performance mods for NS

[bigfoo]

OK.. I've asked this before, months ago............ but.........

What can i do to squeeze more performance out of this thing?

( I did air intake, and cat back exhaust...........)

What else????????? I'm sick of being toasted by every mustang and that type of car that pulls up

if it was even close, i'd be happy

[JasonA]

Race cams, high stall torque converters, superchargers. All are available now, with the exception of the supercharger, which has been "available soon" for years now.

If if you really want to level the playing field, strap a 500-lb trailer to the Mustang and then race him.

Another thought -- try putting the stock air filter back on and compare, back-to-back, with the K&N. Some people report the K&N is faster, some report it's slower. It'd be best for you to try it yourself. With the high flow exhaust, run the K&N back-to-back with the OE filter and try to compare the performance. Don't let intake noise make you think you're going faster, by the way. Before you do any other mods, make sure you've got the absolute best setup with the equipment you have now. That may or may not be with using the K&N filter.

[MARK 99STS]

Do you have any idea what kind of times you are running? 0-60 or 1/4 mile?

I have Corsa catback, K&N cone filter, 80mm TB., high stall torque converter.

Per G-Tech I'm running 5.7-5.8sec 0-60

Best 1/4 at the track is 14.1 using slicks on the front.

I can hold my own with stock Mustangs. Any body know what stock GT Mustangs run?

Until the super charger comes out there isn't much more you can do. I've been trying for 3 years myself.

[Cupillac]

When is that Supercharger coming? I've sold my kidney just for that puppy!!

[JasonA]

Any body know what stock GT Mustangs run?

Depending on the year, anywhere from low-14s (recent ones with manual trannies and good drivers) to mid-15s (I think the 1994 Mustangs were the slowest in recent history). The earlier 90s 'Stangs are pretty quick, 0-60 6.2 and 1/4 in 14.8...right about what a stock Seville runs in the 1/4. The newer 'Stangs have higher-horsepower V8s and are sub 6-second 0-60 cars I understand.

[bigfoo]

I'll try anything But it can't be a $4000 option.. what im looking for is the $200 options here and there that i can do myself without taking the whole engine apart....... Can you replace the cams without taking the engine apart? (i.e. just take the heads off?) It looks like taking the heads off would require something major since it's traverse and cadillac hardly left any room at all even to get your hand in there Where would I get cams anyway? I bet that would help a ton since it's 'tuned' for a smooth ride and not for total power.

How in the world did u get it to run 14.1? hehheh.. is that a track measurement or the g-tech thing? I don't really trust those things.. I've done some 0-60 times on mine just by stopwatch/counting and it's so close to 6 seconds or right under it.

What i'm thinking is.. would replacing the MAF and TB help at all? How about plugs, wires? Anyone make an ignition pack replacement (MSD??). Also headers...............i can't seem to find headers anywhere :> and of course maybe replacing the injectors with bigger ones or fuel pump if the stock ones can't keep up, although i've read that they can handle quite a bit.

The transmission is a point of interest. I found a place that will rebuild it with better parts so that it takes less power to run it.. so you can get more power out of the engine because normally the transmission takes 25% or so of the power and if they rebuild it and it only takes 20% then that's an improvement I'd also like 1st and 2nd gear to be a little 'higher' so i can really rip it from a stop.

The things I'm willing to try right away are ignition parts, MAF, TB, headers. Maybe even nitrous? Is nitrous dangerous on this engine? It seems like it might be since it's aluminium and already high compression.

Also, has anyone tried the differences in usine 87 octane gas or 93 or 94? And what about synthetic oil/trans fluids? Possibly high octane gas plus both synthetics could give a decent boost..

