And on and on. Really, you sound like a standard disrespectful salesman trying to shove a Chevy small block down everyone's throats. None of those statements were about how an SBC is the perfect balance between engine size and power. It's not the perfect balance. They're an OK engine that can be thrown together for cheap, and just tossed into the scrap heap when they break. All you've done in this thread is praise the crap out of SBCs, and basically attacked anyone who said anything that disagreed with your perception of the SBC's greatness. Then ironically you also stated how they'd be a total waste in a Fiero, because transaxles suck and it's not an efficient swap. So apparently they're not the perfect balance you claim they are, according to your own statements.
Horizontal trans axles do suck unless you want good traction in the snow when you go get your groceries. The fiero was the only set up which actually made sense for a performance set up but that was with a 2.8 and i really like how your selective by omitting the post I was referring to but that's part for the course for you.
it would be at the crank and yes i had my own shop but i got out of it years a go due to they where starting crate motor racing so no need for them to come see me when there gona go to GM and get there sealed crate engine plus i got tired of guys like dobey trying to tell me how to do my job LOL
[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 09-25-2015).]
Originally posted by engine man: can you tell me how this is going to give me 28 inches of wc rise if at 100 % VE at 8000 rpm it can only move 108.8 cfm on a head that flow 300 cfm with 28 inches of water rise the cylinder it falls short by 191.2 cfm to get it to show 28 inches of water rise so it is simple less suction less air flow thru the restriction / port this and the other factors i have pointed out so the flow bench and formula are not wrong
What?
In that example, the 108.8 CFM per cylinder is all that the engine can physically move. The 28 in WC is just a standard for measurement. The flow you see on the bench at that value, is not what the engine will actually flow through the head. The intake manifold is almost certainly going to restrict that to a lower number, on a flow bench. Also, as I already stated, many times, the 28 in WC value is the pressure difference at the orifice plate on the flow bench. The pressure difference in the cylinder at the valve is going to be greater than 28 in WC. The engine is not 191.2 CFM short. The engine is physically incapable of flowing more air than that.
Like was said earlier, how it works, is the valve timing, lift, an dduration, are what affect how much air actually gets into the cylinder. You can have a head that can flow 600 CFM at 1.000" lift, but if you have a cam that only lifts the valve to 0.500" at the heads, and those 600 CFM heads flow the same amount at <= 0.500" lift as a set of 250 CFM heads that peak at 0.550" lift, then you're going to get the same flow through the intake valve, with either head. The number from the formula is a theoretical maximum, and is only useful in a basic informative sense.
No, the flow bench numbers, nor the formula are wrong. Your interpretation of the flow bench results, and the importance of the value derived from that formula, though, seem to need some improvement.
Originally posted by Silvertown: Horizontal trans axles do suck unless you want good traction in the snow when you go get your groceries. The fiero was the only set up which actually made sense for a performance set up but that was with a 2.8 and i really like how your selective by omitting the post I was referring to but that's part for the course for you.
LOL. No. You're just whining about transaxles for no reason. You could at least try to come up with some valid technical complaint, like "the gear ratios are not ideal for big V8s making lots of torque in the low end" or something. But no, you've just gone with the "they suck because I don't understand them, and I'm an old RWD guy" argument.
Those were like the first 10 posts from you in this thread. If it's so simple, it wouldn't take you 30 posts to get to the point, which you still haven't made. But that's par for the course for you.
Seriously, why do you have to make every single post of yours try to have some lame ass personal insult in it?
so in your world tell me how much power a NA 2.8 gm V6 can make with its stock heads that flow around 140 cfm if it had all the right parts to go with it ? my way with the formula say about 214 at the crank
[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 09-25-2015).]
it would be at the crank and yes i had my own shop but i got out of it years a go due to they where starting crate motor racing so no need for them to come see me when there gona go to GM and get there sealed crate engine plus i got tired of guys like dobey trying to tell me how to do my job LOL
There was a head shop in nashville I took my business to and they were great. I miss going to shops and learning and your right the crate motor industry is hurting these small businesses. I'm to old to pult forth the effort it takes to pull it break it down run to the machine shop and so on. The only thing I can muster these days are the interiors and stereo installs.
[This message has been edited by Silvertown (edited 09-25-2015).]
