Gear questions.

[Colt]

New to the site, been lurking awhile.

Have a 2004 Marauder. Looking at changing the rear end gears.

Has anyone done 3.73's or 3.90's ?

I have messed more with modern 5 speed Mustangs. 4.10's tend to be over kill IMHO.

Mustangs come with 3.27 rearend gears, and tires that are 25.7" in diam. Going to 3.73's works great. (1st gear is 3.38, 2nd is 2.00, 3rd is 1.32, 4th is 1.00, and 5th is .68). Tire revs per mile are 811.

Now from what I know of the Marauder it has 3.55's stock with 28.5" tires. 1st gear is 2.84, 2nd 1.55, 3rd 1.00, and 4th/od is .70. Tires revs per mile is 724. Am i off on any of this?

I am guessing that 3.90's or 4.10's would work best.

Any traction issues for those with 4.10's? I dont want to spin out much when I am heavy on the gas in a turn or taking off. Also can a 'Ford' dealer flash for 3.73's or 4.10's or must it be a programer/tune? What are your RPM's with 4.10's at say 70 and 80MPH?

Thanks for any info.

[CBT]

Hi, sailor! :wave:

[fastblackmerc]

You need to use the search function as this topic has been discussed ad nauseum.....

[Colt]

You need to use the search function as this topic has been discussed ad nauseum.....


I did. Looked back over a year. Not much info on the dealer flash, or 3.73's or 3.90's that I found.

A lot of "4.10's" are how the designer wanted it. And how great they are, but I found little on how well they work, or if there is tire spin when going hard on the gas in turns and stuff.

Maybe I missed it all, could you give me a recap?

[RF Overlord]

Steve Babcock, the program manager for the Marauder project, has repeatedly said that the car was originally supposed to have 4.10s, but got shot down.


I have messed more with modern 5 speed Mustangs. 4.10's tend to be over kill IMHO.Remember, the MM is significantly heavier than a Mustang and has taller rear tires. I don't think anyone here who has gone to 4.10s has regretted it (including me).
Any traction issues for those with 4.10's? I dont want to spin out much when I am heavy on the gas in a turn or taking off.Heh...good one. There isn't much of a chance of that in this car with the lack of low-end torque and the weight. Ask anyone here...4.10s make this car respond the way it SHOULD have from the factory.
Also can a 'Ford' dealer flash for 3.73's or 4.10's or must it be a programer/tune?Someone correct me, but I don't think most dealers are set up to change individual parameters in a tune; all they can do is reflash the entire PCM with factory code updates.

[musclemerc]

The dealer can flash for whatever gear you like but it's better to get a Xcal with a tune for the 4:10's and the stock 3:55's and just swap the tune yourself. Easy Peasy!

[RF Overlord]

Remember it's not just the speedo that needs to be corrected. Without a tune, your shift points will be too low as well.

[ntd]

can a 'Ford' dealer flash for 3.73's or 4.10's or must it be a programer/tune?

.

Nope our IDS software only allows us to change option that were available from Ford, 4.10's were never an option. I had 4.10 when NA it it really wakes up. Cruise rpm and fuel mileage will take a very minimal hit. If you plan on staying NA or Centrifugal supercharger go for it. If you see a Eaton in your future you may want to hold on as a lack of low end torque will no longer be a problem. Oh and welcome :beer:

[Colt]

Thanks for the replies.

I plan to stay NA.

I read a person did 4.30's and then went with 3.73's, as the wheel spin was bad.

Is the Xcal seen as better than the Diablo (IIRC they make one)?

I have read that RPM go from 200 to 550 higher on a gear swap from 3.55's to 4.10's. Seems like a large spread in RPM's. The 3.90's might work well. the debate of the 3.73's and 4.10's in a few threads messed me up on whts 'better'.

I have a K&N kit, and plan to just do rear end gears and maybe a tune, as its my daily driver now, but want to get it faster for highway driving. Might look at the exhuast later.

[ntd]

SCT all the way it's supported by more tuners. 3.73 will improve your acceleration but seat of the pants 4.10's make more of an impact. If your really worried about the rpm increase find a member local you with 4.10's and ask for a ride, see if it's something you can live with.

