Bullit's cold air kit....

[STLShelby]

What???????????????? Where do you folks come up with all this stuff. PLEASE LETS DO A GROUP BUY AND MAYBE WE CAN GET BORDERS TO SELL THE PAPERBACK Shelby Mustang book at a discount..although at its current price of $12.99 it should be affordable to most who post here. If only I could convince you folks to actually read it.

 

The 65/66 Gt350's ran 306 gross HP based upon a SLIGHTLY modified K code engine. The standard GT with the K Code engine ran 271 Gross Hp. That is a mere difference of 35 Gross Hp or about 28 net HP. So the difference between then and now is a mere 9 net hp (and your 319 modern net Hp is about 375 in 60's Gross terms--the same level as a GT500 back in the day). The 65/66 Shelby GT was all about handling NOT hp. A Shelby GT will walk away from a GT 500 on a road course. If you are into drag racing--why buy either--get an old fox body 302 and build the heck out of it -for $20 grand - and blow everything away. My god, even the GT 500 can't run with a Standard C6 Corvette. Its not about HP --its about history, a mind set--best <bleep> pony car ever built--the original and the one that outlived all the rest.

 

As far as the Bullitt--<bleep> right its plain--that is the whole concept which so many 'miss'. It is based upon the movie car...a plain jane that could move (You may have heard of it, the movie was called Bullitt and it starred Steve McQueen and a green no flash no badge 68 Mustang. The king of cool and he wasn't into stripes and wings etc to look cool).

 

The 08 Bullitt has a much softer suspension--Ford wouldn't allow the Ford Racing/Shelby GT suspension on standard Mustangs--its too stiff for the 'general' population. And yes the Bullitt may be quicker in a drag - 2 reasons--rearend gearing with the 3.73 and its suspension. Do you folks understand there is a HUGE difference between a drag racing suspension and a road suspension. Now the Bullit is road tuned but only lightly so as it is soo much softer then the Ford Racing/Shelby verions--and that adds to tire traction off the line in a drag race-- The Shebly GT, while not a full blown coil over rock hard suspension is much stiffer and much better for the twisties and the worst thing you would want for the drag strip. If you bought a Shelby GT for the drags--big mistake.

 

You all have wondeful cars, APPRECIATE WHAT YOU HAVE..you are very lucky..and with the Ford 0% for 60 kicking in on Wed maybe I'll finally get to join you. And then I can really bitch in earnest--if you want to mod like crazy--buy a Standard GT and go at it. If you want the 67-68 look buy a GT500. If you love the original 65-66 look then that is why you buy the Shelby GT.

 

For 09--no Shelby GT--I'm expecting them to get the go ahead on the GT350 name--and that will sell.......

 

 

 

+ 1

[AFBLUE]

One or 2 years from now Ford will come out with the Mach1 or Boss and Shelby will have a GT 350. Some will wish they had waited and not bought a Bullitt or Shelby GT. I've waited 4 years to own a S197 mustang and was holding out for a special edition. Yeah I could wait longer for the GT 350 or Mach1/Boss, but that means not having a car to enjoy now.

 

Maybe in 1968 some 1966-1968 Shelby mustang owners saw the 1969 Shelby mustang and wished they had waited (it could have happend). A few years later they probably wouldn't feel that way as the earlier Shelbys have a larger appeal (and higher sticker price).

[ShelbyGT#3658]

One or 2 years from now Ford will come out with the Mach1 or Boss and Shelby will have a GT 350. Some will wish they had waited and not bought a Bullitt or Shelby GT. I've waited 4 years to own a S197 mustang and was holding out for a special edition. Yeah I could wait longer for the GT 350 or Mach1/Boss, but that means not having a car to enjoy now.

 

Maybe in 1968 some 1966-1968 Shelby mustang owners saw the 1969 Shelby mustang and wished they had waited (it could have happend). A few years later they probably wouldn't feel that way as the earlier Shelbys have a larger appeal (and higher sticker price).

 

 

I agree AFBLUE.

