moose power?

blown84

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Posts
164
Reaction score
0
Location
Conroe, TX, USA
ok, im decent at math, but im not gonna make you explain that. SO, heres a ticker, usin typical temps around where i live.

outside air: 110 degrees
suction: .3
efficiency: 50%
discharge psi: 15lbs
 

f-two-fiddy

Registered User
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Posts
2,960
Reaction score
5
Location
Duluth, Mn.
icanfixall, thank you very much for that. its gives me more ideas... :D and i do plan on doin a lot of portin and polishin on the heads. are 7.3 turbo heads pretty much identical to the 6.9 heads? my mind is to just pop a set off a 7.3, tune em up, and just swap the heads on the reassembly. thoughts?

The 6.9/7.3 heads are not interchangable.
 

hesutton

The Anti-Anderson
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
8,200
Reaction score
738
Location
Bowling Green, KY
ok. maybe i should be more clear about what i want. first: to make a decent amount of power in a way that is uncommon. second: to make enough torque (im a torque freak. if i make only 200hp but have 5 to 600 lb-ft, id be more than happy)

*disclamer: SHOOT ME DOWN IF I AM WRONG. I WONT BE BUTT HURT.

You can get 200HP and over 450lb/ft torque with a moose pump and moose injectors along with a turbo. See Here.

Heath
 

Brianedwardss

Registered User
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Posts
1,178
Reaction score
1
Location
Oregon City, OR
I think someone in the know of these engines here on OB's should sit down and write a nice read on why these engines, even @ 420 & 444 CI repectively, are not capable of huge amounts of power. By huge I'm talkin' 450+ hp, and 700+ torque. These are great reliable engines, and will go as many miles as any Diesel engine ever marketed in a pickup truck. They're just not huge power generators. This is primarily due to the indirect-injection concept that these engines were engineered with, and a host of other details that have been layed out time and time again here. There's a limit on how high one can go with them. Definitely not ever gonna scare or discourage anyone from their interest in one of these trucks, just trying to be up front about it. We could always use a fresh mind, energy, and bank account to stir the perverbial pot every now and then and try some new ideas. Ultimately most of us would love to be proven WRONG on our statements (where else can you find that on a forum).

I'm tired at the moment, but here's some common issues that limit the safe power limit:

6.9L - 420 CI:
-7/16" head bolts, easily stretched with anything over say 12 psi of boost. Result is a blown head gasket. Surf craigslist and tell me how many 6.9l trucks that you find with a blown head gasket, at times it's a fairly substantial number. Head studs cures that sufficiently.
-Early 6.9l blocks were known to crack the block near the block heater (not really power related, but still)

7.3L - 444.6 CI
-Thin cylinder walls. Read up on cavitation, this can be a problem, especially on a rebuilt motor where the cylinders were bored over stock. One nice thing about a 6.9l is that the cylinder walls are ~ 1/4" thick.
-7.3L's do have 1/2" head bolts, which are a great improvement, but also means that 6.9l heads won't interchange.

There's more, but I'm tired at the moment.

In the name of efficiency, a blower on a 4-stroke diesel won't cut it. But in the name of cool, definitely. A lot of folks I meet out there hear the word blower and automatically think it's cool. And sometimes that's all a person wants is for their stuff to generate conversation. There's nothing wrong with that at all, it's really about how it's presented. I sense this Detroit blower is more cool than efficient, and there's nothing wrong with that, not one bit. You only live once, why not do something no one else has done, Right? Im the same way about some things.

We're always interested in people willing to sink a bit of money into these engines, and try new ideas. Most of the fore-seen criticism is actually people, out of the goodness of their heart, trying to help steer you in the right/most desirable direction, so that your hard-earned coin turns into money well spent. 13,000+ posts on FTE tells me your serious about what you do. As of late here, there's been a number of new folks show up with a 'them vs the world' attitude trying to tell us we're a bunch of square-headed, set in our way folks that don't know as much as we think we do. So if some established folks come off a bit edgy in the beginning, definitely cut 'em some slack, cause it's been getting pretty deep at times here of late. There's a world of information waiting at your finger tips if you get to know the search function, and all it's quirks. Most of the time when I've got a problem, an hour searching this site will answer my question. Just takes some figuring out how to work the search.

Anyway, welcome to the forum. May your stay be long and productive! ;Really
 
Last edited:

429idi

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Posts
209
Reaction score
0
Location
Layton Utah
ok, im decent at math, but im not gonna make you explain that. SO, heres a ticker, usin typical temps around where i live.

outside air: 110 degrees
suction: .3
efficiency: 50%
discharge psi: 15lbs

Sorry it got screwed up when I submitted it. so.........

tin= 110+460=570
pin=-.3+14.7=14.4
pout=15+14.7
pout/pin=2.06

{570+[570x(-1x2.06^0.263)]}/.50=808degrees r-460=348.6degrees f.
:eek: That's hot. 1cubic foot of air weighs around .05lbs at that temperature, whereas at 70 degrees it weighs .075lbs per cubic foot. This is all assuming of course we are at sea level.

