Stock 19's.. It's already got a surging issue.. Mainly cause its running on factory speed density!!! But other than some surging it's LOVING it..
oil suggestions Fresh Ford 302
- Thread starter Flareside302
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
BAH HAHAAHA! Yes, I've experienced the speed density/aftermarket cam problem, why do you think my Townie went MAF?
I'm staying speed demaity due to quicker computer fuel table adjustments, just gonna tune with a moates quarter horse down the road.. MAF is nice and all, but I've seen it before were some switches to MAF and loses 2 tenthes in a 1/4.. Just doesn't do the calculations fast enough.. SD just sees lower/no vacuum.. OK DUMP FUEL..
So have you made a decision on what oil your going to run?
Originally Posted By: TFB1
A '92 isn't Mass Air??
For oil I'd probably go with the 0W-40 as well, though any good 0/5w30 would be fine...
I have a '96 F-150 5.0 with 175Kmi, gets whatever 5w30 that's on sale...
Nope trucks didn't get MAF till mid 94 model year... And even then it was fairly rare...
Ad remember too, all first gen lightnings, except a few Cali ones were all speed density as well
A '92 isn't Mass Air??
For oil I'd probably go with the 0W-40 as well, though any good 0/5w30 would be fine...
I have a '96 F-150 5.0 with 175Kmi, gets whatever 5w30 that's on sale...
Nope trucks didn't get MAF till mid 94 model year... And even then it was fairly rare...
Ad remember too, all first gen lightnings, except a few Cali ones were all speed density as well
Last edited:
Pretty much what I figure, either 0w-40 or 5w30.. It'll be royal purple on 5-7k mile oci's.. Just wanted to double check on what I was thinking...
Get a used oil analysis of that RP!
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Flareside302
It'll be royal purple
I`d go for the HPS if I were using RP.
It'll be royal purple
I`d go for the HPS if I were using RP.
Yeah my '93 Lightning was SD, sold it about four months ago... I'm kinda missing it, but I really needed a truck I could use as a truck and not be worried about getting it dirty, scratched etc...
I know about the .2 sec loss on a Mass Air conversion, saw closer to .25 on a Mustang I converted years ago... I ran the same MA setup on a Trick Flow headed & cammed 5.0 in a '88 T-Bird, had decent drivability and went best of 13.11@105 on the motor... With more converter it could have dipped into the high 12s fairly easily... Should be back on the road this spring with a 331 and a lot more converter(3500 vs 2600)....
I know about the .2 sec loss on a Mass Air conversion, saw closer to .25 on a Mustang I converted years ago... I ran the same MA setup on a Trick Flow headed & cammed 5.0 in a '88 T-Bird, had decent drivability and went best of 13.11@105 on the motor... With more converter it could have dipped into the high 12s fairly easily... Should be back on the road this spring with a 331 and a lot more converter(3500 vs 2600)....
Originally Posted By: electrolover
Get a used oil analysis of that RP!
Plan on it but whats your reasoning behind it? I'm sure your gonna say that I can go longer than 5-7k mile intervals..
But I drive only around 10-12k miles a year... So lol..
Get a used oil analysis of that RP!
Plan on it but whats your reasoning behind it? I'm sure your gonna say that I can go longer than 5-7k mile intervals..
But I drive only around 10-12k miles a year... So lol..
Originally Posted By: Flareside302
Originally Posted By: electrolover
Get a used oil analysis of that RP!
Plan on it but whats your reasoning behind it? I'm sure your gonna say that I can go longer than 5-7k mile intervals..
But I drive only around 10-12k miles a year... So lol..
Theres not a lot of used oil analysis with RP. Plus you really dont know how good an oil is doing until you have it checked
Originally Posted By: electrolover
Get a used oil analysis of that RP!
Plan on it but whats your reasoning behind it? I'm sure your gonna say that I can go longer than 5-7k mile intervals..
But I drive only around 10-12k miles a year... So lol..
Theres not a lot of used oil analysis with RP. Plus you really dont know how good an oil is doing until you have it checked
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: TFB1
Yeah my '93 Lightning was SD, sold it about four months ago... I'm kinda missing it, but I really needed a truck I could use as a truck and be worried about getting it dirty, scratched etc...
I know about the .2 sec loss on a Mass Air conversion, saw closer to .25 on a Mustang I converted years ago... I ran the same MA setup on a Trick Flow headed & cammed 5.0 in a '88 T-Bird, had decent drivability and went best of 13.11@105 on the motor... With more converter it could have dipped into the high 12s fairly easily... Should be back on the road this spring with a 331 and a lot more converter(3500 vs 2600)....
