BBK SUPER CHARGER DYNO RESULTS | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

BBK SUPER CHARGER DYNO RESULTS

rockylaurence

Well-Known Member
Joined
January 23, 2000
Messages
381
Reaction score
0
City, State
Lakeland, Fl
Year, Model & Trim Level
93 Sport
I was looking for the old Thread and couldn't find it. Anyway, three Mags posted the same install on a 4.0L Ranger and only one Mag (OFF-ROAD Aug2000) posted the Dyno results. I assume that the others didn't post the results because the expectations feel WAY short of what their Paid advertizers claimed.
Claimed 50% increase with Insta-charger
Claimed 7-10 HP with 66mm T/B
Claimed 20 HP with headers
The article leads us to believe that the total will be an additional 110 HP with all the goodies from the original 160 HP motor (270 HP).
Dyno results were:
Rear wheel HP STOCK=119
Rear wheel HP Insta-charger w/extras=164
Approx 36% Gain in HP for How much? $3500.00?
Maybe the Ranger was a Dog to begin with-I don't know....
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





Those numbers sound pretty reasonable. Assuming 25% drivetrain loss, 119 is right on the ball. The 164 translates to ~220 hp. Did that truck also have filter, catback, and computer upgrades? Hmm, maybe if those numbers are correct then I won't break 250. Then I don't need to upgrade the fuel system.....Hmmmmmm. (discussion in "on my way to supercharger" thread) Sometimes less is more ;)

Something I just thought about. We're always talking about peak horsepower and torque numbers. For instance, Flyguy dynoed a 4 hp increase with his headers. I also didn't feel the claimed 20 (15) hp increase, but I did notice flatter hp and torque curves. What I'm saying is that even if these mods don't raise the peak numbers as high as they claim, they still flatten the curves out so you have more power at all speeds, not just the peaks. On a street vehicle, that's what you want. You don't want all the power at balls-to-the-wall, low and mid-range power are great also.

Thanks Rocky
 






Alec,

Good point about the peak increases in power for different mods.

Like you said Nick(FlyGuy) only got a peak increase of 4hp total at a specific rpm after his header install, but the Headers may have had a 15 or 20Hp increase somewhere else in the rpm range. Thats why (as someone tried to do earlier this year) you cant add the advertised increases and end up with a realistic number.
Headers may add 20hp at 3000, and an intake may add 15HP at 2000rpm, but the engine may not even show a peak HP increase at X rpm, because the mods all work at different points on the power band.

The area under the curve is more important than the peak numbers for everyday driving anyway. Unfortunately we seldom see the curve just the peak number.

36% peak increase seems pretty good to me, but the real story would be what happened everywhere else in the power band. Although I agree with Rocky, if the story was good the tests and the graphs would have been everywhere in the article(s)

hopefully we will know sometime soon- Alec will let us all know!!!
 






480x25%=120 that means 600 at the fly for my truck. Fly wheel power does not mean very much. i think 25% is a bit much to use but every thing does very. like 4x4 big tires stuff like that but. the truck they used was not 4x4 so i think you should use more like 15 to 20%.
 






How much Boost?

I think (it wasn't in the article) that the low numbers with the S/C are due to low boost. BBK's kit is to be added to an internally stock motor and I bet the boost as been limited to approx. 5 pounds. Understand that BBK doesn't want to be liable for blowing your motor. I bet that with a larger drive pulley and 8 pounds of boost that motor would really SCREAM and would still be reliable. Can you imagine getting the same numbers as the Mitsubishi 3000! One hundred HP per liter--it can be done with FORCED induction. Good luck ALEC.
 






Even if it flattens out the power curve I'm still not sure if 36% is worth $3500 when $3500 will go a long way towards swapping in a 5.0L which can be built to 300HP without blinking an eye and much more than that(ala Troll) if you try. The stock tranny is also marginal with the stock 4.0. I don't know if I'd want 200+ horses behind my tranny or not. Lastly, it will probably last about as long as the engine it's put on. Then you have to put out 7k for a new motor and blower and still don't have the power you could of had. But then again, having a blower on an Explorer just sounds cool... :-)
 






Brad,

Some of us dont have the option of swapping the 5.0 in so working with the 4.0 is THE only choice- unless we get an OEM 5.0 in a late model. I dont think the cost of the blower would compare to the install of the 5.0 in terms of dollars and time. I guess I should take a peek at GOFAST's swap thread for some cost Ideas. When I looked into it I was heading over 4000 when I stopped counting, and ran into the legal(smog) problems.

Rockys probably correct about the stock motor and the liability with higher boost numbers. If the units are ever shipped we shall find out.

Alec,
you should check the Ranger 4.0 board if you dont already -there is some info relating to the release of the BBK posted( I think it was yesterday)
 






I Know they've already manufactured at least 2 "batches". They're on their third one now: which mine is in. Updated ship date: 1/18/01 :(

That means it won't be installed until Feb. I'm going to call them tomorrow and ask them why the delay. I already had 3 days planned to work on it the week before. Darn!
 






Alec heres the link to the post on the 4.0 board I was referring to in my previous post

Dead Link Removed
 






3.5k will go a long way towards swapping a 5.0. But you cant just consider money in all this. Time and frustration are a major part of swapping engines. We can say that a 5.0 swap that is efi will cost 6k proffesionally installed, does that seem reasonable? Anyway a bbk will be 3.5k. Now consider time away from your truck to do a 5.0 swap. Maybe a month and a half? That is a long time man and if ur not getting it professionally installed think about 4k for a 5.0 kicking out 300 hp for 50 hrs of work or a 4.0 that kicks out 210 hp for 6 hrs of work. I guess it depends on how much time, effort, frustration, busted knuckles or yelling at ur mechanic, and money you are willing to put into this. I've looked into each route a little bit, but i would choose a 4.0 with a blower and a t-5 because of the ease. One more thing you can't forget is how tired the parents or your significant other will get of you constantly working/spending money on a truck that has an engine that is lying on the ground. :)

-Chav
 






I agree that a 5.0 would be more frustrating and time consuming but I am biased in a few ways:
-I like V8s
-I don't like my tranny (10 times in the shop in the last year)
-b/c of my tranny I am used to being away from my truck
-I am used to frustration (b/c of my tranny) so it doesn't bother me
-I've got 154k miles so a blower is not rational for me unless I get a new 4.0L but then I might as well put in a 5.0L
-I don't think my tranny would survive the power
-one rarely sees me without busted knuckles
-40% of my reasoning for the swap is to get rid of my tranny
-and lastly, the significant other will also get tired of hearing how powerful my new motor is so they might as well get used to it :D
-Oh yeah, did I mention I don't like my tranny?

I'm not saying that you shouldn't supercharge your Explorer; by all means have at it. I go for any mod that makes a car faster. But, if it were me I would choose the 5.0L b/c in my current situation it has more bang for the buck. Yes, it cost more than a BBK but you also get more power, a stronger tranny, probably better mileage, and 'bigger engine' bragging rights... but, if I had a newer Explorer with lower miles and lived in a county that required emissions checks/testing then yes I would probably go for the BBK.
 






Back
Top