Here is another equation that can show how much of an effect air temperature has on power.

((14.7+boost)x cid x rpm/2 x ve) / (639.6x(460+iat))= airflow in lbs/min

so

((14.7+15)x 420 x 1650 x .85) / (639.6x(460+348))=33.8lbs/min

at 130 iat (Intercooled)

((14.7+15)x420x1650x.85) / (639.6x(460+130))=46.3lbs/min

so you can make 36% more power with the same amount of boost.
 

429idi

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Posts
209
Reaction score
0
Location
Layton Utah
You can get 200HP and over 450lb/ft torque with a moose pump and moose injectors along with a turbo. See Here.

Heath

The only way to get that is if the torque drops off, like you saw in his post.
(450x2250)/5252=192hp
If his torque was a little flatter and he held it to say, 3000rpm it would be
(450x3000)/5252=250hp I think with a bigger turbo he would see way better results at higher rpm.
 

blown84

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Posts
164
Reaction score
0
Location
Conroe, TX, USA
i rather enjoyed the last four post guys. thanks a bunch.

mel, that is one impressive injector youve got there.

429, im actually a couple hundred feet BELOW sea level here. lol.
 
Last edited:

88 Ford

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Posts
1,784
Reaction score
6
Location
San Diego, CA
Blown84 I'd say go ahead and use a blower. In my opinion boost is boost no matter how you achieve it. There are different designs that might be a little more efficient but as long as you are getting more air into the engine you are gonna make more power. I'm going to put an Eaton M112 on my 7.3 and see what it does. Lol.
I also like your idea for the water injection. I'd definitely use a windshield washer fluid mix to get a little bit of additional power to. It'll cool your boost and give yuo more power which is good in my book. And as far as the Moose products go I'd say get um. I have the Moose pump and it is awesome! Its a mod I highly recommend.
 

OLDBULL8

Good Morning Ya'll.
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Posts
9,923
Reaction score
338
Location
Delphos , Ohio
Ya never said where you might get a V8-71 blower. I got all mine (14 of them) from a junk yard at Wooster Iron & metal, Wooster OH, they scrapped out old GM busses (Greyhound). Busnut.com, look in there classifieds.
 

phazertwo

Die Summer DIE!
Joined
May 24, 2010
Posts
617
Reaction score
0
Location
Crawlorado!
Sorry it got screwed up when I submitted it. so.........

tin= 110+460=570
pin=-.3+14.7=14.4
pout=15+14.7
pout/pin=2.06

{570+[570x(-1x2.06^0.263)]}/.50=808degrees r-460=348.6degrees f.
:eek: That's hot. 1cubic foot of air weighs around .05lbs at that temperature, whereas at 70 degrees it weighs .075lbs per cubic foot. This is all assuming of course we are at sea level.

Here is another equation that can show how much of an effect air temperature has on power.

((14.7+boost)x cid x rpm/2 x ve) / (639.6x(460+iat))= airflow in lbs/min

so

((14.7+15)x 420 x 1650 x .85) / (639.6x(460+348))=33.8lbs/min

at 130 iat (Intercooled)

((14.7+15)x420x1650x.85) / (639.6x(460+130))=46.3lbs/min

so you can make 36% more power with the same amount of boost.

AWESOME POST!! :thumbsup:

PZ
 

88 Ford

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Posts
1,784
Reaction score
6
Location
San Diego, CA
Oh ya one other thing I forgot to say is that Heath made over 200 hp and 450 lb/ft without an intercooler. I've got an intercooler and it makes a world of difference. I think he might have been able to push it over 500 lb/ft or damn there close if he did have one. But who knows.
 

160k87F250

not rocket science
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Posts
840
Reaction score
0
Location
York, PA
thank you both for the assistance and advice.

that said, i gave you both fair warnin, and you did bout like i expected you would, and tried to justify yourselves. i may be new here, but im not new to the forum world. i have over 13,000 posts on ford truck enthusiasts. i have no disrespect for either of you. but your beef is your beef, not mine. now, please, do not post in this thread any further.

if i have specific questions, i will PM either or both of you. you may post in any other threads i may create, but please, no more IN THIS THREAD. also, if i pissed you off, feel free to let me know. just not here.

thank you.

Well put. I like a person who controls his own threads.

John
 

93_444idi

first on race day
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Posts
539
Reaction score
0
Location
missouri
is that mister vs stock injector comparison against bb injectors? i'm curious about the difference between bbs and misters
 
Top