I used to drive mustangs and camaros back in the days and I rebuilt the engines and all that.. I just sold my mustang recently that i had for many years, mainly due to having no time to work on it (I have 3 young kids now). The mustang was way faster than the sts mainly because I built it up, but i couldn't stand to drive anything slow and I needed something to cart the kids around in that was safe so I ended up with the STS. however, that does not mean I don't want it to be faster than it is. I just miss the 11 second quarter mile in the mustang Of course that was a 3200 lb car with a substansially bigger engine.. so i'm not complaining about the sts If i could afford a AMG mercedes i would have one of those 650hp turbo jobbies but alas, i don't have 100k sitting around. If i did i'd spend 30k on a muscle car and have 800 HP without turbo

[JasonA]

Your car already is tuned for max power (with driveability concerns also of course). You're already making over 1 hp per cubic inch. Remember, this is only 4.6 liters of displacement we're working with here. Cams are available from CHRFab.com I think, but they're "race only" I understand. I doubt you'll find any gain with wires or plugs. We've generally found that OE works the best here. Not to say that you might not find something out there that works, but it's really untested and certainly not guaranteed. It'd be a shame to throw 200 bucks away on a set of wires that run worse than stock.

93 octane will work best, with best performance under all circumstances. Before model year 2000, the engines were optimized for 93 octane gasoline, and if you run less, you run the risk of slightly degraded performance (we're talking like 5 hp here). Not much to make a difference, but if you're taking it to the track to get a good time, certainly put 93 in there.

If your car is already near 6 seconds, you're doing pretty good. Stock 99s are closer to 7 seconds. If yours truly runs 6-flat to 60, that's faster than everyone else, and faster than a lot of stock Mustangs. Get a G-tech to be sure. They work well (in my experience) and are accurate enough for my purposes. I measured 6.7 seconds on my '97 SLS. Mostly 6.7-6.9, but 6.7 was the fastest.

[bigfoo]

Well i've seen some cool plugs and wires and other stuff out there that may make a difference.. even 5-10hp will help But i can't seem to find things like ignition coil replacements, a new intake(manifold), headers, cams or even heads that will work. And I have yet to find a computer reprogrammer.. I think just reprogramming the computer alone would help but nothing does it that i can find. I think it would benefit from new plugs/wires simply because I changed the intake and exhaust and now it has less restrictive airflow which makes it use more fuel which could benefit from a bigger bang in the spark. (I've had simimar experiences while rebuilding older cars that were carbuerated... i would repalce the intake and carb and exhaust and there was so much fuel and air flowing throuhg it that the stock ignition wasn't making a big enough spark to burn it all so it actually decreased some power in cases, and then when the ignition was upgraded it came back to life.. )

I think I'm going to try a set of those iridium spark plugs and see if it makes any difference.. of course i'll have to get a g-tech to measure it from somewhere unless i can find a local dyno shop

I think it would benefit more from changing the gear ratio and a high(er) stall converter

[MARK 99STS]

My times of 5.7-5.8sec 0-60 are with the G-tech but my 14.1 1/4 mile times are actual time slips from the drag strip. The biggest problem is traction in first gear without "traction control" kicking in. That is why I put slicks on the front to control wheel spin. Your not going to get any good times with wheel spin. I also went with light weight aluminum wheels all around while at the track. They are much lighter than the stock chrome ones. The high stall converter really improved my times as long as I get traction. I can actually chirp the tires turning traction control off and starting in second gear , but then it bogs terribly when it catches.

The computer is what is holding up the super charger. No one seems to be able to reprogram it.

Don't waste your time or money on a different MAF. I tried that and it ran worse.

The TB will help when the super charger comes out but it really didn't do much for mine right now.

As Jason said the cams are for racing only and would not work in a stock STS. There are no headers, intake manifold,heads,etc available for the STS. The stock injectors are certainly adequate.

[danbuc]

I spoke to the guy who runs Domestic Performance about a month ago and he said they are developing a set of high flow exhaust headers for the northstar engine. The only problem is he wants to get enough people interested in it before he starts producing them to make sure it would be cost effetive in the long run. So far I don't think anyone other than me and maybe two other people have shown interest because no one knows about it.

[bigfoo]

Hehe.. I have a hard time believing that nobody makes a MAF or TB that helps at all .. There must be something available somewhere.. People use NS engines for all sorts of fun stuff, albeit they use their own computers with them

'

Maybe the computer is holding up a lot of stuff .. Why is it so hard to reprogram? there are chips for much newer cars than mine

[JasonA]

There must be something available somewhere.. People use NS engines for all sorts of fun stuff, albeit they use their own computers with them

You really can't compare a Northstar in a custom application (like a sandrail, making 700 hp), and one in a street car (like a Seville, making 300 hp). You really can't ask, "well, they're making double the hp in the sandrail, how do I do it in my car?" Well, you can ask, but the answer really isn't what you want to hear, I don't think.