Originally posted by engine man: it would be at the crank and yes i had my own shop but i got out of it years a go due to they where starting crate motor racing so no need for them to come see me when there gona go to GM and get there sealed crate engine plus i got tired of guys like dobey trying to tell me how to do my job LOL
I'm not trying to tell you how to do your job, whatever your job actually is. I was just pointing out that the formula you keep touting as the ultimate solution to making power, is a vast oversimplification of how an engine works, and is pretty much useless for 99% of people, particularly those simply trying to choose an engine, that they probably aren't going to tear down and rebuild anyway, in a street Fiero.
The thread isn't about wanting to make 600 HP with an N/A V8, and what one theoretically needs to do so.
Originally posted by engine man: so in your world tell me how much power a NA 2.8 gm V6 can make with its stock heads that flow around 140 cfm if it had all the right parts to go with it ?
Why does one need to make power N/A? You act like there's no other way to make power. And you're acting like I'm trying to claim a 2.8 is a good performance engine. Neither of those things is true. The 60 degree pushrod V6 platform is horrible. I wouldn't waste money on one, even if I had infinite cash.
LOL. No. You're just whining about transaxles for no reason. You could at least try to come up with some valid technical complaint, like "the gear ratios are not ideal for big V8s making lots of torque in the low end" or something. But no, you've just gone with the "they suck because I don't understand them, and I'm an old RWD guy" argument.
Those were like the first 10 posts from you in this thread. If it's so simple, it wouldn't take you 30 posts to get to the point, which you still haven't made. But that's par for the course for you.
Seriously, why do you have to make every single post of yours try to have some lame ass personal insult in it?
I'd earliermentioned that the op was size vs whatever. To I think roger. Your the pot calling the kettle black. Just because you hate chevy so bad doesn't mean that it's not a great engine. When you can design a whole car from bumper to bumper and ladder rails don't count. I might listen to you. When you've apprenticed under real car builders I'm talking award winning on the magazine cover I might listen. Trophies you got at the county fair won't impress me. When you've did work for john force then I might listen
yup you can use forced induction but just because you have 14 pounds of boost it will not flow a certain amount it will only flow as much as the biggest restriction will allow at that boost pressure and that restriction could be a number of things including the intake port and sure you can go to a higher boost but the trade off is more heat in the intake charge and a less dense intake charge i dint ask for you to spend money on the engine i just asked for a HP number you thought it could make with those heads
[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 09-25-2015).]
Fastest wheel driven single engine at bonneville-sbc Fastest production car in the world-sbc Won the most races in nascar-sbc Most wins at indy by a major manufacturer-sbc Currrent lemans gt champion-sbc Like a rock the heart beat of america The perfect balance of power and diplacement
Fastest wheel driven single engine at bonneville-sbc Fastest production car in the world-sbc Won the most races in nascar-sbc Most wins at indy by a major manufacturer-sbc Currrent lemans gt champion-sbc Like a rock the heart beat of america The perfect balance of power and diplacement
Originally posted by Silvertown: I'd earliermentioned that the op was size vs whatever. To I think roger. Your the pot calling the kettle black. Just because you hate chevy so bad doesn't mean that it's not a great engine. When you can design a whole car from bumper to bumper and ladder rails don't count. I might listen to you. When you've apprenticed under real car builders I'm talking award winning on the magazine cover I might listen. Trophies you got at the county fair won't impress me. When you've did work for john force then I might listen
I don't hate Chevy at all. I don't worship them either, though.
I'm glad you take everything so personally and try to make condescending attacks. But I try to avoid appeal to authority, because it doesn't make for valid argument. Apparently it's all you're willing to understand though. Go fanboy someone else if you want. I'm not looking for fanboys; just for useful, relevant, and accurate information to be shared in the thread, so that others wanting to pick an engine to swap in their Fiero can make a real choice, and not just go SBC because you think it's the best combustion engine evar and nothing can beat it.
Originally posted by engine man: yup you can use forced induction but just because you have 14 pounds of boost it will not flow a certain amount it will only flow as much as the biggest restriction will allow at that boost pressure and that restriction could be a number of things including the intake port and sure you can go to a higher boost but the trade off is more heat in the intake charge and a less dense intake charge i dint ask for you to spend money on the engine i just asked for a HP number you thought it could make with those heads
Yes, you can only flow as much volume as the system will allow. There are ways to reduce the amount of heat added to the intake charge, and to avoid detonation in the cylinders. It's all a package. Everything is a trade off, whether you go turbo, or stay N/A.