 

I was very lucky because I seen the bullitt and the 2010 Mustang a year ago. (I can't say anything about the 2010 so please don't ask.) I knew then, I wanted this body style. At first I wanted the GT500 but they are still going for over sticker. All I was looking at was the 500hp number. Then I stepped back and looked at the big picture. I realized (IMO) the SGT looks better, handles better, and I liked the fact that it was converted at SAI, just like the 60's.

[ilmor]

As they say...some faster and better may always come along...at least until the new CAFE standards kick in....

[AFBLUE]

...at least until the new CAFE standards kick in....

 

Yeah, good point. Who knows how much longer this 2 coming of the muscle car era will last.

[SGT3517]

Oh, forgot to mention that I love the SGT stance better compared to the Bullitt. Pictures I've seen of the Bullitt show a lot of gap between the wheels and wheel wells.

http://i2.ebayimg.com/06/a/000/77/ea/440e_4.JPG

 

Nothing that can't be rectified via the aftermarket, but it would have been more visually pleasing if it came from the factory that way.

 

 

The stance is supposed to make it handle like the original '68 :D

 

I just want to re-iterate what everyone else has said. The cars are going to be very close in straightline performance, somewhat close on road courses, etc etc. If I had to do it over again knowing the specifics of the Bullitt at my time of purchase, I would get the Shelby. I even owned a 2001 Bullitt, Dark Hyland Green. The new Bullitts look way to V6, and the interior dash piece is Barf. Yes they are cheaper...but wait for the dealers to get a hold of them. They will probably be a 1 yr run like the 01s and you wont see them selling at sticker.

[ShelbyGT#3658]

The stance is supposed to make it handle like the original '68

 

As for the Bullitt's cold air kit. We had the bullitt cold air kit at our plant (Sandusky ACH) about 6 months ago. It is a very high quality piece. It has "Ford Racing" molded in to it. The tubing looks like it doesn't flow as well as ours but I don't know for sure.

 

I made the end of arm pick off tooling for molding and some of the other toolmakers made various fixtures for assembly. They ended up taking the manufacturing job from us and giving it to some one else. We're steadily losing air cleaner and carbon can work. I think they are trying to turn us into just a lighting plant to sell us off that way.

[SWEDESHELBY1]

+100!!

 

 

Ilmor is always like that, he just says things and never mods his car, he's just like that... :D

 

Ilmor have a Merry Christmas and I think we have been through this post before just on another forum?

[WI-GT/SC]

One or 2 years from now Ford will come out with the Mach1 or Boss and Shelby will have a GT 350. Some will wish they had waited and not bought a Bullitt or Shelby GT. I've waited 4 years to own a S197 mustang and was holding out for a special edition. Yeah I could wait longer for the GT 350 or Mach1/Boss, but that means not having a car to enjoy now.

 

Maybe in 1968 some 1966-1968 Shelby mustang owners saw the 1969 Shelby mustang and wished they had waited (it could have happend). A few years later they probably wouldn't feel that way as the earlier Shelbys have a larger appeal (and higher sticker price).

 

I have to agree with 'AFBLUE'. Their will always be something new & more powerful coming down the line. I have always loved that Mustang & the movie BULLITT. The new BULLITT is a neat car for the right person. On the other hand We have something no one else does, the modern version of the 66' Shelby GT-350. I have yet to drive mine, but these cars are the sweetest thing since sliced bread. Sure they have there shortcomings, should have had more standard horsepower, 3:73 gears, headers, Hood scoops not falling off, etc. But they put this whole deal together in a very short time & from a production standpoint I think they did a great job! (all else aside). And I do believe there is something to be said for the Shelby nomenclature that the others don't & won't have. I think these are the best looking S-197's out there & they are REAL Shelby's, made by SAI unlike the GT-500's built by Ford (no offense to anyone, the GT-500 is a great car & breed of it's own that can also be Shelbyized) Enjoy our cars for what they are & remember, if 07' & 08' is it for them, then we are pretty darn lucky to have one (I know I am). Enough of my babaling. Just my view on the issue

 

I wan't to wish my Shelby family The most Happy Holiday's & A Prosperous New Year!!!!!!!!! :D

[ilmor]

Ilmor is always like that, he just says things and never mods his car, he's just like that... :D

 

Ilmor have a Merry Christmas and I think we have been through this post before just on another forum?

