428 supra cobra jet

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-13-06, 05:01 PM
  #1  
Full Member

Thread Starter
 
shelbyinyoface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: baltimore maryland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
428 supra cobra jet

hey guys this is just some dumb **** i was thinking up...
but do you think a 428 super cobra jet would fit into an rx7 fd3s...
if you think this is stupid please feel free to call me a dumb ***
Old 09-13-06, 05:04 PM
  #2  
Broken FD

 
TurboTagTeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With enough time and money you could put a detriot deisel in an FD. Your not a dumb *** if you make it happen.
Old 09-13-06, 05:07 PM
  #3  
Full Member

Thread Starter
 
shelbyinyoface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: baltimore maryland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what do u think the performence would be like
Old 09-13-06, 05:11 PM
  #4  
Team Benjos Captain

iTrader: (2)
 
XxMerlinxX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Greenwood/Hartsville, SC.
Posts: 2,720
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Why not throw it in a mustang where it belongs?
Old 09-13-06, 05:14 PM
  #5  
Full Member

Thread Starter
 
shelbyinyoface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: baltimore maryland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
cuz a mustang can't handle for ****
Old 09-13-06, 05:52 PM
  #6  
Rx7 Wagon

iTrader: (16)
 
Narfle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: California
Posts: 6,988
Received 875 Likes on 548 Posts
Why would you use such an inferior engine? The ford 427 kicks the **** out of the 428 day in and day out.
Old 09-13-06, 06:07 PM
  #7  
Lives on the Forum

 
rynberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyinyoface
cuz a mustang can't handle for ****
And how well do you think an FD is going to handle with that big-block pig iron motor up front? That motor has too much low-end torque to work in an FD.

I really wish people would start thinking if they should do something instead of if they can do something.
Old 09-13-06, 06:20 PM
  #8  
Zero Rotor Motorsports

iTrader: (1)
 
Crash Test Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyinyoface
cuz a mustang can't handle for ****
That definitely depends on the application. It's like saying an RX7 is slow - some are, some aren't.


Originally Posted by rynberg
That motor has too much low-end torque to work in an FD.
Where exactly is there a chart that lists the cut off for too much torque? I'm curious to find out if my car shouldn't work because it has more torque than the 428 in question
Old 09-13-06, 07:27 PM
  #9  
Lives on the Forum

 
rynberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
That definitely depends on the application. It's like saying an RX7 is slow - some are, some aren't.


Where exactly is there a chart that lists the cut off for too much torque? I'm curious to find out if my car shouldn't work because it has more torque than the 428 in question
What's the point of having so much low end torque that you can't put it to the ground? I tend to notice V8 guys find spinning the rear tires fruitlessly to be more entertaining than I do.
Old 09-13-06, 07:55 PM
  #10  
I hate because I'm bored.

 
comradegiant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've always thought that if you are going to put a V8 in an RX-7 it should be a Ford 302.

Sure its not the torquiest or the most powerful, but its the best bang for the buck. And its small, to my knowledge the smallest V-8 out there in terms of external dimensions.
Old 09-13-06, 08:00 PM
  #11  
RX-347

iTrader: (2)
 
digitalsolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 2,115
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by rynberg
What's the point of having so much low end torque that you can't put it to the ground? I tend to notice V8 guys find spinning the rear tires fruitlessly to be more entertaining than I do.
Sub 1.6 second 60's times arne't what I call unable to put it to the ground, but perhaps we have different measuring sticks.
Old 09-13-06, 08:28 PM
  #12  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
I'm curious to find out if my car shouldn't work because it has more torque than the 428 in question
Your LS1 is making more than that? They were rated at ~440 ft lbs.
Old 09-13-06, 08:29 PM
  #13  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rynberg
That motor has too much low-end torque to work in an FD.
Nonsense.

But I agree with you. That motor is too damn heavy for an FD.

Last edited by wingsfan; 09-13-06 at 08:31 PM.
Old 09-13-06, 09:44 PM
  #14  
Zero Rotor Motorsports

iTrader: (1)
 
Crash Test Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wingsfan
Your LS1 is making more than that? They were rated at ~440 ft lbs.
Shhhh! I've got some guys thinking that just because they have a single turbo instead of stock twins they will "put a whoopin' on me" and others thinking I'm going to run 9's on the stock heads. You're gonna ruin the fun!

But seriously, anyone who is spinning their wheels instead of hooking has a setup issue, not too much torque. You can have too much clutch, too much air in your tires, too much preload in your shocks... but no FD will ever have too much torque.

