We also learned that it was a LONG time ago when this information was all presented in articles in Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords lol 😝

who do you think provided the info in MM&FF?

Richard was modifying 5.0 truck intakes for these in the very early 90s. I have photos that I took at his shop.

@@richardholdener1727 The intake was not 90hp bolt on by itself. Pure clickbait You KZfaqrs are so full of shit just for some view's.

@@boostjunkie2320 the title is literally how to add 90hp... he then proceeded to show you how he added 90hp. if you think thats click bate and him being full of shit then you're literally just ignorant

I doubt half a turn of extra pre load is what broke a valve spring......besides pre load based on amount of turns past zero lash isn’t a definite. If you have 3/8 studs opposed to a 5/16 that 1/4 turn is a different amount of preload as there’s different amount of threads per inch. Actual pre load should be a number. Typical is around .020” and plenty of guys run more or less depending on preference. Hell you can run solid lifters and tight lash them and not have any issues. Maybe it was just her time to go.

@@DWBmotorsports Maybe. Maybe not. What I couldn't remember was the guy that got the motor running 10 years prior was haveing the same problem with it not wanting to rev out, and it broke studs, at the stock 1/2 turn till he figured out it was suppose to be 1/4. Car had hyd lifters. She still had good compression and good oil pressure. Still had cross hatchings in the bore. Valvoline racing oil. We were going to pull the valve covers when we were pulling it in.

@@joenobody2580 Way too many things point away from the few tenths of the adjustment to say that is what did it. You had valvetrain trouble on it already, and from your post, all you did was to replace the rockers and a spring and cleaned everything up. What made the rockers fail? Were the new rockers in alignment, and centered on the stem? Was a spring test done on the springs? Did they have coil bind? Were the guides checked? Etc. The valve stems could have been bent slightly from your description, and yes, a keeper could have failed with the age of them. The spring could have just fatigued and broke also from the age. Coil bind would be guess on the revs, too.

@@elmerfudpucker3204 don't take my word for it. I'm no engine builder. I took the word of the two gentlemen that were there, tearing it down, and the gentleman that originally got the car running and did all the maintenance for years. All three are highly qualified. I was just there, learning more than I cared to know about valve train, paying for the expensive mistake of an arrogant know it all.

Edelbrock has done this with the reg. Performer kit.( rec. 9 to 1 comp.) = 337Hp @ 5,500rpm, vs stock Efi H.O. 302 = 230Hp to 235Hp. I think Edelbrock has not done a complete Perf. Rpm 5.0 kit is because they dont have a cam in there line up to match, although they could have made one!? Heck, edelbrock didnt design the cam for the Reg. Performer package, its the Ford racing E303 cam! I think there Perf. Rpm cam specs should be 234 deg. @ .050 int., with .555 Lift, and 244 deg. @ .050 exh., with .570 Lift, on a 109° Lsa ( rec. 11 to 1 comp), that would be a great match to there Perf. Rpm 2 intake, and 2.02 Aluminum cyl. Heads! This package/combo on a 302 to 310cu. In. with free flowing exhaust system should make a nice pump gas friendly 400 +Hp!? Then i would have loved a more strip oriented Victor Efi 5.0 Combo, with ( rec. 13 to 1 compression ), solid roller cam 250 @ .050 int. with .600 lift, and 260 @ .050 exh. with .620 lift, on a 108° Lsa, using there Victor Jr. aluminum cyl. heads, along with the Victor 5.0 Efi intake, using 1 3/4 to 1 7/8 Ported high flow headers, and exh.= 500Hp Na potential!?

Why didn't you modify the gt 40 intake for an even comparison

Also like to see the carb options compared to the efi intakes

He's has a video on all that

@@xmo552 any idea how far back it was?

@@ryanblackwell8321 I think it's this one. 👇😁👇 Watch "5.0L FORD INTAKE TEST" on KZfaq kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ed1kjZOjpsq3mKc.html He also has "how to 200hp, 500hp, 600hp, 1000hp power combo/power recipe" vids for our 5.0 302s.