 

 

No need to mod if you're already satisfied...however, I imagine Swede that you have modded the heck out of your based on all the complaints about horsepower! Hopefully your car satisfies you now.

 

Swede, you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

[fatboy_merged]

Okay, everyone keep your shorts on...Umm...Shirts.

Uncle! Uncle!

 

I apologize if I hit a nerve, Swede, wasn't trying to start any trouble. Please read my post again? I hope you read me wrong. If you still feel this way, please give me a shout at 312.401.1396, anytime.

 

My remarks about the value of HP vs. TQ stand true, and any winner in any style of racing, from NASCAR to INEX/ Legends cars will tell you the same thing. Stay in your power band. I own two Legends cars, one for circle track, the other for drag racing. Both are driven the same way on different tracks. Hell, ask any bike racer, the answer is the same...Stay in the power band.

 

I didn't mean to be mod specific, i.e. supercharging. For sure, adding a supercharger improves HP and torque and for this kind of money, it had better. If I need to correct my remarks, I will.

 

"I have taken this car many many times to the limit and have it crap out @ 6200, such a waste."

 

Well, now I have to ask you, Swede, what are you expecting? Yes, the 4.6L-3V craps out @ 6200 RPM, but why? It's not the EEC, my friend, I know this for a fact. It's design limitations.

 

Please remember that the 4.6L engine (with any head configuration - 2V, 3V, and 4V) all suffer the same shortcomings in producing power. It's a "square" bottom end, 3.55 bore, 3.54 stroke, and low end power (under 2500 RPM) is naturally weak. It comes on very strong from 2500 to 5800 RPM, but due to it's engineering, they all crap out after 6000 RPM. If you feel that there is more power above 6000 RPM that you are missing out on, there is. It's called credit, and I suggest you keep a VISA card handy for the flat bed ride home.

 

My point was that there are many mods offered on the market today that folks are seduced into buying by reported "HP gains", when their torque numbers suffer, and customers don't see that. Such is the case with many exhaust mods, i.e. larger OD pipes, off road pipes, "X vs. H" crossover pipes, and likewise stuff on engine temps, spark enhancers, some suspension mods, engine oil, air/oil filters, tires, and so on. The list can be endless, and my message here is do your homework and decide carefully. But, if any of those mods costs you torque, it's not a performance mod, it's just cute.

 

Manufacturers and suppliers alike often brag of HP gains, some even show/display HP dyno sheets. But, the truth remains that when torque drops, or, lays flat, you're going slower. In my last post, I wanted to be specifically vague about such detail. I just wanted to share my HP/TQ point of view. But, lose torque, and you slow down. Build torque and you go faster are basic principles of speed. I started racing at 14, and I'm 55 now. Not once over these years has anyone shown me anything different, and I can't find a flaw in the physics involved.

 

Swede...Get your car on a dyno and make a half dozen pulls. Average the data and look at your power curves. Every car will be a tad different, but if your power runs flat at 5800 RPM, or, tapers off after 6000, what is the value of any extra/added access to higher RPMs? None, because when the torque peaks, upshift into the next gear (if you have one to shift into) and keep your maximum power alive and on tap. You will be faster, I promise.

 

The days of "winding out" a gear to redline, have passed, we are smarter today. I may be able to wind out a gear to 6500 RPM, but all I am getting back from that extra RPM is "risky business" engine wear, fuel consumption, and loss of speed from increasing wind resistance to my achieved MPH. Areodynamically, every car is a brick in the wind, but some are smaller bricks than others. Torque is muscle, and torque/muscle is what delivers your brick to the finish line, and decides how quick it will arrive on target. HP, even RWHP, is just an index. Stuff nice to know, but means squat in the big picture.

 

My opinion on the Bullit dampner (harmonic balancer as you call it) remains unchanged. If you attach more dead weight to the crankshaft, it will take more of your natural engine power to turn it, and not just initially, but all the way through your RPM range. How this produces more power, escapes me. It's just more dead weight (drag) on the crank. If you want to know how this feels in your seat-of-the-pants meter, drop your tire pressure to 20 PSI and go for a ride. The effect upon final performance should be about the same.

