Horsepower arguments

[Grumpy Bear]

15 minutes ago, Donstar said:

Pickups grew in popularity  in the later 60's  and climbed for family use with the introduction of the super cabs in the seventies.  I preferred pickups because they were like driving a big car without the stigma that was cast on the "gas guzzlers" during the energy crisis days!

It THAT what it was about?   That's sort of like 'everyone want's to go to church', no one what's to be seen doing it. 

[L86 All Terrain]

The problem is most people judge an engine by HP/L, which is a useless stat. aside from giving clues to the amount of stress the engine is under and how soon it will likely fail. People go "Chevy sucks because they can only get 450hp out of 6.2L but Mercedes can get 550 out of 6.2L." They fail to take consideration of the valve train. These engines are CIB 16V engines. Most European V8's are DOHC with 32V and 4 camshafts. DOHC inherently flows more air, but at the penalty of size, weight, a 6 foot timing chain, etc. GM's engines make insane power for that they are and the valve-train. CIB allows for a much small package, lighter weight and much smaller dimensions, it also keeps the engine bottom heavy. DOHC engines are often top heavy and will drastically affect a car's handling. Basically in a nutshell, (the LS family anyways) is lighter, smaller, cheaper, more reliable, easier to mod, takes boost well, parts in stock everywhere, plentiful in scrap yards, tunable, and better balanced than most comparable DOHC engines. The LS family is God's gift to hot-rodders. These new LT's are garbage in comparison in terms of building a performance engine.  

[DONWT15]

24 minutes ago, 10SierraA.T. said:

The LS family is God's gift to hot-rodders. These new LT's are garbage in comparison in terms of building a performance engine.  

A slight note of negativity here finally.

['17 Sierra]

2 hours ago, 10SierraA.T. said:

The problem is most people judge an engine by HP/L, which is a useless stat. aside from giving clues to the amount of stress the engine is under and how soon it will likely fail. People go "Chevy sucks because they can only get 450hp out of 6.2L but Mercedes can get 550 out of 6.2L." They fail to take consideration of the valve train. These engines are CIB 16V engines. Most European V8's are DOHC with 32V and 4 camshafts. DOHC inherently flows more air, but at the penalty of size, weight, a 6 foot timing chain, etc. GM's engines make insane power for that they are and the valve-train. CIB allows for a much small package, lighter weight and much smaller dimensions, it also keeps the engine bottom heavy. DOHC engines are often top heavy and will drastically affect a car's handling. Basically in a nutshell, (the LS family anyways) is lighter, smaller, cheaper, more reliable, easier to mod, takes boost well, parts in stock everywhere, plentiful in scrap yards, tunable, and better balanced than most comparable DOHC engines. The LS family is God's gift to hot-rodders. These new LT's are garbage in comparison in terms of building a performance engine.  

I agree. My last new car before this truck was Z06 Corvette with the LS7 427 CI. 505 stock HP out of a normally aspirated pushrod motor. Insane. Now they're putting blowers on the Z06. The LS7 was pretty much maxed out for a NA motor.

[Grumpy Bear]

Well over 2 horsepower a cube all motor isn't unheard of but it wouldn't much fun to drive day in and day out or last that long. Think 1500 hp 500 CID NHRA Prostock   They also cost a hundred grand. Or how about 850 hp  from a 358 CID NASCAR motor with a thousand mile maximum life expectancy. 

 

 

[KARNUT]

An 850HP NASCAR engine could live a long life in a street car if desired. They wouldn’t be running the sustained RPMs like in a race car. I’d rather go the stroker- blower combo. It more fun playing with pulleys and fuel combos to fit the mood.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DONWT15]

 

Chevrolet's latest NASCAR race engine, known as the R07, which debuted in 2007 is perhaps the most refined small-block in the world. The R07 shares few similarities with any production small-block in your driveway. It's become a purpose-built engine, no longer based on any street engine. 

Article from Hot Rod magazine

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

2 hours ago, DONWT15 said:

 

Chevrolet's latest NASCAR race engine, known as the R07, which debuted in 2007 is perhaps the most refined small-block in the world. The R07 shares few similarities with any production small-block in your driveway. It's become a purpose-built engine, no longer based on any street engine. 

Article from Hot Rod magazine

 

 

No different than the 500 CID Hemi used in Top Fuel. Lord, how long has it been since anyone raced an Iron 392/426 in TF? 

How about a stock block Chevy or Buick 6 at Indy? Be that as it may 2hp/cube NA is possible; it is and was done even in some of the older motor designs. Honda comes to mind. 

 

I've been watching NHRA Pro Stock with some interest the last ten years. Especially that last two when it went from carburetors to injection and mandatory RPM chips. You might have noticed fewer and fewer people entering these races the last five years. 3hp per cube would be in the bag if the mechanical limits of increased RPM could be solved and they were headed in that direction. This increased cost to the point of more than one could carry. Get in your 'Way Back Machine" if you are old enough to have one and ask yourself if you would have believed over 10,500 rpm from a 500 inch BBC in 1968? A claim of 7,000 could get you called a liar.