You can do anything with money, time, and opportunity. A few people have spent lots of money doing custom computers, custom harnesses, custom...pretty much everything...for a few specific applications (like a sandrail). This also takes lots of time. If you're a fabricator, you can make a lot of parts yourself (like headers). You also need the opportunity, and a road car isn't it. There are environmental and administrative constraints which limit what you can do. The sandrails aren't constrained by needing catalytic converters, having tailpipe emission requirements, certain safety or driveability items, etc. Those 700 hp sandrails are also twin-turboed, which is easy to do if you have all the space in the world (read: not a front wheel drive engine bay) and lots of time and money to custom-create your turbo setup.

I think you're going to find that the dual platinum-tipped spark plugs will work best in the Northstar. Some people have found that other plugs, even "premium" ones like Iridiums or +4s, don't run well. Same deal with the plug wires. The OE plug wires are specially designed to keep the electronics safe from "crosstalk" from the wires. Throwing some aftermarket wires on there can sometimes produce unintended results...even when using the most expensive and "best" aftermarket wires. A larger throttle body and MAF sensor is available. It's 80mm. Some people like it, some haven't found much use for it. I believe it's 4 or 5 hundred dollars, for the pair.

In short, you can see that a Northstar-powered car isn't an old carbureted V8 engine, which can be tuned and tweaked to produce much more power than the factory put in. The '92 Mustang's 302 cui. V8 engine made 225 hp stock. If it were making the same horsepower/cui as the L37 version of the Northstar (1.07), it would have made over 323 hp. That's something Ford never got out of its 302 engine (during the emission era), and something they've merely approached or matched with their naturally-aspirated modular V8 engines. The Northstar engine is already heavily optimized right from the factory, and as you know, makes a wonderful performer out of a 2-ton luxury sedan. If I were you, I'd drive it and enjoy it like it is, and invest your money into a muscle car which you can tweak and tune on weeknights and race on Saturday.

[bigfoo]

I guess the point is.. to have a car that is a luxury car that nobody expects will lay down some rubber and rip down the road You kind of expect that out of an old, loud, rumbling muscle car

[JasonA]

I guess the point is.. to have a car that is a luxury car that nobody expects will lay down some rubber and rip down the road   You  kind of expect that out of an old, loud, rumbling muscle car

I understand completely. And my point is, you're not going to get there just throwing $200 here and there at it with bolt-ons. You said before that $4000 for a supercharger is out of the question, and we're saying (or at least I'm saying) that you really need to address the big things (like airflow through the engine) to get real performance gains...and that means new cams (you may have to have some street friendly ones custom ground), performance headers (again, custom), computer programming (definitely custom, if attainable at all), etc. Big money.

[bigfoo]

OK.. I found a place that will do custom head work and cams and stuff like that.

So the question is.. if i take off my heads and give them to them and let them do their stuff, will i have to change any of the computer settings or anything else on the car to compensate for it? How smart is this computer? Say i get a cam with bigger lift and different duration..well, 4 cams in this case .. and they port the intake and heads and do valve jobs, etc............

Any ideas? I made an extra 100HP on my mustang by changing the entire upper system (carb, intake, cam, heads(major head work)) .. but it doesn't have a computer.. I was runnin about 400HP out of the 302, poor thing but it had a ton ton ton of work done to it. But the heads and the intake/ cam made by far the biggest difference out of anything else that I did.. so would that work for this type of engine?

I've meddled a lot with the fuel injected mustangs/camaros/corvettes etc, that were in the late 80's early 90's and they are nothing at all like the system on this car.. this is so tightly packed in there it scares me

Sorry for the long read But i'm going to get to the bottom of this one way or another :>

[danbuc]

I inquired about the 4 cam set from CHR-Fab at my local cadillac dealer. They told me that the cam position sensor would have to be messed with and or changed completely, not to mention it would cost a F**k LOAD to install them in a matter of speaking. When I ask the mechanic there how much to put them in, he said that if my car was out of warranty(which it is) it would probably be anywhere from $1000-1200 dollars. The reason for this is that they have to lift the car up and drop the whole engine out of the bottom to get to the side of the engine that sits next to the firewall. Plus the cams are quite expensive too. Long story short, it will probably cost you at least half if not more of what the supercharger will cost so you probably should just save up for that. Plus that will give you much better performance gains across the power band.