I'm unsure if it was neomustangs did Dyno on GT40 tube, Cobra and explorer but basically all was the same but that order they came out as tubular being best but talking about couple horse power difference between them. Personally I have the explorer and Cobra but went with explorer so I have it paint matched to my engine and Cobra to side

Yes, 100%. I'm about to pull the trigger on a full work over of the stock intake and heads from Big Dog. I wanna keep the stock look on the motor

I'm running his port work on a stock bottom end 302.

@@19jody72 did you dyno the setup?

@@caaspal not yet..its ready though. Just been to busy at work. Dyno shop is 2 1/2 hours away... It's on a startup tune at the moment , it's very responsive!! I'm pretty confident it will make 350 to the tire.. Daily driver with ac

@@19jody72 awesome dude, don’t forget to tell me the numbers when you get it done haha. Their port work seems pretty incredible to me

Yeah can't ever change it now its so iconic to these videos

Well I would just take the motor out of it and crush the rest of the car lol. Unless you like a car that spins out of control at the drop of a dime has no brakes and rattles like hell

@@MB-ib5ji foxbodys only need driven by people who can actually drive a car. which probally isnt you. Lol.

I've been 196 mph in mine-over 170 mph for 30 minutes straight-they work well

@@richardholdener1727 hey mate quick question for ya since I can't find the answer anywhere else, I'm looking at a 408ci L77 stroker build but I'm not sure if a (Duration @ .050 - INT 231 - EXT 243 Lobe Separation 113 +Adv Valve Lift INT 0.617 - EXT 0.623) cam is to small. If so what would be a more suitable to give me a lumpy/choppy idle yet a nice power curve upto around 45-5000rpm?... N/A build but will be looking into a centrifugal supercharger set up in the future.

@@MB-ib5ji a good carpenter NEVER blames his hammer . I have smoked Camaros and mustangs in pick up truck , the things you say ....are driver related not car ....period Your talentless if you can’t drive everything Even a farm tractor to the limit and past the limit .....you son have the fear......you’re not a driver

Would love to have one with the programming.

I would be very leery of that Comp camshaft if your car is geared like mine. Many times driving down the road and the AOD has shifted into top at 1500 RPM, and stays there even when its at 900 RPM. Chug chug chug.

I have to disagree the 4.6 2v can make similar power with a quality heads cams intake package like the trickflow one for example. Ecspecially if this is done to a non pi 2v as that raises the compression when you add pi heads or trickflow heads. They can easily get well over 300 rwhp and from 281 cubes. The 5.0 didn't do any better. With similar heads cam Intake setups on both with the same supporting mods they make similar power but I may give the edge to the 2v if its the non pi version that will end up at like 10.5:1 compression when upgraded to pi heads or similar. The 2v isnt quite the turd everyone makes it out to be just needs the right setup. Idk why everyone praises the 302 but downs the 2v when they make similar power stock and modded if modded similar the difference is the 2v don't need an aftermarket block to reliably stay together north of 500 rwhp (I am assuming both cars have forged internals) i aint hating on the pushrods at all I love them too but the 4.6 can gain some big time power with the right mods just like the 302 did.

@@midnight347 This is all true, but to do this to a mod motor is at substantially higher cost. Pushrod engines are more budget friendly and a smaller overall package, thus fit into more places than the HUGE mod motor.

Yayyy.. someone from the 90's come to spread their 90's tech ideas.

@@superkillr ....The slow guy enters the chat.....

Actually i just watched the custom runner length vid on the 4.6.. LOL 66 ft lbs more at 3300.. I would go so far as to say the efi truck plenum may have a 40 ft lb or so advantage on a modified engine over mustang style? Ive thought about playing with a phenolic spacer / tb spacer to make it even longer since I port mached the plenum to the lower and opened the tb ports for the 62mm.. Hoping I didnt kill that torque velocity but everything else is modified and a 280 / 290 cam 472 496. (Its a good 1500 to 5500 low to mid power cam).. Either way every ft lb (and where it is) on the truck is necessity

Add gearing or displacement. That is the easiest solution. A set of 410 gears front and rear will give it all the low end grunt it needs.