And yes, an iron 428 weighs too much for anything but a dedicated drag car. But it could still be a fun drag car
Old 09-13-06, 09:59 PM
  #15  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
Shhhh! I've got some guys thinking that just because they have a single turbo instead of stock twins they will "put a whoopin' on me" and others thinking I'm going to run 9's on the stock heads. You're gonna ruin the fun!
Sorry. Didn't mean to spoil your fun. You can totally run 9s on stock heads. What was I thinking?

It just dawned on me that the 440 lbs ft rating is at the flywheel, or the equivalent of ~375rwtq assuming 15% drivetrain losses. My cam only motor made that.


But seriously, anyone who is spinning their wheels instead of hooking has a setup issue, not too much torque. You can have too much clutch, too much air in your tires, too much preload in your shocks... but no FD will ever have too much torque.
Sure, At the strip. I'm not going to put around town without the swaybar connected and 15psi in the tires though.

And yes, an iron 428 weighs too much for anything but a dedicated drag car. But it could still be a fun drag car
Put me in the camp that says an FD is wasted if you're just going to use it to drag race. Maybe that's a tad elitist, but I think they were meant to turn...and I'm not a big drag racing fan.
Old 09-13-06, 10:14 PM
  #16  
You've Been Punk'd

 
razorback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Branson, Missouri
Posts: 4,727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rynberg
What's the point of having so much low end torque that you can't put it to the ground? I tend to notice V8 guys find spinning the rear tires fruitlessly to be more entertaining than I do.
we will see how my fc performs with a late 60s mopar pig iron motor
Old 09-13-06, 11:06 PM
  #17  
Zero Rotor Motorsports

iTrader: (1)
 
Crash Test Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wingsfan
Sorry. Didn't mean to spoil your fun. You can totally run 9s on stock heads. What was I thinking?
With enough nitrous and weight reduction

Originally Posted by wingsfan
It just dawned on me that the 440 lbs ft rating is at the flywheel, or the equivalent of ~375rwtq assuming 15% drivetrain losses. My cam only motor made that.
Mine hasn't been tuned and dynoed yet, but it will probably be in that neighborhood as well.



Originally Posted by wingsfan
Sure, At the strip. I'm not going to put around town without the swaybar connected and 15psi in the tires though.
I have before, but not with the FD. Where I live you have to leave town to find some decent turns so it's really not as far-fetched as it sounds.


Originally Posted by wingsfan
Put me in the camp that says an FD is wasted if you're just going to use it to drag race. Maybe that's a tad elitist, but I think they were meant to turn...and I'm not a big drag racing fan.
And I support your right to your opinion, something that's as tough to come by on this forum as ever. I bought mine to build a daily driver, which some would say is as much of a waste as a drag car. I haven't decided what's going to happen at this point since I bought the C6, but whatever I do I know I'll have more torque than the stock engine, and I assure you it won't go to waste
Old 09-13-06, 11:32 PM
  #18  
Senior Member

 
sereneseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: mooresville
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DO IT!!!!!do it do it, and then send pics, i had a 428 in a 66 t-bird that put down 580 @ the wheels too bad the car weighed nearly 4000lbs but i never had issues with wheel spin let me know if you need any engine parts i still have a ton of leftover bits from that motor.
Old 09-14-06, 07:52 AM
  #19  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
With enough nitrous and weight reduction
Or a couple solid fuel rockets bolted to the roof.

Mine hasn't been tuned and dynoed yet, but it will probably be in that neighborhood as well.
What cam did you choose? You already have longtubes, right? Plans to swap the heads?

I have before, but not with the FD. Where I live you have to leave town to find some decent turns so it's really not as far-fetched as it sounds.
But you’ll kill your mileage with those underinflated tires.

And I support your right to your opinion, something that's as tough to come by on this forum as ever.
Support, or an opinion?

I bought mine to build a daily driver, which some would say is as much of a waste as a drag car.
Nah. You’d at least have to make a few turns in a DD.

I haven't decided what's going to happen at this point since I bought the C6, but whatever I do I know I'll have more torque than the stock engine, and
I know what I’d do. Goodbye FD…hello boost.
http://www.lgmotorsports.com/catalog...oducts_id=1557

I assure you it won't go to waste
No doubt.
Old 09-14-06, 11:47 AM
  #20  
Full Member

 
Merc63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Barban
Why would you use such an inferior engine? The ford 427 kicks the **** out of the 428 day in and day out.
The 427 and 428 used the same blocks. In fact, most of the later Shelby 427 Cobras used 428s, stock. The 428 Cj and 428 SCJ were more powerful than the 427 engines.