 

Hopefully (as is the case with superchargers), what you gain from supercharging pays back this power sap, and your power gains continue on above that. However, this is the chief argument between supercharging, and turbocharging.

 

Turbos are exhaust driven, not serpentine belt/crank driven. Thus, power sapping drag on the crank is absent and properly tuned turbo kits can produce overkill power to any engine, and drag free too. However, turbos are slower to respond than superchargers, and among superchargers, Roots/PD blowers respond faster than centrifugal. But, this is the beauty in it all, you get to name your own poision.

 

Again, I apologize. I wasn't taking you on, Swede, please consider giving me a call?

 

Nonetheless...Some facts remain true, and others are unsupported by empirical data, i.e....Proof.

 

Buy fact, dump crap.

 

i agree....i've seen too many throw a rod above 6000 RPMs...u definately dont want to hang around above the power band too long especially with stock lower ends....

if u want that extra 500 rpm...get a high performance lower end...it will buy u more time in that high RPM...but anything mechanical will eventually break. its a matter of sooner...or later.

but as i say to them "its your car".....but with my car i would never go above 6000

 

 

of course u psycho's can always get this engine :rolleyes:

 

[SWEDESHELBY1]

i agree....i've seen too many throw a rod above 6000 RPMs...u definately dont want to hang around above the power band too long especially with stock lower ends....

if u want that extra 500 rpm...get a high performance lower end...it will buy u more time in that high RPM...but anything mechanical will eventually break. its a matter of sooner...or later.

but as i say to them "its your car".....but with my car i would never go above 6000

of course u psycho's can always get this engine :rolleyes:

 

 

 

The new Bullitt say 6500 rpms is not an issue even without any low end rebuild. Like LuLu says it maybe for not but I have always have found that the power band is within the realm of the specifications of the engine itself, not the other way around. If FORD is offering an extra 250 rpms with its factory warranty I'd take it! I have had to many crap outs @ 6200 RPMs with this engine, go for the warrantied 6500 RPM's - Hey I could be all wet too and LuLu could be the right one here, but why would they sell it and take the chance of blowing the engine if it didn't make any performance difference?

[LuLu]

Merry Christmas all...

[SWEDESHELBY1]

Merry Christmas all...

 

 

Ummmm, OK.

[DreamRide]

You know what i hate............................

 

 

 

 

With the design of todays engines and smog issues,

 

I hate when i let off the throttle when coming to a corner on a mountain road and the rpm hangs and does not drop like on the older cars, Like the cars not going to slow down, so you have to start breaking earlier when lining up for the corner. :angry:

 

 

Merry Christmas all..............

[ShelbyCobra826]

The only place Im seeing a minor performance advantage is straight line performance, I'm looking for a lot more from my car then simple straight line performance.

 

+1

[stump_breaker]

I hate when i let off the throttle ...... and the rpm hangs and does not drop like on the older cars.......

 

 

THANK-YOU!!! It's not just me. That is most annoying..... <_<

The Mustang is the only vehicle I have that does it.

 

Of course it could be worse. My 05 Unlimited had a glitch that would cause it to suddenly jump like the throttle had been tapped. Not a good thing when sitting in a drive-through line.

[69dejavue]

LULu, I am curious. You mentioned the problems with the CVPIs. The CVPIs in our community go 150,000 miles before trade in and usually 6 years. The mechanics have never had a valve cover off of the engines in that time. A couple of cracked intake manifolds, a few transmissions, and a few clutches in the rear end. The engines have held up great! Isn't the CVPI a 2V not 3? However, we have a great mechanic and the cars are not beat as everyone knows they have to last 150K.

 

LuLu mentioned the inherient problems with a square engine. Again, he is correct. The longer stroke usually gives more torque, the larger bore (and subsequent shorter stroke) will usually render more HP and higher RPMs. That is why in the mid 70s the auto manufacturers started stroking the small blocks out to gain torque and not have emissions. The larger bore, in the old days, contributed to more pollution before the fuel injection and computerization of today. The small block ford went all the way to 400 CID.

 

Does anyone know if we can obtain the flash tune of the Bullitt for the 07SGT? I will not run 87 octane but I would like to have the option if I cannot find the highest grade. Out west you can only find 91 for premium.

