quote Originally posted by Will: The Northstar is within about 20 lbs of an all-iron V6/60.

Supernatural 340GTO vs Will Style 4.6 Northstar.



Peak we are pretty close but under the curve the little V6 is a stomp puller.

[This message has been edited by La fiera (edited 12-23-2019).]

quote Originally posted by La fiera: Supernatural 340GTO vs Will Style 4.6 Northstar. Peak we are pretty close but under the curve the little V6 is a stomp puller.

I don't know that I would say that's a comparable build, Will's N* is built using mostly stock parts, I think the pistons and rods are the only "Performance" parts in the engine, with stock heads, cam, and intake. he did some porting of the block to improve bay to bay breathing, installed time serts for the head and main studs, and then put all the best stock parts together that he could.

Edit:

Also, BSFC would tell more of the story here as well, I'd bet Will's N* is probably more efficient.

[This message has been edited by ericjon262 (edited 12-23-2019).]

------------------
"I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."

"The day I tried to live, I stole a thousand beggars' change and gave it to the rich."
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/119122.html

quote Originally posted by La fiera: Not by any means I'm comparing apples to apples. All the 3.4 has is Intake, heads, cam and exhaust, the bottom end is completely stock with stock DOHC pistons, stock head bolts and stock head gaskets, nothing fancy. The N* has an extra 1.2 liters, 20 more valves and 2 more cylinders. I agree, It's not a fair comparison. As far as efficiency, I don't know what you mean by that. Compare the HP and TQ @ 2500rpms. The 3.4 has +60WTQ and +35WHP on the 4.6. But simple math will tell you which one is more efficient, the 51WHP per cylinder from the 3.4 V6 or the 37WHP per cylinder on the 4.6 V8. What I'm saying is that if that N* was mine it would be over 400WHP N/A.

quote Originally posted by ericjon262: I mean, that's probably not too hard, but I don't think it was his goal when he built it though. By efficiency, I'm meaning that a N* like Will's probably burns less fuel to make similar power. it probably also has a ton more room to grow compared to your 3.4

Oh, geez, where's the ruler? Let's just whip them out.

I'm still using stock Cadillac cams. So what?
I'm still using the stock Cadillac intake. So what?
I'm still using unported stock cylinder heads. So what?
Would my engine make more power if I had fully worked heads, giant rumpety-rump cams, long tube headers and an intake stack that made me cut a big hole in my decklid? Of course it would. So what?

Unlike some of us, I never claimed I'd be God's gift to engine building... just that I was going to have fun and see what I could learn. I've certainly had my setbacks and issues.

So anyway... 300 ftlbs at the wheels out of a 3.4? Did you find the same dyno that Motor Trend used for the C8 Corvette?

I understand the usefulness of Mustang dynos as tools, but their use to generate numbers for internet arguments seems to be their primary selling point.

A Dynojet drum has a known moment of inertia. A power source that can change that drum's RPM from X1 to X2 in Y time makes (X2^2-X1^2)/Y power. This is physics. Any tool that measures that same power source at the same rate of change of RPM and produces a different number is WRONG. There are LOT of ways a Mustang dyno can produce radically different results than a Dynojet.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 12-24-2019).]