[gqconley]

Well just finished the Dyno on the stock'ish 289 in the 1967 Cougar. Looks like the horsepower while not high gets to a peak and stays flat and never drops off.

 

[gqconley]

Spec sheet two

 

[gqconley]

spec sheet 3

 

[gqconley]

Cougie getting locked into the dyno...

 

[kengrau]

What mods have been done to the engine?
I have a '67 289 out of a Fairlane in my Mustang II.

 

[xr7gt]

So is it still a 2V?
If so that's not too bad rear wheel HP considering the car had a 200 horse engine. Shows you all of the power loss at the converter and driveshaft. Hmmm..
Oh, and 3,120 pounds is lighter than I expected.

 

[gqconley]

Dont know what the mods have been except what I can see. The weight is with a burly mechanic in the car and half tank of gas.

Specs that I know of :
Edelbrock Performer 289 intake
Edelbrock 600 4v carb
Mallory unilite electronic distributor
I would ask the machine shop that did the work but they are out of business which is why I was wondering about their work. The previous owners moved and I dont have their contact info, they did keep the last 20 years of receipts in a big box. The engine was rebuilt last spring and the receipt from the machine shop listed these items:
289 core and rot asbly
BP and Balance
Hi-Performance Cam, mch lift
Flat-Top Pistons & additional machine for valve rec.
Rebuild 1967 Hi-Po heads, 3 angle, comp springs, brass slv
Portland Performance Machine...

Looking at the work it seems they had decent intentions, I just dont know what the specs of the equipment were.

Assuming this work was done I would think the HP numbers would have been higher. The torque is pretty darn high, which contributes to the excellent seat of the pants feel.

 

[xr7gt]

Well it seems like it should have a higher HP figure but the torque is what motivates the car.

Wonder what that setup with stick shift would dyno out at ?

 

[texrep]

The HP rating is the actual HP at the rear wheels on the graph? If so, it doesn't look to bad to me.... Is there a way to calculate engine HP using a dyno?


Just wondering...

Don

 

[gqconley]

My question is the torque usually that much higher than the horsepower? Is it typical for HP to go up and flatten out and not go down? The dyno guy said that it appeared that I had a restriction somewhere that stopped the horsepower from increasing. He felt that based on the high torque and the fact that the horsepower stayed constant that there could be a lot of potential depending on what the restriction is.

any ideas???

 

[MunchE]

The restriction is likely your factory heads. 140rwhp on a Mustang Dyno isn't too bad, I hear Mustang Dynos read hp differently than regular DynoJet or whatever dynos.

I wish the chart had RPMs instead of MPH, though.

Oh, and is tq usually that much higher than hp? On a V8, especially with a factory cam and heads, yes, that typically is the case. On my car the tq stays higher than the hp until I reach the 1hp/ci mark.

 

[Royce Peterson]

With a C4 engine HP and torque losses in the transmission are around 15% and another 5% for the rear axle. So multiply the figures by 1.2 and that should be close to correct gross horsepower levels.

The major restriction here is the small engine displacement. Cheapest way to bring it up would be to install a 351W.

 

[dfwcatsclub]

I think this is what Royce is talking about. A Cougar with a 351...

 

[gqconley]

So what are ya saying DFW I should go bigger cubes

 

[Royce Peterson]

So Bill did you dyno it without Nitrous also?

 

[dfwcatsclub]

That was without nitrous. And the parking brake was stuck. And the car was dyno'd uphill. And the dyno under-reads by 20%.

What else can I say?

 

[RandomMan]

That was without nitrous. And the parking brake was stuck. And the car was dyno'd uphill. And the dyno under-reads by 20%.

What else can I say?

And there was a loose nut behind the wheel.

Thats the one my dad always tells me.

-Rob