Originally posted by kinger:
1. Are you saying there is no difference between 204 TQ and 229?
2. Your right it is such a slow ass car to drive..
3. Why is peak HP so damn important?
4. Do you realize the chassis barely handles this power output?
5. BTW we did tune back abour 25hp if that make any of you number crunchers feel better...geez..


1. Not at all. There should be considering the 20% increase in displacement. I just expected more being as it's boosted.

2. I never said that. However expecting low 13's from a car making just a bit more overall power than cars running 14 flat is asking a lot.
I also stated it would walk my car and it's no slouch. (even though it's just a NA 2.5L )

3. It's not. I specifically stated that in my post too.
However if you take a look at the comparison chart below you can see exactly what I mean.
These are based on overall power. NOT peak numbers!

You are crushed by the 2.5L turbo (no big surprise there) (-16%HP / -16%TQ)
You are only a bit better than a 2.5 S/C with the expected TQ advantage (+4% HP / +12.2% TQ)
The big surprise is vs SHOShop's 3L. Up to 5000rpm (-1.5%HP / +1.3%TQ) Above that it's no contest of course. (+10%HP / +12.4%TQ)


4. The chassis can't handle the stock SVT power in 1st gear or launching in almost any car. Nothing new there.

5. So you put the stock pulley back on to lower the boost to 9psi?
Your mod list states you are running the smaller 3.125" pulley. Am I missing something here?

2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.