[musclemerc]

The 3:90's are made by Motive, and I have heard alot of bad things about them. Try to stay with American made FRPP's

[SC Cheesehead]

4.10s are the way to go on this car.

At 70 mph, you're going to be turning about 2,400 rpms, IMO, the car runs better as you're slightly higher in the powerband at highway speeds.

I've tracked mileage on every tank I've run through my car, both before and after installation of the 4.10s, and the overall average is right around 1 mpg difference on the highway.

Don't try to over think this one, go with the 4.10s, you'll be very pleased with the results.

[ImpalaSlayer]

n/a gears and a tune are hands down the best mods to do.

[MrBluGruv]

For everything I've done so far, the budget best-bang-for-buck mods to do to a bonestock Marauder would be the U/D pulleys, 4.10 gears, and a tune. I don't think an intake makes enough difference to warrant even the $175 price tag, and while the greatest real gain probably comes from a SC, I don't think for the average person that that would qualify as a budget mod.

[ctrlraven]

It took me 3 years to finally have my 4.10s installed and I love how well the car responds, I also have a 3500 stall converter. I get very little wheel spin unless that is exactly what I am trying to do. On hot days my tires just hook and go, very very little spin if any. I've seen about 1.5 mpg drop and I do about 65% highway/35% city driving.

I haven't taken notice to what my 70 mph rpm is but now it's about 2227 rpms. When I had 3.55 gears it was 1725 rpms. I am also running just a slightly larger rear tire (255/55-18 and with 4.10 gears gives me an effective rear gear of 4.04. I'll be going to a 265/50-18 next time which is just a hair shorter than the stock 245/55-18 and will have an effective rear gear of about 4.15 ish.

[LordVader]

[QUOTE=CBT;935976]Hi, sailor! :wave:[/QUOTE

Just for you!

[babbage]

I've got 3.73's - at 80mph I'm running 2500 rpms. It was a nice upgrade. A higher stall TC makes for a good performance upgrade too. My MM is as fast or faster than other N/A MM's with 4.10's - I like the quality of the FRPP too. Depending on miles you may want to put in new rear axles too along with seals and bearings since they have to come out anyway. Dare I also suggest a girdle? Break em in with dino oil - go easy for first 500 - then change to a quality synthetic.

[Colt]

For everything I've done so far, the budget best-bang-for-buck mods to do to a bonestock Marauder would be the U/D pulleys, 4.10 gears, and a tune. I don't think an intake makes enough difference to warrant even the $175 price tag, and while the greatest real gain probably comes from a SC, I don't think for the average person that that would qualify as a budget mod.


Eeek!!!

Just some info for ya, take it or leave it. If I did an U/D set up it would be ATI. I know most here dont go over 6500 RPM's too.


Let's talk about why this happens with Cobra’s and Machs and not SOHC Mustang GT’s, 5.0’s, Camaro’s and everything else that is not a high revving DOHC Ford.

First are the fragile, powdered metal oil pump gears. They simply cannot take a lot of abuse.


Second is the fact that 4 camshafts and all the chains required to run them create a lot of harmonics in the crankshaft. That’s a problem.
Third is the steel crankshaft made by Kellog. It’s the kind of crank hot rodders dream of but it’s super rigid and does not absorb harmonics like a cast crank will.
Fourth is the internally balanced short block that is more susceptible to engine harmonics than an externally balanced setup.
Fifth is the manual transmission. Gear banging and no fluid filled torque converter.
Finally, the death blow for the powdered metal gears: High RPM. The DOHC in stock form performs best when shifted at the factory designated red line, 6800 RPM. Those are some pretty serious revolutions and there are a lot of harmonics created.



All these things combine to make the Ford DOHC oil pump gears uniquely susceptible to failure. As such, the oil pump gears can fail under a variety of conditions that increase crankshaft harmonics. Over revving, forced induction and yes, inferior dampers that do not adequately control harmonics.

