89 5.0L camshafts - Ford Mustang Forum
Like Tree8Likes
  • 3 Post By 90lxwhite
  • 4 Post By Grimbrand
  • 1 Post By 90lxwhite
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-06-2019 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
killanotch's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 3
 
89 5.0L camshafts

Hi all,
I have an 89 5.0L with a Paxton novi 1000 supercharger and about 7-8 psi boost. I am looking into doing cam and roller rockers but I have no idea which cam will work best with the supercharger. I have stock heads/intake with an upgraded fuel system. I know some people like the lumpy sounding cams but I have heard they are not the best option for power/efficiency with a supercharged engine. If anyone has recommendations about lift/duration etc etc please let me know.

Cheers

killanotch is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-07-2019
SHELBY GT 350 Member
 
90lxwhite's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,883
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by killanotch View Post
Hi all,
I have an 89 5.0L with a Paxton novi 1000 supercharger and about 7-8 psi boost. I am looking into doing cam and roller rockers but I have no idea which cam will work best with the supercharger. I have stock heads/intake with an upgraded fuel system. I know some people like the lumpy sounding cams but I have heard they are not the best option for power/efficiency with a supercharged engine. If anyone has recommendations about lift/duration etc etc please let me know.

Cheers
I have a very similar setup, stock heads, stock intake (ported lower), except I had the cam prior to adding the blower.
Honestly, I don’t think the cam is worth the investment with the stock heads. After a stock rebuild and cam upgrade (302 to a 306) it made a whopping 205 rear horse power naturally aspirated. I’m not sure how much power the cam made if any, but it wasn’t much. It’s a .512 lift cam on intake and exhaust and 281 duration. It sounded fast though..
After having the lower intake ported it made 223 rear horse n/a, and when I added 8 psi it got it up to 332 at the wheels.
The stock heads just don’t flow enough, nor rev high enough, to justify a cam swap really.
How much power are you making now? What rear gear do you have? If it doesn’t match the cams “recommended stall speed” drivability will stink a little. Not so much once you’re cruising down the road or at wide open throttle, but when you’re taking off leisurely. I still had 2.73 gears for a little after the rebuild and it would buck and chug at lower speeds/RPM. So I was always riding the clutch. After going to 3.73’s it was better. But, then it was like cruising around in a tractor. But that’s another topic.
You’d get more power out of a better intake manifold at this point in the game than you would a larger camshaft.
http://www.compcams.com/(S(1tawu4550...csid=1045&sb=0

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	430A3147-61E4-4C80-B9A0-4F34FC63E5CF_1546833477336.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	240.3 KB
ID:	607797   Click image for larger version

Name:	CF723DAD-476F-42A9-8189-DE1535608174_1546833499872.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	243.9 KB
ID:	607799   Click image for larger version

Name:	12109971-2B97-499F-B72C-175C685FF402_1546833527079.jpeg
Views:	23
Size:	110.5 KB
ID:	607801  
94 Bumblebee, Krem12 and Grimbrand like this.
90lxwhite is online now  
post #3 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-07-2019
GT Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
Grimbrand's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2016
Location: Sedgwick
Posts: 2,180
 
Garage
Send a message via Skype™ to Grimbrand
The main thing you need to worry about with a cam and forced induction is overlap. Overlap is the period where the intake and exhaust valves are both open. During that time on an N/A car, the exhaust is already whooshing out the header as the intake starts to open. For a brief moment before the exhaust valve finishes closing, the momentum of all the gas leaving the chamber out the exhaust helps suck the intake charge into the chamber. In fact, during most of the engine's real powerband, your exhaust does most of the work, instead of the piston's downward motion on the intake stroke.

Many high performance cams increase this overlap, which means at high RPMs, this scavenging effect is enhanced, helping the chambers fill much more effectively. It is not uncommon for a highly tuned Windsor to achieve volumetric efficiency over 100% during certain RPMs. I've seen as high as 114%, N/A. That means a 5.0 is acting like it's a 5.7 liter engine being filled with 100% of the available fuel and air it can hold! Normally that is impossible without super or turbocharging, but thanks to the highly developed intakes, cams, and exhaust we've got for these motors, it happens.

However, at low engine RPMs, there's no scavenging going on. Instead, with a cam that has a lot of overlap, some of the exhaust ends up going the wrong way, fouling the intake, and you get a coughing, stuttering mean-sounding idle, along with low vacuum and poor economy.

For a supercharged car, you have pressure in the intake to shove fuel and air into the cylinders, regardless of what the exhaust is doing. If you have too much overlap, instead of efficient cylinder filling, you're actually letting some of the unburnt fuel and air sail right out the exhaust. You also don't pressurize the cylinder with a nice compressed charge to light off, because, again, the pressure went right out the exhaust header.

When you are ready to pick out a cam, it's a good idea to talk to the cam manufacturer. They will want to know things like the vehicle weight, type of transmission, what sort of fuel delivery, rear gears, engine displacement, and a whole host of other things to help you pick the right one.

In this case, going with the stock 5.0 HO cam would be far preferable to most of the 'performance' cams out there with a hairy idle, for obvious reasons.

I smile a lot. It makes people wonder what I'm up to...
Grimbrand is offline  
 
post #4 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-08-2019
Apprentice
5.0L Member
 
91convert50's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Paw Paw
Posts: 141
 
Of course, with all of my mods, I made it all the way to 236hp and 243tq N/A, on a Mustang Dyno at 79 degrees. Of course, that is through the totally efficient AOD transmission. My F303 cam is .512 on both intake and exhaust, but has a duration of 282. Sounds fast at idle though.