 

In my youth a horse a cube netted a motor with weak vacuum and a high idle that made tall gears, automatic transmissions and power brakes iffy. Fixed cam timing and lift that allowed enough rpm and cylinder fill to obtain a horse a cube demanded nothing less. We spent thousands on cars that cost only a few thousand to get that type of power. Which by the way was as peaky as a two stroke. Today VVT, VVL, DOD/AFM, direct injection, huge improvements in cylinder and manifold design, transmission ratios and on and on put power levels of the old big blocks in motors half their size with the road manors of a Ford Flathead. Torque curves flatter than a Midwest prairie. Taller than Mt. Evans. And yet all the young can do is complain about it. 

 

Then I tell myself. Boy would I love to have this technology applied to a 1970 500 CID Caddy motor. 700 hp and 25 mpg! 

 

What? A guy an dream, right? 

[DONWT15]

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

In my youth a horse a cube netted a motor with weak vacuum and a high idle that made tall gears, automatic transmissions and power brakes iffy. Fixed cam timing and lift that allowed enough rpm and cylinder fill to obtain a horse a cube demanded nothing less. We spent thousands on cars that cost only a few thousand to get that type of power. Which by the way was as peaky as a two stroke. Today VVT, VVL, DOD/AFM, direct injection, huge improvements in cylinder and manifold design, transmission ratios and on and on put power levels of the old big blocks in motors half their size with the road manors of a Ford Flathead. Torque curves flatter than a Midwest prairie. Taller than Mt. Evans. And yet all the young can do is complain about it. 

That's a fact.

 

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Then I tell myself. Boy would I love to have this technology applied to a 1970 500 CID Caddy motor. 700 hp and 25 mpg! 

Picture this:  1970 black on black Eldorado cruising I-90 at an easy 160 mph.

 

 

[L86 All Terrain]

On ‎2018‎-‎02‎-‎13 at 12:23 PM, '17 Sierra said:

I agree. My last new car before this truck was Z06 Corvette with the LS7 427 CI. 505 stock HP out of a normally aspirated pushrod motor. Insane. Now they're putting blowers on the Z06. The LS7 was pretty much maxed out for a NA motor.

Do you still have the car? I have been looking around for the right C6Z for 2 years now. There are a few 700hp NA LS7's lurking around. I was also super bummed to see a tiny blower on a 6.2L rather than a new "LT7".  

['17 Sierra]

27 minutes ago, 10SierraA.T. said:

Do you still have the car? I have been looking around for the right C6Z for 2 years now. There are a few 700hp NA LS7's lurking around. I was also super bummed to see a tiny blower on a 6.2L rather than a new "LT7".  

I let the Z go 3 years ago when we made the move to Washington state. The car was immaculate; OCD immaculate and I mean flawless. Black too. I never even drove it in the rain. Wouldn't have been able to keep that promise to myself here in WA LOL!! It was a sunny day weekend car. The guy that bought it is from Vegas and within one month had a cam, headers, ported heads and wrinkle walls on it for the 1/4 mile. That was the wrong Z to do that with. He could have saved a ton of money and bought one less nice for sure.

I'm with you on the the new motors but they had to do it because there is no more room for displacement to up the HP with the EPA.

[Grumpy Bear]

35 minutes ago, '17 Sierra said:

I let the Z go 3 years ago when we made the move to Washington state. The car was immaculate; OCD immaculate and I mean flawless. Black too. I never even drove it in the rain. Wouldn't have been able to keep that promise to myself here in WA LOL!! It was a sunny day weekend car. The guy that bought it is from Vegas and within one month had a cam, headers, ported heads and wrinkle walls on it for the 1/4 mile. That was the wrong Z to do that with. He could have saved a ton of money and bought one less nice for sure.

I'm with you on the the new motors but they had to do it because there is no more room for displacement to up the HP with the EPA.

That's a heart breaker John. Sorry that happened to you and to the car. Another one bites the dust. 

[Grumpy Bear]

6 hours ago, DONWT15 said:

That's a fact.

 

Picture this:  1970 black on black Eldorado cruising I-90 at an easy 160 mph.

 

 

Ain't she prudy Pa 

[Annhl8rX]

Comparing cars to trucks is kind of ridiculous to me, so I’ll keep stick to evaluating things with beds for now.

There’s no doubt that my 5.3 offers all the performance I need, but it’s not as much fun to drive as my 2010 Ram (5.7) or even 2005 Nissan (5.6) were.

The Chevrolet doesn’t feel like it has all the ponies it claims to. Hopefully the tuner I should have soon will remedy some of that.

[DONWT15]

1 hour ago, Annhl8rX said:

There’s no doubt that my 5.3 offers all the performance I need, but it’s not as much fun to drive as my 2010 Ram (5.7) or even 2005 Nissan (5.6) were.

That 5.7 is a good motor, but it also has 25 more cubes and hemi heads are the best flowing design over all.

 

The Nissan 5.6 is also somewhat larger and is an overhead cam, but I don't have much experience on them.

 

I think both might be better compared to 6.2.

 

If you want to tune it, then go ahead and have some fun.