Here is a who’s who of the nation’s top modular engine builders that recommend avoiding small size dampers like Steeda on DOHC Ford engines:

Boss 330 Racing. Al Pappito

Modular Performance. John and Mike Tymenski

Accufab Racing. John Mihovetz. NHRA AA/AT World Record Holder

Livernois Motorsports

Pauls High Performance

Sean Hyland Motorsports

VT Engines




Here is small sample of the things they’ve had to say about small diameter dampers:




Quote:
"Do you rev your engine over 6500 rpm? If you do you should worry...The next time you blast through the gears might be your last"
Al Pappito


Quote:
"We do not install small dampers on any DOHC engine builds. All our engines get Innovators West full size dampers"
Livernoise Motorsports


Quote:
"There is alot of harmonic vibration on the front of mod. cranks. The small dia. dampers do not adequately control the vibration"
Al Pappito


Quote:
"The net of all this information is to use the (stock) '96-'01 Cobra balancer (F6ZZ-6312-AB) on all manual transmission, forged crank applications"
Sean Hyland


Quote:
"It appears that if you want your engine to live a happy life keep your stock vibration damper/pulleys"
Al Pappito


Quote:
"Cheapo balancers just do not work with powdered metal gears"
J. Mihovetz


Quote:
"Food for thought..I just rebuilt a '98 cobra it has spent the last five years as a road race car. The bone stock engine had never had a wrench on it, including the rusty stock damper sitting right where it was bolted in 1998. 20,000 mi at full throttle. This thing was totally worn out .guess what....The flats on the crank and the stock pump looked great.
In contrast...A slightly famous Factory stock cobra after a mid season NMRA teardown showed a problem. After 500 street miles and about 35 quarter mile passes the rotors had beat depressions about .040.'' deep into the drive flats where the pump contacts the crank. That engine was wearing a small dia. underdrive damper"
Al Pappito


Quote:
"There also seems to be increased instances of oil-pump failure when some brands of underdrive pulley kits are used. I believe this is due to inadequate damping with the reduced-diameter harmonic balancer"
Sean Hyland


Quote:
"After building truckloads of modular engines a pattern has emerged. Most all oil pump failures involve underdrive pulleys"
Al Pappito


Quote:
"If anyone will spend $5000+ to rebuild an engine, $400 for a damper should be one of the first things. I'm using an ATI"
VT Engines



So let’s review:

If you own a Ford DOHC engine built from 1996 forward, and you rev it over 6500 RPM, every major modular engine builder in the country agrees that it is foolish to run a small diameter damper.

In addition to improper design resulting in numerous engine failures, small diameter dampers have been shown on several occasions to be out of round showing excessive run out when measured with a dial indicator. This is not only poor design but poor manufacturing and quality control. This probably contributes to the vibration many have felt at higher RPM with aftermarket, under drive dampers.



Some guidelines established by the professionals who build these unique engines are as follows:


The stock damper with stock powdered metal gears is good to 7,000 RPM.
The stock damper with billet gears can operate to 7,400 RPM but is not advisable.
Anything over 7,200 RPM should be running billet gears and an ATI damper.
A small diameter damper shouldn’t be run in any combination over 6,500 RPM. Billet gears will hold up with a small damper but the harmonics beat up the crankshaft drive pretty good and eventually something will fail whether the pump, a camshaft gear or the crank trigger.
Finally, let’s address some of the arguments presented by under drive, small diameter damper proponents:



Argument 1: “Show me proof!”

Answer: Idiot.



Argument 2: “I’ve run a Steeda small damper aggressively for a long time and have had no problems”

Answer: That’s not impossible. Varying production tolerances will make some oil pump gears more durable than others. Most people don’t want to find out the hard way.



Argument 3: We risk engine damage any time we install an aftermarket performance part on our cars.

Answer: In some cases that may be true but for the most part it simply is not. H-beam rods, forged pistons, hardened oil pump gears, ATI damper, billet oil pump gears, intake and exhaust mods. The list goes on and on. Even things like nitrous and supercharging are relatively safe when applied properly. And the inherent risk in their use is a little more tempting when we’re talking 100+ horsepower gains VS 3 - 5 hp for an under drive damper.



Argument 4: I’ve seen oil pumps fail with stock dampers.