1991 Mustang LX 5.0 Convertible. 302, GT40 Heads, GT40 Intake, 1.6 Harland Sharp Roller Rockers, Accufab 75mm TB, BBK 75mm MAF, BBK CAI, 24# injectors, F303, MAC shorty headers, BBK off road H pipe, Flowmaster 40 series, Ford 4.10 gears, SR Perf Upper and Lower control arms, SR Perf Full Length Subframes, Ford Racing "B" Springs, Eibach Pro-Dampers, Smog deleted, rebuilt AOD with 4r70w gears
91convert50 is offline  
post #5 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-08-2019
SHELBY GT 350 Member
 
90lxwhite's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,883
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by 91convert50 View Post
Of course, with all of my mods, I made it all the way to 236hp and 243tq N/A, on a Mustang Dyno at 79 degrees. Of course, that is through the totally efficient AOD transmission. My F303 cam is .512 on both intake and exhaust, but has a duration of 282. Sounds fast at idle though.
236 is pretty good numbers for e7 heads.
*Edit*
My bad man. Didn’t realize you had GT40’s. How many rpm can it spin until the power starts to fall off?

Last edited by 90lxwhite; 01-09-2019 at 10:37 AM.
90lxwhite is online now  
post #6 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-09-2019
Apprentice
5.0L Member
 
91convert50's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Paw Paw
Posts: 141
 
Peak torgue is at 4,300 and Peak hp is at 5,400. The lines cross at like 5,300. Pretty sure I have a vacuum leak due to a super loose oil fill spout. I really have to get that fixed soon. I am happy with what I have, but am thinking about upgrading to aluminum heads. Save weight and maybe flow a little better. The car is a convertible, so it's already really heavy. Fund to drive though. Prefer to drive it over the 2006 with a blower and double the hp.

1991 Mustang LX 5.0 Convertible. 302, GT40 Heads, GT40 Intake, 1.6 Harland Sharp Roller Rockers, Accufab 75mm TB, BBK 75mm MAF, BBK CAI, 24# injectors, F303, MAC shorty headers, BBK off road H pipe, Flowmaster 40 series, Ford 4.10 gears, SR Perf Upper and Lower control arms, SR Perf Full Length Subframes, Ford Racing "B" Springs, Eibach Pro-Dampers, Smog deleted, rebuilt AOD with 4r70w gears
91convert50 is offline  
post #7 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-09-2019
SHELBY GT 350 Member
 
90lxwhite's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,883
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by 91convert50 View Post
Peak torgue is at 4,300 and Peak hp is at 5,400. The lines cross at like 5,300. Pretty sure I have a vacuum leak due to a super loose oil fill spout. I really have to get that fixed soon. I am happy with what I have, but am thinking about upgrading to aluminum heads. Save weight and maybe flow a little better. The car is a convertible, so it's already really heavy. Fund to drive though. Prefer to drive it over the 2006 with a blower and double the hp.
HP & TQ ALWAYS cross at 5,250. The math formula takes tq and converts it to hp and 5,250 is where they always cross.
I feel ya on the ole cars. There’s something about trying to wrangle in power with old tech suspension etc, and to me they definitely sound way better than the new ones. More like a “muscle car” than a “sports car” I guess.
94 Bumblebee likes this.
90lxwhite is online now  
post #8 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-11-2019
GT Member
 
wbrockstar's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Nashville
Posts: 2,182
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90lxwhite View Post
HP & TQ ALWAYS cross at 5,250. The math formula takes tq and converts it to hp and 5,250 is where they always cross.
I feel ya on the ole cars. There’s something about trying to wrangle in power with old tech suspension etc, and to me they definitely sound way better than the new ones. More like a “muscle car” than a “sports car” I guess.
I agree,the Foxbody's/94-95's are the winners in the sweet exhaust notes.The newer Stangs
have a higher pitched,raspy,gurgley sound to them.BTW- any idea what the newer ones are wearing for the converter pipe,mufflers?? Is it more of an xpipe type design??

1991 Mustang lx
D.S.S. 342ci {10.5:1}
TFS 190cc + track heat
Lunati 61011 .549".565"
Pro-M 76mm maf
Jetronic 30lb inj
QA1 Coilovers
17" Weld ProStar XP's
wbrockstar is offline  
post #9 of 11 (permalink) Old 01-13-2019
SHELBY GT 350 Member
 
90lxwhite's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,883
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbrockstar View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90lxwhite View Post
HP & TQ ALWAYS cross at 5,250. The math formula takes tq and converts it to hp and 5,250 is where they always cross.
I feel ya on the ole cars. There’s something about trying to wrangle in power with old tech suspension etc, and to me they definitely sound way better than the new ones. More like a “muscle car” than a “sports car” I guess.
I agree,the Foxbody's/94-95's are the winners in the sweet exhaust notes.The newer Stangs
have a higher pitched,raspy,gurgley sound to them.BTW- any idea what the newer ones are wearing for the converter pipe,mufflers?? Is it more of an xpipe type design??
Man I’m not sure. But I kinda think the overhead cam is part of the equation.
90lxwhite is online now  
GT Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
Dana W's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Oviedo FLA
Posts: 2,037
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90lxwhite View Post
Man I’m not sure. But I kinda think the overhead cam is part of the equation.
The sound? It's multiple valving. Two exhaust valves have to be smaller, the ports are separate, so they are smaller too. Smaller is higher pitched.

Welcome to Lambo Sound world.


130 total pounds of Pitbull ruled by 8 pounds of cat.
Dana W is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
 
90lxwhite's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,883
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana W View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90lxwhite View Post
Man I’m not sure. But I kinda think the overhead cam is part of the equation.
The sound? It's multiple valving. Two exhaust valves have to be smaller, the ports are separate, so they are smaller too. Smaller is higher pitched.

Welcome to Lambo Sound world.
Ah, ok.
90lxwhite is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1