How do you slightly port it

@@smoke_oguwop there are some videos where Richard holdener talk about porting heads at home with a Dremel tool or something like that. So i think is not the same if machine shops do the porting.

@@smoke_oguwop are you serious

Omar the changes expressed in your comment should have some positive results very similar to the data from Richards dyno session. The term “slightly ported” shouldn’t be a mystery because it typically suggests a general cleanup of any casting flash or ridges that protrude into the intake tract , possibly causing decreased or irregular intake charge flow. Port matching would be good to include with “slightly ported” heads and intake manifold. A good Dremel tool with plenty of extra sanding and polishing rolls or a die grinder works well for port clean up. Some of the first power tools I bought when my shop was new during the early eighties was a Craftsman electric die grinder with plenty of accessories, a compressor large enough to power various pneumatic grinders and the trusty Dremel Tool for light duty grinding. I use 351 Cleveland type heads for most of my builds and while the iron 4-V heads have plenty of intake runner volume as cast, there’s always plenty of port cleanup and matching to do to optimize flow velocity. Richard mentioned the Extrude Hone process in his video and while I don’t have access to one of the machines, the extrude honing abrasives embedded in the dense putty-like carrier media can remove controlled amounts of aluminum or iron very smoothly and evenly as the machine forces it through the ports. You might say the Extrude Hone process can slightly port or hog it out until trouble comes 😳.

@@danielwilson6665 that's what I tried to say when I'm mentioned slightly ported, but I'm new to this, I have a 4 banger to use as a guinea pig and hopefully if I can slightly port the head and of I don't mess it up then I'm going to move to my Mustang 302 to do the same to the Restricted flow E7 heads. But I really want to to build a 351 with GT40 heads, that's why I'm wondering what can be achieved with that combo.

that's why I show the whole curve

392 WHEEL HP?

@@richardholdener1727 yes on chassis dyno. The heads and lower intake were hand ported. Upper was extrude honed.

Tough one to believe unless it was peaking at like 7000rpm...

@@superkillr 200cc heads are pretty fucking big for a small block. Not that unbelievable.

I heard, don't quote me, but before the explorer intake was discovered the 5.0 f150 intake was used with some heavy porting and sometimes welding of a runner or two to increase its size for porting.

the 302 truck intake flows similarly to the GT40 intakes. the Holley Systemax-II lower intake is based on the truck lower. im currious what the flow difference is between the S-II vs stock truck 5.0 lower vs ported would be.

@@a4channoob that is the same thing i have been wondering about

the stock HO is tiny and long

he could of on3 turbocharged it and gt40 intake and it would smoke a charger unless it’s a hellcat

And it cost him only!!! 50 thousand dollars lol...

will do mate!

we ran a Holley HP ECU

the big bang is stock junkyard stuff-not after market parts

@@richardholdener1727 awwwww.. so does that mean this is something you wouldn't consider dong a video on then i guess.. not "big bang" titled i guess.. i want someone reputable to actually test these parts how because all i can seem to find is back and forth on forums. its outside of my budget to risk the gamble on them. thanks for the response though.

not sure on difference between ECUs

And, whether you will be driving in inclement weather or not...