Answer: Sure, it happens. The oil pumps are a marginal design from the factory. Increasing RPM beyond the factory limited 6800 RPM or installing power adders (nitrous, blowers, turbo) are just a couple examples of things that can increase engine harmonics. That is not a reason to install an inferior product that further jeopardizes your engine.



Argument 5: Most oil pump failures can be traced to improper damper installation.

Answer: Not true. What that statement is basically saying is that all the professional engine builders listed above don’t know how to install a damper. I don’t have to point out how ridiculous that is. Besides, it’s one bolt (new) torqued properly. Not rocket science. As a side note TheBlkMach1 had his damper installed by Steeda at their facility. He experienced pump failure with no other contributing factors.



Argument 6: Oil pump failures only occur on race engines or engines that are “over revved”.

Answer: Depends on your definition of “over revved”. Al Pappito plainly states that a small damper engine should not be revved over 6500 RPM. That’s a LONG way from “over revving” a DOHC engine that the factory designed to run at 6800 RPM for hours on end.



Argument 7: Steedas website says they worked with Ford to achieve the proper dampening characteristics.

Answer: That is the standard damper statement they’ve always used. It is meaningless. Fords Technology Transfer Program is available to anyone wanting to build an aftermarket part for a Ford. It can be used to obtain dimensional information as well as many other parameters.



Argument 8: Steeda has a new damper that is as heavy as the stock unit.

Answer: Weight is only one of several factors involved in producing a properly designed damper. The way they’ve distributed a bunch of the weight way out in front does not instill confidence. It's pretty tough to throw caution to the wind and blindly trust this company just because they've covertly admitted to marketing an inferior piece by completely redesigning it and quietly offering it in place of the original unit. Try calling them to ask about it. They wont admit to a re-design. Liability. It only took them 10 years. They haven’t even bothered making any claims regarding improved ability to control harmonics, let alone admitting to a re-design. Guinea pig it for them? No thank you.


In the end it boils down to whether or not 3 - 7 hp is worth the risk. Especially when nearly equal performance gains can be had by installing Cobra R pulley’s on the alternator and power steering pump. Even more by adding an electric water pump.

[Colt]

I've got 3.73's - at 80mph I'm running 2500 rpms. It was a nice upgrade. A higher stall TC makes for a good performance upgrade too. My MM is as fast or faster than other N/A MM's with 4.10's - I like the quality of the FRPP too. Depending on miles you may want to put in new rear axles too along with seals and bearings since they have to come out anyway. Dare I also suggest a girdle? Break em in with dino oil - go easy for first 500 - then change to a quality synthetic.

What type of tuner are you using?

My car is at about 34K miles now. Plan to use FRPP, just torn on the 3.73's vs 4.10's.




I do question some things, as I drive a CVPI for a living. I read some here say the aluminum drive shaft wont hold up well with 4.10's at high speed, yet Police car's run 3.73's (and 3.55's) at 120 MPH+ and dog the cars well on a daily basis with smaller tires/higher revs (and get 100,000 to 200,000 miles out of them). I believe we use the same drive shaft as a CVPI.

I also dont know that the CVPI has a seperate tranny shift program for the 3.73's vs the 3.55's (just a flash for the gears as far as I know). Would a tuner really be needed with 3.73's for the tranny?

Also what is the top speed for the MM, I have never tested it but read from 117 to 130MPH. 110 is as fast as I have been to date and felt like there was much more. I know in my Mustang Bullitt with the 3.27's I could hit 160+ and with 3.73's 145 was pushing it (might have been my tune as well as I lowered the rev limit, and nixed the speed limiter). Has anyone gone over 135 MPH with 4.10's NA? I assume the RPM/TQ is there.

Thanks, just looking for the group info from others.

[Rockettman]

Food for thought.
If you decide to use a tuner (I have an SCT and love it), most of the tunes available here or "out there", have tuned for 3.55's or 4.10's. If you don't plan to spend the money to go to a dino and work through the entire tune, it's just plain easier to get a tune for the 4.10's that's already done for you.

