A Sweet Motor For The New Mach 1!

typically the rules only let you go tighter. So if you had a 1992 car and swapped in a 2003 motor you would then be required to have all the emission controls to match the year of the engine. Of course each state has its own quirks.

MadDAWG

Patrick,

Yes. But even a supercharger on the Marauder would increase sales. Big question, though. Can you run 11:1 on pump gas? It's pushing the envelop as far as super undeaded is concerned.

Jimmy

This engine was discussed probably six months ago or more. There were talks of having it available by late spring of this year... unfortunately, it's not available yet. It is to sell with an option of engine wiring harnesses and computers to allow it to be dropped into all vintages of vehicles. I personally think a 5.0 cammer in a Fox would be cool. Still a 5.0, could retain the badging and all.

What I'd *rather* see out of the 5.0 Cammer though is an option to get forged internals (not just forged pistons) and about an 8.5:1 or 9:1 compression ratio. Build 4.6-like strength into the block and make the heads flow better than the new GT heads. I'd imagine you'd still be in the

325-350hp range even with the low compression, and it would be the most blower-friendly crate engine ever offered. Strap a blown 5.0 cammer in anything and go to town. You're looking at probably $10-12k including blower and electronics, but you have the bullet to do anything you want.

JS

Jimmy,

Yeah, 11:1 would be too high for street applications unless all your driving is at the top of Mount Everest. Liike someone else wrote later in this thread, it would be nice to see a low(er) compression version for those wanting to add a blower.

Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD

>

Around here (NJ) some Sunoco stations sell 94 octane... I wonder if that would do it. Just go conservative on the timing and it might work, seeing as how it's an all aluminum engine. I've heard 10.5:1 is about all you can do on 92 or 93 (93 is premium here). I couldn't imagine spending that much on gas though, it's almost $2.00 last time I checked. It's like $.10-$.15 more for 1 octane point! Personally I'd rather use displacement to make power and run on 89, probably make more torque down low than that 302/5.0 as well.

> >

Not too long ago, I looked at a 92 LX that had a GT40 crate engine. That engine is advertised "For offroad use only, not for highway applications", yet this guy had cats on it; what makes this an offroad-only engine?

>