And I told you I don't care how much a stock 2.8 with stock heads can make. It's a boat anchor. There are limits to how much power it can make, far beyond just the head and intake flow. The 2.8 isn't a platform that even allows you to use all the right parts to make over 200 HP N/A. There's no way it could make anywhere near the theoretical max result of that formula. This thread isn't about how much theoretical power a stock 2.8 could make with no change to heads. All I said was that the formula is a vast oversimplification of an internal combustion engine; which it is.
There are two basic principles of the engine that will give you more power; cylinder volume, and cylinder pressure. If your intake system can provide more air than your cylinder can hold at 100% VE, then you need to increase either the cylinder volume, or increase pressure. If you have more volume than your intake system can fill, then you need to increase the volume the intake system can provide, or provide more pressure with boost. No matter what changes you make to get those two things, those are the two things you are changing that will give you more power. Sometimes that means bigger heads that can flow more CFM, sometimes it's an intake manifold that can flow more CFM, sometimes it's a bigger turbo to add more boost, sometimes it's a smaller pulley to add more boost, sometimes it's a different cam or rockers, to increase VE, sometimes it's nitrous to increase BMEP. If you're at 100% VE for the engine, then your only options for making more power, are bigger cylinders (whether that's more bore, or more stroke), or more cylinder pressure (whether it's a supercharger, turbocharger, nitrous, or just different fuel and change to timing).
Originally posted by Silvertown: Fastest production car in the world-sbc Most wins at indy by a major manufacturer-sbc
Huh?
Bugatti Veyron most certainly isn't an SBC. The current Corvette isn't an SBC either. It's a GM corporate small block. There are no more Small Block Chevys in production cars. Last one was over 12 years ago, and it was a truck. The Z06 isn't the quickest or fastest production car. Porsche 918 is the quickest, Bugatti Veyron is the fastest.
Offenhauser most certainly isn't an SBC. Honda even has more wins at Indy 500 than Chevrolet does, as a manufacturer. Or did you mean some other event at Indy than the 500? NASCAR? NHRA? Something else?
Also, the NASCAR engines aren't SBCs. They are similar, but not the same.
Here we go again. My buddies are arguing about engine size, ie. 4, 6 and 8 cylinders with or without turbo's or superchargers as to what is more power full. Given that the old Indy cars had 4 cylinder Offenhausers, then V-8's, aspirated then injected, turbo or supercharged , the 84 Fiero Indy pace car had a modified 4, I've also wondered who has the biggest you know what. I know there is a relationship between torque and H.P. but that's all I know. Ok guys, lets have some input on this. Whats better or whats the difference.
Funny how you started this thread and have not been back in it since.
With hardly any qualifications as to what kind of vehicle you want this to fit to, it's just a loaded question that will have people jumping all over the place on what's better. First and foremost it all boils down to what kind of budget you have. For example, if you want the fastest 1/4 mile "street car", one that can be driven on the street reliably, you don't have to go any further than Larry Larson's Shop with a big bag of money, he has repeatedly taken the title for World's Fastest Street Car at Drag Week Competition for more than 5 times. Pretty darn hard to argue with proven success that he's had with using a custom built V8 big block, using twin turbo's.
Bugatti Veyron most certainly isn't an SBC. The current Corvette isn't an SBC either. It's a GM corporate small block. There are no more Small Block Chevys in production cars. Last one was over 12 years ago, and it was a truck. The Z06 isn't the quickest or fastest production car. Porsche 918 is the quickest, Bugatti Veyron is the fastest.
Offenhauser most certainly isn't an SBC. Honda even has more wins at Indy 500 than Chevrolet does, as a manufacturer. Or did you mean some other event at Indy than the 500? NASCAR? NHRA? Something else?
Also, the NASCAR engines aren't SBCs. They are similar, but not the same.
Is offenhausera major auto manufacturer? Reading is fundamental in a debate. Bugatti is not the fastest. The Hennessy venom is . And Honda and chevrolet are tied. But history doesn't matter to you. Those who forget shall repeat it. If pontiac had only heeded those words
I don't hate Chevy at all. I don't worship them either, though.
I'm glad you take everything so personally and try to make condescending attacks. But I try to avoid appeal to authority, because it doesn't make for valid argument. Apparently it's all you're willing to understand though. Go fanboy someone else if you want. I'm not looking for fanboys; just for useful, relevant, and accurate information to be shared in the thread, so that others wanting to pick an engine to swap in their Fiero can make a real choice, and not just go SBC because you think it's the best combustion engine evar and nothing can beat it.