[musclemerc]

Funny they single out the Steeda pully's. I've heard of oil pump failure but it was mostly with BBK pully's not the Steeda's. My tune has me shifting @6300rpm and for sure I have NEVER had a problem with my pully's and they were one of the first mods I did on the Merc years ago.

[ctrlraven]

You would want to have a tune anyways for the car, it's night and day difference over stock. Whatever gear upgrade you do I would have a tuner before hand, SCT is the most popular since it is vastly more supported.

Why not try out a tune first and see how you like it. If you need more then add on gears.

I had a fellow Marauder owner install my new diff and 4.10 gears and all we used was Motorcraft diff fluid and 4 oz bottle of FM. I'll change the fluid out in 5k miles as it should be good and broken in by then. lol

[babbage]

What type of tuner are you using?

My car is at about 34K miles now. Plan to use FRPP, just torn on the 3.73's vs 4.10's.




I do question some things, as I drive a CVPI for a living. I read some here say the aluminum drive shaft wont hold up well with 4.10's at high speed, yet Police car's run 3.73's (and 3.55's) at 120 MPH+ and dog the cars well on a daily basis with smaller tires/higher revs (and get 100,000 to 200,000 miles out of them). I believe we use the same drive shaft as a CVPI.

I also dont know that the CVPI has a seperate tranny shift program for the 3.73's vs the 3.55's (just a flash for the gears as far as I know). Would a tuner really be needed with 3.73's for the tranny?

Also what is the top speed for the MM, I have never tested it but read from 117 to 130MPH. 110 is as fast as I have been to date and felt like there was much more. I know in my Mustang Bullitt with the 3.27's I could hit 160+ and with 3.73's 145 was pushing it (might have been my tune as well as I lowered the rev limit, and nixed the speed limiter). Has anyone gone over 135 MPH with 4.10's NA? I assume the RPM/TQ is there.

Thanks, just looking for the group info from others.

Wow that was some great info you posted on the Underdrives, think I'll stay away!! I use an SCT device, http://www.sctflash.com

Top speed on an MM is factory limited to 117 - for driveline harmonics.
All CVPI's with 3.55 are limited to 119 - the exception was in 99-2000 when they got the good Alcoa composite drive shafts - then they were able to do 129 (if I remember correctly)

Find yourself a driveshaft from a 99-2000 CVPI that came with 3.55's it will have the better than aluminum Alcoa MMC shaft -or- Dennis Reinhart sells very nice Dynatec driveshafts that are high speed balanced and have very good rotational tolerances.

I you want to keep the top end go with 3.73's or keep the 3.55's - you'll get a small jump in performance with 3.73, but to get off the line even better install a Circle D TC or one from Precision industries. This dropped half a second from my 1/4 mile time.

[RF Overlord]

Colt, what's the source of that article? It sounds like it was written by someone with a big ax to grind against Steeda. Lots of people here have Steeda underdrives, me included, and I've never heard anything bad about them.

I like how the article says my 50,000 miles with Steeda pulleys is a fluke... :shake:

[babbage]

Colt, what's the source of that article? It sounds like it was written by someone with a big ax to grind against Steeda. Lots of people here have Steeda underdrives, me included, and I've never heard anything bad about them.

I like how the article says my 50,000 miles with Steeda pulleys is a fluke... :shake:

Small size dampers LIKE Steeda. Not just steeda.
Source of article? Why not check with all of these guys



Here is a who’s who of the nation’s top modular engine builders that recommend avoiding small size dampers like Steeda on DOHC Ford engines:

Boss 330 Racing. Al Pappito

Modular Performance. John and Mike Tymenski

Accufab Racing. John Mihovetz. NHRA AA/AT World Record Holder

Livernois Motorsports

Pauls High Performance

Sean Hyland Motorsports

VT Engines

[fastblackmerc]

Colt, what's the source of that article? It sounds like it was written by someone with a big ax to grind against Steeda. Lots of people here have Steeda underdrives, me included, and I've never heard anything bad about them.

I like how the article says my 50,000 miles with Steeda pulleys is a fluke... :shake:

Same here, have had Steeda underdrives for over 50k and no problems.