The MAF setup goes full base-table at WOT anyway. The big issue is the square-root sign shaped timing table, which Jay Allen always remarked was easy to get around by locking in your timing with the SPOUT out.
My car went faster when converted to MAF. But I used a Pro-M MAF, not a stocker, which at 55mm, are insanely restrictive.
My car was 14.2 @ 99.8Mph stock (speed density), 13.8 @ 101 MAF with underdrives and an E-fan. Cut a 107Mph trap, bottom 13's (should have been 12's and a higher trap, but broke the transmission) on the limiter in 3rd for its only pass with the new H/C/I setup (ported GT-40's, TFS-R, TFS1 cam...etc), made 270RWHP on the dyno, pig rich.
Yeah my '93 Lightning was SD, sold it about four months ago... I'm kinda missing it, but I really needed a truck I could use as a truck and be worried about getting it dirty, scratched etc...
I know about the .2 sec loss on a Mass Air conversion, saw closer to .25 on a Mustang I converted years ago... I ran the same MA setup on a Trick Flow headed & cammed 5.0 in a '88 T-Bird, had decent drivability and went best of 13.11@105 on the motor... With more converter it could have dipped into the high 12s fairly easily... Should be back on the road this spring with a 331 and a lot more converter(3500 vs 2600)....
The MAF setup goes full base-table at WOT anyway. The big issue is the square-root sign shaped timing table, which Jay Allen always remarked was easy to get around by locking in your timing with the SPOUT out.
My car went faster when converted to MAF. But I used a Pro-M MAF, not a stocker, which at 55mm, are insanely restrictive.
My car was 14.2 @ 99.8Mph stock (speed density), 13.8 @ 101 MAF with underdrives and an E-fan. Cut a 107Mph trap, bottom 13's (should have been 12's and a higher trap, but broke the transmission) on the limiter in 3rd for its only pass with the new H/C/I setup (ported GT-40's, TFS-R, TFS1 cam...etc), made 270RWHP on the dyno, pig rich.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
My car went faster when converted to MAF. But I used a Pro-M MAF, not a stocker, which at 55mm, are insanely restrictive.
Yeah I should have mentioned I was using a 76mm Pro-M cal for 24Lb injectors on the Bird... Won't have to worry about all that stuff this time, goin' old skool with a carb on the 331...
My car went faster when converted to MAF. But I used a Pro-M MAF, not a stocker, which at 55mm, are insanely restrictive.
Yeah I should have mentioned I was using a 76mm Pro-M cal for 24Lb injectors on the Bird... Won't have to worry about all that stuff this time, goin' old skool with a carb on the 331...
Originally Posted By: Flareside302
Originally Posted By: TFB1
A '92 isn't Mass Air??
For oil I'd probably go with the 0W-40 as well, though any good 0/5w30 would be fine...
I have a '96 F-150 5.0 with 175Kmi, gets whatever 5w30 that's on sale...
Nope trucks didn't get MAF till mid 94 model year... And even then it was fairly rare...
Ad remember too, all first gen lightnings, except a few Cali ones were all speed density as well
Dodge is still using speed density on the hemi. I couldn't believe it when I saw it. Talk about stone age. Harder to tune too. Not as sensitive or accurate.
My mustang has a lightning maf and 24 pound injectors. They are pretty much maxed out at wot.
Your right about the 302s. Nearly indestructible and easy to make power with. Gobs of torque down low. The 4.6 will wind out a bit better but under 3000rpms they suck. Vvt was a godsend in the sohc/dohc engines. Helps broaden the powerband.
Originally Posted By: TFB1
A '92 isn't Mass Air??
For oil I'd probably go with the 0W-40 as well, though any good 0/5w30 would be fine...
I have a '96 F-150 5.0 with 175Kmi, gets whatever 5w30 that's on sale...
Nope trucks didn't get MAF till mid 94 model year... And even then it was fairly rare...
Ad remember too, all first gen lightnings, except a few Cali ones were all speed density as well
Dodge is still using speed density on the hemi. I couldn't believe it when I saw it. Talk about stone age. Harder to tune too. Not as sensitive or accurate.
My mustang has a lightning maf and 24 pound injectors. They are pretty much maxed out at wot.
Your right about the 302s. Nearly indestructible and easy to make power with. Gobs of torque down low. The 4.6 will wind out a bit better but under 3000rpms they suck. Vvt was a godsend in the sohc/dohc engines. Helps broaden the powerband.
- Status
Similar threads