The threads over the sbc is the perfect balance of both. But like all the bowtie bathers your still standing back in 19 whatever trying resurrect old arguments. But I tell you what when the zora c8 comes out I'll bring it to the fierorama and let you see what successful auto evolution looks like.
I will say my statement again.......there is no substitute for CUBIC inches. So all these cars have been geared and have marvelous me traction control systems that allow them to turn the 0-100 times etc. If you want raw power in anything......is real sime......bigger motor. You always have to remember. The small little motor may make all this power. But its gonna run out of power long before the big motor. The internal combustion engine is real simple to make power. Make it breathe. You can't breathe as much air with a small motor. That is why you don't see top fuel dragster and such running a 2.0 dohc motor. You can't make the 8,000-10,000 horse power with a small motor! Think about it Brian
Small blocks can turn higher RPMs in most cases than any big blocks. Big parts internally carry big weights. When I was racing supermods in Okla years ago, we ran 301 (bored 283) and 327s. They would run all season at 9000-10,000 rpm. All the big blocks ive owned all had redlines between 5500-6000 RPMs. This is another reason supercars like Ferrari have smaller displacement (engines 3-4 ltrs in older ones). They can turn 2-3 times the RPMs of big US V8s. Sure the V8s, with more low end torque can pull them in the first 50', but after that, there gone.
The engine swap in a fiero should be a quad 4 for the fiero dimensions and your budget. The v8 has no business being in the back. If your going to put a V8 in, put it in the front.
Originally posted by Silvertown: Is offenhausera major auto manufacturer? Reading is fundamental in a debate. Bugatti is not the fastest. The Hennessy venom is . And Honda and chevrolet are tied. But history doesn't matter to you. Those who forget shall repeat it. If pontiac had only heeded those words
Offenhauser has the most wins. They don't currently make production vehicles. But the Indy car engine from Chevrolet is not an SBC either. It's a tiny 3.0L thing that Hennessy venom is not a production car. Also it's not an SBC.
Honda has one win more than Chevrolet.
Knowledge is fundamental in a debate. You are trying to argue that the production SBC is the best engine in the world, but then are pointing at examples of things that are not production SBC engines.
Originally posted by Silvertown: The threads over the sbc is the perfect balance of both. But like all the bowtie bathers your still standing back in 19 whatever trying resurrect old arguments. But I tell you what when the zora c8 comes out I'll bring it to the fierorama and let you see what successful auto evolution looks like.
I have no idea what you even just typed.
But nobody is resurrecting old arguments, except maybe yourself. You keep trying to claim things are SBCs, when they are in fact, not SBCs.
Originally posted by rogergarrison: Small blocks can turn higher RPMs in most cases than any big blocks. Big parts internally carry big weights. When I was racing supermods in Okla years ago, we ran 301 (bored 283) and 327s. They would run all season at 9000-10,000 rpm. All the big blocks ive owned all had redlines between 5500-6000 RPMs. This is another reason supercars like Ferrari have smaller displacement (engines 3-4 ltrs in older ones). They can turn 2-3 times the RPMs of big US V8s. Sure the V8s, with more low end torque can pull them in the first 50', but after that, there gone.
We drag raced big blocks, and they would leave the starting line at 6500-7000 RPM. There's more difference between a BBC and SBC than displacement. The LS7 is 427 cid, and turns over 7000 RPM. A BBC 427 street engine might not necessarily be able to do the same.
More than simply displacement, the Ferrari engines are also flat plane. Ferrari and Lamborghini are using larger and larger engines today, so that they can make the big power numbers. Gearing also plays a big part in how they accelerate versus US cars with slightly larger V8s. Ferraris have multi-clutch sequential gear boxes, with 7 gears, and top gear is 1:1. They aren't built with gearing to get 30 MPG highway. There's also 5 valve DOHC heads versus 2 valve pushrod heads. The last generation ECM for the Gen IV LSx engines, also only can handle up to I think, 8500 RPM.
But, it's certainly possible to build a flat plane LSx that turns 9000 RPM all day long, with aftermarket ECU:
The engine swap in a fiero should be a quad 4 for the fiero dimensions and your budget. The v8 has no business being in the back. If your going to put a V8 in, put it in the front.