[Colt]

Funny they single out the Steeda pully's. I've heard of oil pump failure but it was mostly with BBK pully's not the Steeda's. My tune has me shifting @6300rpm and for sure I have NEVER had a problem with my pully's and they were one of the first mods I did on the Merc years ago.


On my 4.6L 2V Bullitt that came with U/D pulleys from the factory I used Steeda pulleys to underdrive even more and reduce rotational weight. I did about 90% of Steeda products on my Mustang from control arms to ball joints to caster cammber plates to full sub frame conectors etc. If Steeda made it and it would fit I used it. IMHO Steeda makes some great things, top of the line for fit and finish.

The issue is the higher reving 4V has a lot more going on. I think Steeda was used as they are one of the top makers for the 2V and much more info was known about the 2V vs the 4V. Also Steeda uses rubber over a higher end liquid. Back in the day only a few people really knew 4V tech, and those are the people mentioned in the quote I posted from a Mustang site I used for tech.

To each their own on pulleys, but the people mentioned are the top builders IMHO of 4V's. Not that I will ever have a built 4V.

[Colt]

Same here, have had Steeda underdrives for over 50k and no problems.


The issue is if you rev to 6500+ RPM's there is a high fail rate and you do a lot of damage in that area. At lower RPM's you should be ok. But if you hit 6000+ RPM's you might be doing some damage that might not be as noticeable. One could do a teardown and check for damage mentioned to said parts. Our cams and tune is not the same as a Cobra/Mach1 but its close...

IMHO on a daily driver it should not be a major issue, but on a track car a higher end U/D crank should be used, like mentioned in the quote ATI and IW.

[Pops]

I do business with Pauls High Performance. I do not believe he says not to use the Steeda Underdrives. They install them all the time and they do work and seem to be problem free if installed correct. I have no idea where you get your information! They were put on my car and it picked up a lot of ET and caused no problems at all.

[Colt]

Wow that was some great info you posted on the Underdrives, think I'll stay away!! I use an SCT device, http://www.sctflash.com

Top speed on an MM is factory limited to 117 - for driveline harmonics.
All CVPI's with 3.55 are limited to 119 - the exception was in 99-2000 when they got the good Alcoa composite drive shafts - then they were able to do 129 (if I remember correctly)

Find yourself a driveshaft from a 99-2000 CVPI that came with 3.55's it will have the better than aluminum Alcoa MMC shaft -or- Dennis Reinhart sells very nice Dynatec driveshafts that are high speed balanced and have very good rotational tolerances.

I you want to keep the top end go with 3.73's or keep the 3.55's - you'll get a small jump in performance with 3.73, but to get off the line even better install a Circle D TC or one from Precision industries. This dropped half a second from my 1/4 mile time.


So you just used a hand held tuner? Is that what most use over a custom tune here? I have always like a basic hand held tunes as I just do 'bolt ons'. Did you adjust you tranny shift points too?

Might have to up grade my drive shaft too.
Ford used an aluminum metal matrix composite driveshaft for the 1993–2005 Police Interceptors as a measure to allow safe operation at over 150 mph Anyone know if this is false?

My bad on a prior post, 3.27 and 3.55's are CVPI's not the 3.73's. I was thinking of the SUV's. Brain fart. To much info running around in my head.

I have a lot to learn on MM's. Heck the CVPI's have changed a lot as well (first CVPI I had was a 99 an now I drive 2006 to 2010 and each has small changes I keep finding out).

Anyone know about what speed the 3.73's or 4.10's max out at for real world on a NA MM (not on a chart that does not take drag and other things into account)?

[musclemerc]

I don't think there is a diffrence in cam profile's either. A complete "C" head from Ford is a "C" head. I have'nt seen any info that shows specific cam profile's for Mach1,MM,or Cobra. Same is true with the "B" head. Maybe I missed someting over the years.

[babbage]

So you just used a hand held tuner? Is that what most use over a custom tune here? I have always like a basic hand held tunes as I just do 'bolt ons'. Did you adjust you tranny shift points too?

Might have to up grade my drive shaft too. Anyone know if this is false?

