Can the stock motor support a supercharger

[FordTechOne]

Stan Weiss' - Cylinder Head Flow Data at 28 Inches of Water -- DFW / FLW Flow Files for use with Engine Simulation Software

Cylinder Head Flow Data @ 28 Inches of Water -- DFW / FLW Flow Files for use with Engine Simulation Software

www.users.interport.net

And has noting to do with his Question. More to the statement 6.2 are choked up. Don't flow. I was willing to take what ever answer I found. They don't seem to be too chocked up to me. When you look at the flow numbers. You saying they were. Well it got my Curiosity going. and it is ok if you still think they are. I typically agree on more than I disagree. With you...... Not out to prove you or anyone else wrong or right. Just wanted to know the true numbers.

I just checked out the site; those numbers were generated by software analyzer, not real numbers. So the discussion regarding those numbers was all for nought.

Did OP vacate the premises?

 

[kocher93]

For a 20k budget on top of a Gen 1, I'd be looking at upgrading the platform to something like a TRX. They are fast as shit from the factory and come with a warranty. My dad has one and I gotta say, it's pretty fun ripping that thing around.

The 6.2 is a good dumb workhorse and that's why I love it, but adding FI will take from it's reliability no matter who says what. I don't think it's worth it to make a Gen 1 "fast" none of these trucks aside from the new supercharged V8's aren't really all that fast. That said a stock 6.2 and 3.5 will still make the rear end wrap and get you into trouble in the dirt if you're not careful.

If I was gonna slap a blower on anything it would be a vette, but at the end of the day it's your money and your choice.

 

[Gumby]

3.5 has 2 intake/exhaust. So the 3.5 numbers would be double what was posted.

I would be Surprised if they didn't open both sets of valves on the flow bench. That just wouldn't make sense.and wouldn't be consistent with flowing a cylinder head. The object of the flowing a cylinder head is to mimic what happens on the vehicle and over 500 CFM on an intake... would be TOP FUEL numbers. and not sure they flow that.

 

[Gumby]

I just checked out the site; those numbers were generated by software analyzer, not real numbers. So the discussion regarding those numbers was all for nought.

yes software. Head is placed on a flow bench air is pulled through valves the head and measured. by software. so we throwing out Dino testing software also? what? This method used by race engine builders all over the world and I am sure by ford as well. Big benches can flow an entire head not common practice. but big racing I am sure it is done that way. but if we are throwing out the Dino testing because because it is software. Then we all might be SOL. I guess we could get 700 horses and hook them to the truck and have a tug of war.l LOL
The OP left after the first page.

 

[New recaros]

yes software. Head is placed on a flow bench air is pulled through valves the head and measured. by software. so we throwing out Dino testing software also? what? This method used by race engine builders all over the world and I am sure by ford as well. Big benches can flow an entire head not common practice. but big racing I am sure it is done that way. but if we are throwing out the Dino testing because because it is software. Then we all might be SOL. I guess we could get 700 horses and hook them to the truck and have a tug of war.l LOL

F that, then I would have to become a farmer.

 

[FordTechOne]

yes software. Head is placed on a flow bench air is pulled through valves the head and measured. by software. so we throwing out Dino testing software also? what? This method used by race engine builders all over the world and I am sure by ford as well. Big benches can flow an entire head not common practice. but big racing I am sure it is done that way. but if we are throwing out the Dino testing because because it is software. Then we all might be SOL. I guess we could get 700 horses and hook them to the truck and have a tug of war.l LOL
The OP left after the first page.

No no no. There is no flow bench, it’s not real data. The website owner sells a software program to simulate airflow. Those numbers are the results from the simulation, which is generated by filling in generic fields with measurements.

“A Computer Program designed for the motor sports enthusiast. Performance software that does the math for YOU. Handy Car Formulas for high performance math that will help you to analyze your (Street / Drag Racing, Circle Track, Oval Track, Road Racing, Off-Road) Car / Motorcycle / Kart / Engine and chassis needs, and improve performance. American or Metric Input (This is some what Limited). The menus are straightforward and "fill-in-the-blanks" data entry will get your answer. The most important thing to remember is that the more accurate your input to the program, the more accurate the answer will be.“

Automotive Performance Software / Interactive Calculators

Computer program designed for the motor sports enthusiast. Performance software that does the math for YOU, also Interactive JavaScript Calculators.

users.erols.com

 

[Gumby]

Numbers for the 6.2 off an actual Flow bench

6.2 head flow numbers!!!

www.modularfords.com

I will try to find the actual flow bench numbers for the 3.5. for now the simulated numbers will have to do. sorry I will find them if there out there. The 6.2 are actual.

 

[FordTechOne]

Numbers for the 6.2 off an actual Flow bench
View attachment 413892View attachment 413893

6.2 head flow numbers!!!

www.modularfords.com

Good find. Ironically that is exactly what my original comment was based on, as seen in the comments of those flow numbers:

“must say I'm a bit disappointed. This head is outperformed by the 6.2L Chevy and both of the Chrysler Hemi heads. Ford should have been able to do better.”

“I understand the 5.0L Coyote was designed as a "max effort" type modular motor, but the 6.2L Boss is a clean sheet design and they still can't flow what the 6.2L Chevy pushrod engine does... it can't match the 5.7L OR the 6.1L Hemi? Ford should have put a little more time and effort into the heads IMO.”

“Will there be improvements in the next two or three years? Will it then match or surpass the LS-3? I've been around long enough to know Ford will make changes, and I think this platform allows them lots of opportunity. I was just hoping that "out of the box" it would outflow the LS-3 heads.”

 

[John813]

FWIW my buddy has a factory Roush Raptor and has added headers boost etc... Truck has over 140k miles of FI life.
And these miles include FL summers using the truck for it's intended purposes.

My Roush Raptor I sold 4 years ago is still rocking strong as I keep in touch with the owner.

 

[tmp123]

For a 20k budget on top of a Gen 1, I'd be looking at upgrading the platform to something like a TRX. They are fast as shit from the factory and come with a warranty. My dad has one and I gotta say, it's pretty fun ripping that thing around.

The 6.2 is a good dumb workhorse and that's why I love it, but adding FI will take from it's reliability no matter who says what. I don't think it's worth it to make a Gen 1 "fast" none of these trucks aside from the new supercharged V8's aren't really all that fast. That said a stock 6.2 and 3.5 will still make the rear end wrap and get you into trouble in the dirt if you're not careful.

If I was gonna slap a blower on anything it would be a vette, but at the end of the day it's your money and your choice.

Considering the dealer markups and insane property tax bill its just not worth the cost. Same applies to the Raptor R. I love the 1st Gen Raptors and if I can modernize it and get some good performance at a fraction of a new TRX or R price that's my route. Taking a mortgage out for a performance truck is just crazy