now with good planning the stock PCM can give you a wonderfully drivable engine.

Rob, how would any 86-95 Mustang run with aftermarket heads, intake, cam, over 10:1 compression, and 42 pound injectors? They would all be awful on the street, all of them, with any FMU etc. Yet who do we know with exactly that running very well with a bone stock 98 PCM?

Rely on the 96+ superior engine systems, add a decent power adder, and include proper new programming. Done right they will purr like a kitten.