[Luke]

Your car already is tuned for max power.

Puh-lease.......after all the times I have read this statement, I still have to roll my eyes at it.

You're already making over 1 hp per cubic inch.

Sorry, this may have been news when the Northstar was first released but not anymore. Lots of engines do this and more now.

[Greg P.]

So the question is.. if i take off my heads and give them to them and let them do their stuff, will i have to change any of the computer settings or anything else on the car to compensate for it? How smart is this computer? Say i get a cam with bigger lift and different duration..well, 4 cams in this case .. and they port the intake and heads and do valve jobs, etc............

Yeah that's gonna be a problem. Finding someone who can retune your PCM will be tricky and perhaps expensive if you can find anyone at all.

If I remember correctly, I believe that CHRFAB sells a standalone controller for the Northstar which works great on the sand rails and stuff but probably wont work on your street application. They might have some ideas though. have you tried contacting them?

[JasonA]

Puh-lease.......after all the times I have read this statement, I still have to roll my eyes at it.

Fair enough. So what are your mods and how much horsepower are you running, and your 1/4 mile times?

Sorry, this may have been news when the Northstar was first released but not anymore.  Lots of engines do this and more now.

This isn't so much news, as it is an indication that the "easy" stuff has already been done. As has been discussed here many times before, you need to start doing the big things (like cams and headwork) to get much more power.

I still stand by both of my statements.

[bigfoo]

Actually I was thinking of taking the heads off completely and shipping them off somewhere..

You think this is a huge job? Hehe. I contacted that place you mentioned chfab and I'm waiting for their reply.

[bigfoo]

hmm.. maybe it's not such a good idea? heheh..

[MARK 99STS]

Reworking the heads is only going to improve the higher end of the RPM band. What the Northstar needs is more guts on the lower end. Unfortunately the only way to get that (besides the mods I've already made) is either more cubic inches or a super charger. Serious money will have to be spent after the minor mods are done.

On another note.

Danbuc, I would be interested in headers if they could be engineered to flow better given the space and routing constraints. Definitely ther are improvements to be made there, but I would like to see dyno results.

[Josh]

I feel a little let down here... I always thought that an STS would be faster than most mustangs stock... I always wanted to buy one so I could beat mustangs in it. My cousin told about how they blow most cars away. I just sorta thought a Northstar V-8 would kill most of the V-6 Mustangs.

What are some of the faster years of the STS?

[MARK 99STS]

I just sorta thought a Northstar V-8 would kill most of the V-6 Mustangs.

I'm talking about stangs with a 5.0l V8 or bigger. I'll blow 6 cyl Mustangs away all day long.

[JasonA]

V6 Mustangs are no match for a Northstar-powered car. Most Northstar Cadillacs (we're talking about Sevilles and Eldorados, I'm not sure on the Devilles) run 0-60 in the high 6 second range, and quarter miles in the high 14 second range. Click here for STS times, pulled from national magazine road tests:

http://jadcock.oldsgmail.com/cadsls/northstar.html

As you can see, those numbers are also comparable to V8-powered Mustangs, especially the heavy 302 and 281 'Stangs from the mid to late 1990s. Just recently, Ford's added some additional power to the 281 motor (I think it's now 260, on SOHC 2-valve heads) and the Mustang is more competitive with the Northstar Cadillacs (6-second runs to 60 or better).

I'd like to associate myself with Mark's statement that there WOULD be support here for shorty style headers that bolt in place of the stock manifolds only after they can produce some good dyno numbers to compare to stock. I'm not going to pay for their R&D up front, or sign up to commit myself to something that may never happen. They have all the luxury in the world to mark up their prices at the point of sale to recover their R&D costs. Once they come out with some proven results, I'm sure there would be much more support for a shorty header.