89 truck intakes are shit lol only the newer explorer intakes are worth a sshit

An intake isn't gonna do a whole lot on a stock engine as the heads and cam hold it back. You can't just do heads or intake or cam either one separate from the others and expect big gains. The gains are in matching the combo correctly. That is how he picked up 90 hp going to the rpm 2 that car already has nice heads nice cam and other supporting mods and was being majorly restricted by the stock intake. That is how the manufacturers got their advertisement slogans back in the day like "add up to 90 whp with this intake upgrade!!" LOL. Only way it's gaining 90 is in an extreme situation. Like this where everything else but the intake is optimized thus uncorked the problem stock intake with a better one results in big power. Systemax isn't gonna do much on a stock engine. The heads and cam will be holding it back. This is common knowledge known forever. However you stick one on a car with optimized heads and cam itll pick up big power like this rpm 2 did

@@midnight347 I totally get that, and engine is a parametric box. But the intake by itself will show you the actual difference in power between a stock manifold and an aftermarket. Problem is when you only keep the short block and change literally everything else you see the gain caused by the combination of all three partd, you never see what each component is actually worth. Of course factory heads only flow so much, but not everyone has a couple grand for their top end. So someone on a budget could really benefit from seeing a good intake swap to get more power, or a a good cam swap on a stock block, that kind of thing. Yes you'll always gain the most by putting on big flowing heads, and intake with a free flowing exhaust, but some of us are working with what we have and what we can afford. I love watching Richard because he shows you the progression, but he doesn't spend enough time on the stock components before making a jump to a complete top end. Ask guys who were around building cars 40 years ago a cam swap, a nice aluminum intake, headers, and a good carb will do a lot for a motor, but we rarely see this, the videos go from stock to a Summit Racing commercial too quickly.

@@aprules2 I get what you're saying but that is a flawed way if thinking. Testing them on a stock engine gives advantage to the stock intake because it was designed to work with those parts. The holley is gonna be majorly handicapped by being ran on a stock engine and won't be able to show what it's capable of. On a stock engine it would prob gain 20 whp if I were guessing but that's not to say it's only 20 horse better. A test like this actually really shows the difference between them because everything is optimized where both intakes can make the max power they're capable of making so you get to see the true difference which is alot. Doing it on stock engine heavily favors the stock intake resulting in not that much difference when there is really a huge difference. Make sense?

Sounds like you need a 351 in there, It's hard to make a 3" stroke engine move big metal like one wants it to

351W, gt-40 heads and cam will help

why would you add an intake to a stock motor and think that is the best test?

You may want to upgrade that camshaft too. The alphabet cams are horrible in comparison to modern camshaft designs. Richard did a test back in the day and the B can only picked up 7 horsepower over the stock cam😱 something like an XE274 would make more power everywhere and would probably improve driveability over the x cam

a B cam should be worth a lot more than 7 hp over stock

@@evancole3620 I have 1.7 rockers so it not bad and actually it very drivable since I have a tko and 373

@@richardholdener1727 what cam would you recommend to use with the cran 1.7 rockers? I would value and appreciate your in put or is the x303 good

@@evancole3620 I don't know where you got your information, I run a b-cam with 1.7 rr and it makes a hell of lot more than 7 hp! Smfh..

it will be hard on pump gas-don't worry about the intake change

@@richardholdener1727 So toss the 8.2 and go 408. Make 500 hp on motor, then add 10 lbs of boost. If it did not live in a factory 5 "roadster" it would probably be an LS by now. Thanks for the reply!

stock cam and heads?

Yup

technically the 347 isn't legal

They are junk! That's why th we y do sell them anymore...

@@johndoe-zb8bm I got a set cheap and brand new cleaned up the ports a lot . I know they flow a bunch better than anything stock just been looking for anyone that has run them on a dyno . There's a channel that had a set on a fox body and was happy with the gains . The castings look pretty good . Anyways I'm sure they are junk...so what's your personal experience with a set ?

@@macenbarmore1900 The heads themselves are okay,I had problems with the hardware. I sent them back. But I seen a guy have good luck with them on KZfaq! I might have gotten a bad pair..

@@johndoe-zb8bm thanks for the reply I cleaned them up a bunch and lapped the valves everything looked good ! Thanks

@@macenbarmore1900 are you guys talking about the typhoon upper and lower intakes ?

I have nevcer run those

that's not me-that is the Engine Masters Guys!