My bad on a prior post, 3.27 and 3.55's are CVPI's not the 3.73's. I was thinking of the SUV's. Brain fart. To much info running around in my head.

I have a lot to learn on MM's. Heck the CVPI's have changed a lot as well (first CVPI I had was a 99 an now I drive 2006 to 2010 and each has small changes I keep finding out).

Anyone know about what speed the 3.73's or 4.10's max out at for real world on a NA MM (not on a chart that does not take drag and other things into account)?

I'm very sure that info about 150 mph is false. The P71 PCM from the factory is speed limited to 130 with a 3.27 and 119 with 3.55. No panther police car ever went 150 without a tune or reflash.

I've had my MM with 3.73 up to 140, I do have the Alcoa MMC driveshaft. It felt smooth and drama free. I also have a hand held SCT tuner, you can get a canned tune to correct your new gears, but you can also get a dyno run done by a SCT dealer and then they load your specific dyno tune into your handheld - then you upload it into your MM's computer.

[Colt]

I don't think there is a diffrence in cam profile's either. A complete "C" head from Ford is a "C" head. I have'nt seen any info that shows specific cam profile's for Mach1,MM,or Cobra. Same is true with the "B" head. Maybe I missed someting over the years.

I dont know a lot about the 4V, I know that 99-01 Cobra's and 03-04 Mach's had a set up and that the Lincoln Aviator and MM had a set up. Each seemed to be for a set use. Maybe the tune. Its been a while, and I know that the 4V had different cams, but that might have been on the Lincoln side, which our engines seem a match for.

1999/2001 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SVT_Cobra), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2000-2001 Qvale Mangusta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qvale_Mangusta), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2003-2005 MG X-Power SV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_X-Power_SV), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2000–2008 Panoz Esperante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoz_Esperante), 320 hp (239 kW) and 320 lb·ft (434 N·m) [6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine#cite_note-5)
2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_Mach_1), 305 hp (227 kW) and 320 lb·ft (434 N·m)
2004 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_Mach_1), 310 hp (231 kW) and 335 lb·ft (454 N·m) [7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine#cite_note-6)
2003–2004 Mercury Marauder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_Marauder), 302 hp (225 kW) and 318 lb·ft (431 N·m)
2003–2005 Lincoln Aviator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Aviator), 302 hp (225 kW) and 318 lb·ft (431 N·m)
2003–2004 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SVT_Cobra), Iron block, Supercharged, 390 hp (291 kW) and 390 lb·ft (529 N·m)


I have a quest for knowledge, but also tend to forget if I dont deal with it a lot. Thats what I like about this site is people are into their cars here.

I had set sites for Mustangs, IMBOCcom, Stangnet, Corralnet, SVT etc... lots of sites for info. But the MM is very limited for cars and even info on the net. This site and Crownvic seem to have good info.

[Colt]

I'm very sure that info about 150 mph is false. The P71 PCM from the factory is speed limited to 130 with a 3.27 and 119 with 3.55. No panther police car ever went 150 without a tune or reflash.

I've had my MM with 3.73 up to 140, I do have the Alcoa MMC driveshaft. It felt smooth and drama free. I also have a hand held SCT tuner, you can get a canned tune to correct your new gears, but you can also get a dyno run done by a SCT dealer and then they load your specific dyno tune into your handheld - then you upload it into your MM's computer.

I read it as safe at over 150, not that they did 150 but that it was rated to be safe at that speed. Like tires are rated to be safe at a set speed, even thought most never push that limit ever.

At 140MPH was there room for more speed or was it topping out/creeping along?

I dont plan to do 140MPH, but things happen.

Anyone with 4.10's top out their speed or do 140MPH? Anyone know the real world RPM's at those speed with set gears?

[fastblackmerc]

I read it as safe at over 150, not that they did 150 but that it was rated to be safe at that speed. Like tires are rated to be safe at a set speed, even thought most never push that limit ever.

At 140MPH was there room for more speed or was it topping out/creeping along?

I dont plan to do 140MPH, but things happen.

Anyone with 4.10's top out their speed or do 140MPH? Anyone know the real world RPM's at those speed with set gears?