Replacing the heads and intake (which comprises part of each head) with aluminum aftermarket parts makes teh 427/428 weigh about the same aas an iron small block Chevy, and we've already seen that even those don't really upset the balance of an FC.

The problem with the 427/428, however, is physical dimensions. It'd fit in an FC pretty well, but not sure about an FD, due to the limited height you have to work with.

As for the iron engines making it only a drag car, I built this back in the late '80s:





460 powered '81 Fox Mustang autocross car. 700 lb ft of torque, almost 600 daily driver hp. It ran 11s with a 2.73 final drive ratio... with the 16x8 Ronals and Yokohama A008 tires, it pulled over 1 G laterally.

the chassis still sucked and even with good pads, the stock brakes sucked. Still, it was pretty good on tight autocross tracks, and other than brakes outstanding on a road course.

to think that an engine like it in an FC or FD would be worse is laughable. better chassis, vastly better brakes, and the engine woudl sit back farther for much better balance.
Old 09-14-06, 01:16 PM
  #21  
Zero Rotor Motorsports

iTrader: (1)
 
Crash Test Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wingsfan
Or a couple solid fuel rockets bolted to the roof.
I love Mythbusters


Originally Posted by wingsfan
What cam did you choose? You already have longtubes, right? Plans to swap the heads?
Just a Hot Cam. But I have a nitrous kit also, to give it a little more bump I have the 1 7/8 JTR's and a pretty free-flowing Magnaflow setup. Heads may come later, stock for now.


Originally Posted by wingsfan
But you’ll kill your mileage with those underinflated tires.
I live my life 1/4 mile at a time


Originally Posted by wingsfan
Support, or an opinion?
Both. But I don't think I want to know what you're using for support


Originally Posted by wingsfan
Nah. You’d at least have to make a few turns in a DD.
My Monte Carlo did it for two years on skinnies with no front sway bar, an iron motor and worn out BFG Drag Radials


Originally Posted by wingsfan
I know what I’d do. Goodbye FD…hello boost.
http://www.lgmotorsports.com/catalog...oducts_id=1557
I promised my wife her Mustang GT could get a supercharger before I did anything substantial to the C6.
Old 09-14-06, 01:25 PM
  #22  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
I love Mythbusters
Don't we all? I think everyone would like to have a job where you get paid to blow **** up.

I promised my wife her Mustang GT could get a supercharger before I did anything substantial to the C6.
You fool! My wife got new floors for the house for my LS7. I think I came out ahead.
Old 09-14-06, 01:29 PM
  #23  
Zero Rotor Motorsports

iTrader: (1)
 
Crash Test Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If I don't make her car faster, she'll drive mine more. Keeping the car safe in the garage while I'm not using it = priceless.
Old 09-14-06, 01:31 PM
  #24  
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha

 
wingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crash Test Joey
If I don't make her car faster, she'll drive mine more.
Gotcha. I don't have that problem. Mine can't even drive a stick (and doesn't want to learn).

I guess you know what you've got to do then.

Keeping the car safe in the garage while I'm not using it = priceless.
Old 09-15-06, 12:00 AM
  #25  
Full Member

Thread Starter
 
shelbyinyoface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: baltimore maryland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Merc63
The 427 and 428 used the same blocks. In fact, most of the later Shelby 427 Cobras used 428s, stock. The 428 Cj and 428 SCJ were more powerful than the 427 engines.

Replacing the heads and intake (which comprises part of each head) with aluminum aftermarket parts makes teh 427/428 weigh about the same aas an iron small block Chevy, and we've already seen that even those don't really upset the balance of an FC.

The problem with the 427/428, however, is physical dimensions. It'd fit in an FC pretty well, but not sure about an FD, due to the limited height you have to work with.

As for the iron engines making it only a drag car, I built this back in the late '80s:





460 powered '81 Fox Mustang autocross car. 700 lb ft of torque, almost 600 daily driver hp. It ran 11s with a 2.73 final drive ratio... with the 16x8 Ronals and Yokohama A008 tires, it pulled over 1 G laterally.

the chassis still sucked and even with good pads, the stock brakes sucked. Still, it was pretty good on tight autocross tracks, and other than brakes outstanding on a road course.

to think that an engine like it in an FC or FD would be worse is laughable. better chassis, vastly better brakes, and the engine woudl sit back farther for much better balance.
dude......... i'm left with out words ........ what you just said makes me wanna go out and buy a aluminum 428 super cobra jet but the damn thing cost like 10 grand and up......
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dona1326cosprings7
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
4
10-29-15 06:47 AM
Jmolina0163
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
10
10-03-15 10:04 AM



Quick Reply: 428 supra cobra jet



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 AM.