@@richardholdener1727 any chance you would be interested in putting the reversed piston debate to bed? Seems like you are a disinterested party and, of course, highly respected. Tony says he will send you a motor!

tune, headers, cam and springs

do not use that

not familiar

A bong.

high rpm intake

Curious about this too - I have it on my 347 and people tell me it's killing HP but have no suggestion for another option! lol

@@richardholdener1727 what valve spring kit upgrade kit you run on e7te with xe274

you can shorten them-it just shifts the power curve

The Edelbrock rpm 2 wasnt around for many years after 1988.hell be lucky if the dart heads were even out at that time

@@ryangulley2051 I was mostly being a smart ass about that intake adding 90hp. Most of the good bolt-ons didn’t happen until 89 when they got rid of speed density and went to mass air. Junkyard explorer intakes, heads and 3.73’s were the ticket for us poor folk back in the day.

much less

did you watch?

@@richardholdener1727 Yes, I did watch. You said it yourself, you tested 3 different combinations of things. Starting at 10:35 you summarize. Your title makes it sound like intake change alone may yield 90hp, then you sneakily show that if you take a stock engine and change a bunch of stuff out and THEN also change the intake you'll get upwards of +90. That's a deceiving and unscientific test method if you're going to lead with that title. You really didn't get +90 from the intake, you simply got back some of what you failed to get with your other upgrades because you didn't upgrade everything together in logical fashion. You're not the first to do such a thing. Almost every motor show on cable tv these days pulls a similar stunt..."Look at us, we got +50 hp with new exhaust and air filter" (but they also changed the heads, ignition, intake, etc)

you missed the point of this video-the math is strong in this one

yes-although MAF ECUs do well without

injectors need to be sized for power level-80 pounders work well, the RPM II intake works well on an EFI combo-Holley too

@@richardholdener1727 thankyou brother I really appreciate your time I've watched he'd most of your videos but they are so full of information it's hard to retain everything. Cheers again.

no sir-that was all before you tube

@@richardholdener1727 Maybe in the future we will get another one. Super interested in the extrude honed products. Want to keep my engine looking stock to anybody that looks at it. Planning on big dog port to stock heads intake. They said they shorten the runners. Extrude honed sounds like it would work best because of the process it they could port the entire length of the runners. So many choices....

@@richardholdener1727 Thanks for the response though. Greatly appreciated

The article was in one of his books that I have. On a STOCK 302, extrude hone added power everywhere. But mostly in the 4-5K range-- it added 11 HP. At 5300 RPM the manifold fell off a cliff because of the runner length. Should get his E-books, they are on Google Play.

@@S.Matt240 shortening the runners on a 302-308 results in significant loos of power in the mid range. We've done it and if I could I'd post the dyno and track data.

No universal answer. You optimize inlets for different engine speeds. If you go something in the middle then you give away other top end or low end. Its a compromise game ( unless you made your own infinitely variable set up)

no such thing as best

@@richardholdener1727 ✋😁 raising my hand to ask a question. My '88 GT is 100% still stock (amazingly). What is my biggest choker on the high end? Is it: Ignition? Ecu? Heads/intake? Fuel? Cam? I know it's all designed to work together. I'm just wondering what's the biggest *single* thing keeping me down on the high end. Thanks!

@@xmo552 cylinder heads for sure💪

@@joebroart Thanks

the starting power and ending power would both be increased with displacement

Richard has shown they will hold more power than that. I have heard it's actually the 5.0 becoming a stressed member in foxbodies that haven't had their chassis stiffened, also harder/solid motor mounts are a bad idea. The flex in the chassis on a hard launch rips the block down the valley.

@@Silverfang15 Ok. I didnt know that 👍

yes you can add nitrous

I know 2 people who went over 700whp with those blocks.

@@Silverfang15 Twisting "frames" is what splits blocks? 1st time i hear this. How far would you push an '88 roller block? What about an older Mex block for example?