I've had mine up to 122 with 4.10's & stock driveshaft. Still had more "go" but was running out of road.

[Vortech347]

This needs to be a sticky

4.10's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RF Overlord]

Small size dampers LIKE Steeda. Not just steeda.Well, since the article mentions Steeda, and ONLY Steeda, multiple times...

Source of article? Why not check with all of these guysSo I'm supposed to call all of them and ask who they told this info to? How about if Colt just tells us where he got the article from?

[Pops]

Well, since the article mentions Steeda, and ONLY Steeda, multiple times...
So I'm supposed to call all of them and ask who they told this info to? How about if Colt just tells us where he got the article from?

I am in agreement here! Where did all this come from? Most of the people here who have used the Steeda product seems to like it. I like the one ones I had before the SC went on the car. Zero problems and the ETs where very good! I think Colt needs to use the search function and look at the info that is on this site!

[musclemerc]

Your first comment is the only truth in this post. The stock cam's on a Cobra, Mach1, Avaitor, and MM are exactly the same. The only changes in cam profiles are 96~98 -B- heads and 99~04 Tumble port -C- heads. The wiki link you posted say's nothing in reguards to cam spec's, I don't see why you went to the trouble to post it. It's irrelevant!


I dont know a lot about the 4V, I know that 99-01 Cobra's and 03-04 Mach's had a set up and that the Lincoln Aviator and MM had a set up. Each seemed to be for a set use. Maybe the tune. Its been a while, and I know that the 4V had different cams, but that might have been on the Lincoln side, which our engines seem a match for.

1999/2001 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SVT_Cobra), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2000-2001 Qvale Mangusta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qvale_Mangusta), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2003-2005 MG X-Power SV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_X-Power_SV), 320 hp (239 kW) and 317 lb·ft (430 N·m)
2000–2008 Panoz Esperante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoz_Esperante), 320 hp (239 kW) and 320 lb·ft (434 N·m) [6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine#cite_note-5)
2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_Mach_1), 305 hp (227 kW) and 320 lb·ft (434 N·m)
2004 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_Mach_1), 310 hp (231 kW) and 335 lb·ft (454 N·m) [7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine#cite_note-6)
2003–2004 Mercury Marauder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_Marauder), 302 hp (225 kW) and 318 lb·ft (431 N·m)
2003–2005 Lincoln Aviator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Aviator), 302 hp (225 kW) and 318 lb·ft (431 N·m)
2003–2004 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SVT_Cobra), Iron block, Supercharged, 390 hp (291 kW) and 390 lb·ft (529 N·m)


I have a quest for knowledge, but also tend to forget if I dont deal with it a lot. Thats what I like about this site is people are into their cars here.

I had set sites for Mustangs, IMBOCcom, Stangnet, Corralnet, SVT etc... lots of sites for info. But the MM is very limited for cars and even info on the net. This site and Crownvic seem to have good info.

[Colt]

I am in agreement here! Where did all this come from? Most of the people here who have used the Steeda product seems to like it. I like the one ones I had before the SC went on the car. Zero problems and the ETs where very good! I think Colt needs to use the search function and look at the info that is on this site!

corral.net under dohc 4.6l/Svt it's a sticky. If it's wrong, you should let the buildes know about it, as it could be slander, or it could be true.

I would post a link, but I am on my iPhone.

[babbage]

Well, since the article mentions Steeda, and ONLY Steeda, multiple times...
So I'm supposed to call all of them and ask who they told this info to? How about if Colt just tells us where he got the article from?

Why does it matter? Just ask them if they'd recommend under drives on a new 4v engine they might be building for you. If they say no then so be it.

Steeda just happens to be the most popular company that makes UD's.

[Colt]

I am in agreement here! Where did all this come from? Most of the people here who have used the Steeda product seems to like it. I like the one ones I had before the SC went on the car. Zero problems and the ETs where very good! I think Colt needs to use the search function and look at the info that is on this site!


http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1228923

Like I said before, just some info take it or leave it, but as some here have said the MM has the same set up as the Cobra (other than I would guess we have more stress from moving more weight with our engines).