Offenhauser has the most wins. They don't currently make production vehicles. But the Indy car engine from Chevrolet is not an SBC either. It's a tiny 3.0L thing that Hennessy venom is not a production car. Also it's not an SBC.
Honda has one win more than Chevrolet.
Knowledge is fundamental in a debate. You are trying to argue that the production SBC is the best engine in the world, but then are pointing at examples of things that are not production SBC engines.
Offenhauser has the most wins. They don't currently make production vehicles. But the Indy car engine from Chevrolet is not an SBC either. It's a tiny 3.0L thing that Hennessy venom is not a production car. Also it's not an SBC.
Honda has one win more than Chevrolet.
Knowledge is fundamental in a debate. You are trying to argue that the production SBC is the best engine in the world, but then are pointing at examples of things that are not production SBC engines.
Have you even seen an offehauser? Worked on one? Have you worked on ferraris, lambos, shelbys or are you just going on numbers I'm .not saying it's the best engine in the world. I'm saying it's the perfect balance. When what ever ballyhooed extinct engine you love so much goes toe to toe with the world's exotics on a platform from 1955 you might have an argument but you dont. But as soon as the corvette goes mid engine it's game over. And the only milk you'll drinking is spilt on the bricks of indy at the feet of chevy.
What does a link to Wikipedia prove? That I'm right?
quote
From Wikipedia: As the run was in a single direction, and only 16 cars have been sold to date (to qualify Hennessey must build 30), it does not qualify as the world's fastest production car in the Guinness Book of Records.
So where is your car on the cover of a magazine? Where are all these badass SBC cars you've built? Stop trying to act like a badass. You think I care if you can buy a car and get it on a magazine? Wow, you are shallow.
Also, you're the troll.
But hey, come on and take some more personal attacks at me. Surely that will prove you right.
Originally posted by Silvertown: Have you even seen an offehauser? Worked on one? Have you worked on ferraris, lambos, shelbys or are you just going on numbers I'm .not saying it's the best engine in the world. I'm saying it's the perfect balance. When what ever ballyhooed extinct engine you love so much goes toe to toe with the world's exotics on a platform from 1955 you might have an argument but you dont. But as soon as the corvette goes mid engine it's game over. And the only milk you'll drinking is spilt on the bricks of indy at the feet of chevy.
Sorry, I don't love ballyhooed extinct engines like the SBC, as much as you do.
Have you worked on any of those engines? Oh, no, I guess not:
quote
Originally posted by Silvertown: L84 327 fulie, toyota 22re are the only engines I've done.
Stop being a fanboy and going on and on with the ad hominem attacks. They aren't getting you anywhere. The engines you keep claiming are SBCs, are not SBCs. ∎
the SBC is one of the best engine ever built is if it wasn't it wouldn't be the most popular engine to build. performance parts are cheaper than any other engine and you can build one that ranges from small cubic inch all the way up to 434 CI or maybe even more. you can have a mild mannered engine all the way up to a twin turbo monster or a blown Nitro so is one of the best designed engines. Oh and one last thing if you know how to build one they don't leak oil and is the Ls engine great well only time will tell
[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 09-26-2015).]
Stop being a fanboy and going on and on with the ad hominem attacks. They aren't getting you anywhere. The engines you keep claiming are SBCs, are not SBCs. ∎
I'm done with this thread everything I've said is fact. And yes I got pics to back up every car I just mentioned that I had the honor to come through the shop. From one a kind 1929 goldfinger rolls royces to modern day 911 gt3s. So when your on here for another 16 years you'll be arguing about how electric cars aren't faster than your drag racing days. So cie lay vie I got a car to build that doesn't involve butchering a fiero.
the SBC is one of the best engine ever built is if it wasn't it wouldn't be the most popular engine to build. performance parts are cheaper than any other engine and you can build one that ranges from small cubic inch all the way up to 434 CI or maybe even more. you can have a mild mannered engine all the way up to a twin turbo monster or a blown Nitro so is one of the best designed engines
I never said it wasn't a good engine. But it's not the most superior. The aftermarket was certainly flooded with parts for it, indeed. But the Gen II+ engines aren't SBCs, nor are the Indy or NASCAR engines. They're no more an SBC than the original SBC was a flathead Ford V8.