[SGT2666]

The new Bullitt say 6500 rpms is not an issue even without any low end rebuild. Like LuLu says it maybe for not but I have always have found that the power band is within the realm of the specifications of the engine itself, not the other way around. If FORD is offering an extra 250 rpms with its factory warranty I'd take it! I have had to many crap outs @ 6200 RPMs with this engine, go for the warrantied 6500 RPM's - Hey I could be all wet too and LuLu could be the right one here, but why would they sell it and take the chance of blowing the engine if it didn't make any performance difference?

 

 

The manufacturers are typically very conservative so if they give you 6500 red line you can be sure there is plenty of safety margin built in.

[LuLu]

LuLu, I am curious. You mentioned the problems with the CVPIs. The CVPIs in our community go 150,000 miles before trade in and usually 6 years. The mechanics have never had a valve cover off of the engines in that time. A couple of cracked intake manifolds, a few transmissions, and a few clutches in the rear end. The engines have held up great! Isn't the CVPI a 2V not 3? However, we have a great mechanic and the cars are not beat as everyone knows they have to last 150K.

 

I'm in Chicago where our police fleet is quite varied, and none of it is under the control of the PD R&D as it was years ago. Rather, it's a city-wide "fleet management" program, and FM is not very smart about some things. They just buy "state bid" cars off a truck, and paint them. Kind of like going to a 7-11 for dinner?

 

We have just under 5000 CVPIs in a fleet of 13, 000 PD cars, and most of the problematic CVPIs are marked patrol cars in use 24/7, not "take home" cars.

 

What I am about to explain has nothing to do with head/valve configuration, it can affect 2V, 3V and 4V engines, because they all use the same 4.6L NVH block.

 

Most of the failures have been back-tracked to what the car was doing just before it died. This data is resident in your EEC and can be downloaded for up to 300 hours of "engine on" time. Common ground was discovered to be high speed driving, to emergency calls and chases. This led to discovery of a fuel issue when many of the cars were found to have less than 1/4 tank of fuel on board. Since a lot of patrol officers can be very inattentive here, low fuel cars are often left for the next watch. "Let them sit in the gas line, I want to go home" theory. Ditto with flat/slow leaking tires. Remember this, it figures in.

 

Problem 1) Under WOT, the EEC is programmed to shut off the altenator to reduce engine drag and provide more engine power on demand. Thus, combine the natural aging of the battery with the added electtrical loads of emergency equipment, i.e radios, computer, siren and so on, and voltage can easily drop below 9v under WOT. Remember this too, it also figures in.

 

Problem 2) There is a "Fuel Pump Driver Module" in the trunk that monitors pump voltage and output pressure. When it detects a loss of FP pressure from a drop in FP voltage, it shuts the pump off. It also monitors flow, and if it detects the pump "sucking air", it shuts off. "Sucking air" comes from the high speed turns under power, follow me on the low fuel thingy? This module is also sensitive to impact, and consider that both high speed chases and emergency call driving can get pretty bumpy. In a real/civilian world, these wires never cross. But, in heavy duty public service and sports cars, they often short. My point is, that this FPDM behavior means sudden fuel starvation which the EEC does not immediately recognize. Shutting off fuel supply without pulling timing and spark under heavy load = detonation and pre-ignition.

 

Detonation is a long term wear and tear issue i.e. "it takes a while". However, pre-ignition is fatal at the instant, and there goes the neighborhood. This is why most aftermarket supercharger kits include an improved fuel pump, and some are dual pumps. FYI, the GT500 has two of these FPD modules on board, one for input to the EEC, the other for feedback from the EEC. Smart.

 

Today, my employer has a directive in print. A directive that says that no patrol car is to be out on partrol with less than 1/2 tank of fuel. Why? The 4.6L is a very durable engine, yes, but it can't run on air.

 

BTW, Fleet Management is spending a ton of money paying for 4.6L replacement engines after warranty rejection by FMC. Why? Someone in Fleet Management thought that if they could save 1.00 on each oil change X 5000, X each oil change interval, that's a chunk of change to save. But...The filter they selected and mandated couldn't handle the lubrication system pressure, and once FMC found that orange plastic drain back valve in the crankcase residue, warranty void.