An SBC can certainly be built to be a good engine, and it can just as easily be built to be a bad engine. But it's just another engine. A tool for the job. You gotta pick the right tool for the right job. Times have changed though. There are better engines available for a lot of those jobs. Personally, I'd never put an SBC in anything I owned, unless I was doing a numbers matching restoration for some reason. And the build I'm doing in my Fiero is certainly not something I'd generally suggest anyone else would do, either. You gotta figure out what it is you want from your car, and go from there. That's what I advise people to do.
the SBC is one of the best engine ever built is if it wasn't it wouldn't be the most popular engine to build. performance parts are cheaper than any other engine and you can build one that ranges from small cubic inch all the way up to 434 CI or maybe even more. you can have a mild mannered engine all the way up to a twin turbo monster or a blown Nitro so is one of the best designed engines
I like your style. Like sam elliot. I need your expertise when I decide which block I'm going to use. Thanks.
Originally posted by Silvertown: I'm done with this thread everything I've said is fact. And yes I got pics to back up every car I just mentioned that I had the honor to come through the shop. From one a kind 1929 goldfinger rolls royces to modern day 911 gt3s. So when your on here for another 16 years you'll be arguing about how electric cars aren't faster than your drag racing days. So cie lay vie I got a car to build that doesn't involve butchering a fiero.
No, everything you said is not fact. Most of it rather, is your opinion.
Electric cars can be quick. The quickest Fiero 1/4 mile time, is an electric car.
Seriously, you really need to learn how to stop getting so personal about things and laying such lame personal attacks.
I'm not sure what you think c'est la vie means exactly, but the way you tried to use it in that sentence doesn't make sense.
If size is the contributing factor to power, why is a stock 318 mopar faster than a 440 2bbl. Size didnt change. There were tons of big block mopars from 383-440 with factory 2 bbl.
If size is the contributing factor to power, why is a stock 318 mopar faster than a 440 2bbl. Size didnt change. There were tons of big block mopars from 383-440 with factory 2 bbl.
In the same car with exactly the same weight and gearing, where literally the only difference was engine displacement? Same camshaft, heads, intake, carb, and compression ratio? Power != speed or acceleration. It's part of the puzzle, but not all of it. And many other things can affect the final output. But once you've hit the limit of what your engine can output, then the only way to get more power, is with more static displacement.
You can also have a physically larger engine with a smaller displacement, like how the 4.6L Northstar is physically larger than the 6.2L LS9. You can also have engines with less displacement and fewer cylinders, that weigh more than larger displacement V8s.
A higher displacement engine isn't necessarily going to make more power than a lower displacement engine, if it's not tuned to do so. And if you're comparing vastly different cars, with different tire sizes and gear ratios, you can't say one engine is faster than the other. Engines aren't fast or quick, cars are.
Determining what would be best for a particular build though, depends on what the goals of the build are. Just because a 7.0L V8 can make more peak power than a 3.8L V6, doesn't necessarily mean it's a better engine for the job.
If size is the contributing factor to power, why is a stock 318 mopar faster than a 440 2bbl. Size didnt change. There were tons of big block mopars from 383-440 with factory 2 bbl.
the reason i feel is inertia since the 440 and 318 would be about the same power the 318 can rev quicker than the 440 the 318 has a shorter stroke plus it's internal parts are much lighter and the 440 can only breath so much air though the smaller 2 barrel carb so it basically it is running out of breath as far as how much HP a engine can make depends on how much air it can move through the intake and exhaust system and size of the engine only changes the rpm at witch maximum air flow happens
[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 09-29-2015).]
Yes correct. My point being the statement "theres no substitute for cubic inches" is false. There are many other things to factor in. Like I said earlier, rotating mass is one thing in the smaller engines favor. Also size is also proportional to the rpms. A big engine like a 454 makes all of its power at the bottom end, like for a truck or RV, but dont at high rpms. A 3.0 Ferrari dont have much off the line, but builds as it speeds up with much higher rpms. A 454 Chevelle wouldnt stand a chance against a 3. ltr Ferrari on a 1-2 mile run...but would destroy one on a 1/4 mile.
yes size of the engine doesn't matter as on how much power it will make but how much air it can move is the key the more air it moves the more fuel can be burned and power is made. you can only move as much air as the biggest restriction will allow no matter how fast you spin the engine or how big the engine is
yes size of the engine doesn't matter as on how much power it will make but how much air it can move is the key the more air it moves the more fuel can be burned and power is made. you can only move as much air as the biggest restriction will allow no matter how fast you spin the engine or how big the engine is
What's the biggest valve I can put in the 3.4 head. Can I have it machined for a roller setup?