 

I think this individual "bean counter" not only got fired, but he is now standing before a Grand Jury explaining his "gifts" from the cheaper oil filter supplier. I'm not sure, because there's a tire guy in the same room, and I'm not going to guess.

 

Chicago...Got to love it's ways of doing business. I think we got more "G" men working here than @ Haliburton. Oops...Sorry, no politics intended.

 

But, why do I post this here? Because if you're going to push your 4.6L-3V to 6500 RPM (regargless of it's fender badge), you are pushing up against a natural limitation which may cost you an engine. Why risk that when there is no benefit to the added RPM range?

 

S'okay though, replacement engines are widely available, and at half the price you may expect.

[SGT2666]

The Whipple kit comes with the GT500 fuel pump setup and Whipple says NO WOT below 1/4 tank because you may be sucking air. Not sure how the fuel tank issue amounts to some engine limitation though?

[ilmor]

So, reading all the above, and maybe LuLu can best answer this question, what would be the recommended shift points for fastest acceleration in an SGT? I tend to shift a 6K and that feels pretty <bleep> good!

[mywickedshelby]

another Bullitt article and review......

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...n1.369349d.html

[LuLu]

Sometimes this stuff gets so silly...It's just mechanical/engineering fact.

 

Not sure how the fuel tank issue amounts to some engine limitation though?

Okay, then why worry about it? Drive your 4.6L as you wish. Why not push it to 7000 RPM? Why not put a 2.90 pulley on your Whipple?

 

Gents...Why is a warranty absent on some Shelby blower upgrades? Anyone?

 

So, reading all the above, and maybe LuLu can best answer this question, what would be the recommended shift points for fastest acceleration in an SGT? I tend to shift a 6K and that feels pretty <bleep> good!

 

Performance-wise, it's going to be different from car to car, many other factors to be considered. But, 5800 to 6000 is a good range to work with until you find what works for you. A dyno will show you where your power peaks, but it's only a "neighborhood". Lacking wind and road resistance/drag, you have get a feel for it after that, as you indicate you have.

 

Driving past 6000 RPM just because you can doesn't make any performance sense to me. As I posted quite a while back, driving past your peak power is just wasted fuel and risk to the engine, and all you get is slower.

 

I really don't understand why this is so hard to get across here. I don't care which engine you pick out, Harley, Honda, Yugo, Briggs and Stratton, F-16...They all have their performance limitations, points in the RPM range where power drops off, and all that's left after that point is risk to the engine and a loss in performance. You get slower.

 

I'm not making this stuff up, it's mechanical/engineering fact. Sorry I tried to pass it along, y'all do what you want. But, claiming that a larger dampner will allow higher RPMs that provide more power, is simply BS. Believeing that powdered metal rods and cast aluminum pistons with a high silicon content can endure X pounds of pressure, is BS. X is true, but it's not the same X some of y'all believe it is.

 

Y'all go beat on your SGTs a while, and drop back in here when you see blue smoke at start-up out of your exhaust, or, hear a strange "tick" from your engine bay.

 

Happy motoring, gents.

[mywickedshelby]

When little ol ladies get mad, I mean really mad, does blue smoke come out of their ears?

Inquiring minds want to know!

[LuLu]

another Bullitt article and review......

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...n1.369349d.html

 

Same article as post #5.

[mywickedshelby]

thought it looked familiar, oops! :blink:

[ilmor]

Driving past 6000 RPM just because you can doesn't make any performance sense to me. As I posted quite a while back, driving past your peak power is just wasted fuel and risk to the engine, and all you get is slower.

 

 

I couldn't agree more; makes complete sense to me.

[SWEDESHELBY1]

I couldn't agree more; makes complete sense to me.

 

 

Ilmor how can you say that? You have never got your car past 4000 RPMS, even on a straight away, in first gear, with dry roads, with only you in the car etc...etc...! :D Now go ahead and flame me but I was just joking :D -

[SGT2666]

If you're done making HP its time to shift obviously, if you are making HP right up to redline well thats obvious to :D