[Shotimes] (OT) Marauder

[Ron Nottingham]

I, for one, would like to see "plenty of 4-valve OHV" engines (the correct
term, since a motor is electric :-).  I do not know of any production
pushrod 4-valvers.  Although I have seen many different designs for them.
No different than, say, a SOHC 4-valve engine, and there are plenty of those
around, as Honda is a HUGE manufacturer of SOHC 4-valve auto engines.  Most
Civics and Accords only came with 1 cam :-)

Ron N. - Dalton, GA
90 SHO

----- Original Message -----
From: "Midwest SHO Specialists SHOtimes" <MidwestSHOspecialists@hotmail.com>


>      Actually there are plenty of of 4 valve OHV motors around.  You do
not
> need to squeeze extra lobes on the cam either.  All of the pushrod OHV 4
> valve engines that I have seen have fingers in the heads that operate both
> intake valves off of one pushrod.  This is very similar to how SOHC 16V 4
> bangers operate.
>
>      Also Yamaha didn't have the advances that we have now when they were
> designing this motor.  Keep in mind that the motor was designed 17 years
> ago!  That's amazing when you think about it.  They were waaaaay ahead of
> their time.  I digress though.  Hydraulic tappets were not used for fear
of
> high RPM oil foaming which would have caused them to collapse.
>
> ~ Mike
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David P" <jpotter8@bellsouth.net>
>
> > Since all OHV motors are two-valvers, and four valves allow more
efficient
> > combustions, then pushrods DO have a bit to do with emissions, at least
> > until they figure out a way to cram 4V onto a single cam. Sure, injector
> > placement, intake flow, etc play a large part, but when considering
solely
> > 2V vs. 4V, 4V is going to win on emissions and power. You think maybe
> there
> > is another reason why the Corvette runs a 2.73 final?
> >
> > As for OHC being high maintenance, I think you are forgetting that the
SHO
> > does not have a hydraulic tappet. Remove the hydraulic tappet from any
OHV
> > motor and it becomes just as maintenance intense. Not as expensive to
> build,
> > but just as expensive to maintain. If Yamaha had inserted hydraulic
> tappets
> > into their design, we would not be sitting here exclaiming the need to
do
> > the 60k on time.
> >
> > Sure, the small block (or more specifically, the OHV design) will be
> around
> > for some time, but eventually it will be dropped in lieu of more
efficient
> > designs in our nation's quest for emissions reduction. Don't get upset
> about
> > it though, as OHC's days are numbered as well. There are much better
> > air/fuel injections systems on the boards and in testing that don't have
> > valves as we conceive them that will see fruition in the last half of
this
> > century, leaving OHV as the predominant valve design of the 19th, 20th
and
> > 21st centuries. Not too bad a run, but definitely a technology that has
> > outlived it's usefulness.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
> >
> > > Yes production was low, although that is what you said, not
> > > i.  They also sold every one they made, and even ramped up
> > > production and held it longer than planned to try to meet
> > > demand.  You expected maybe they would sell them in Focus of
> > > Camry numbers?  NO special vehicle sells in big numbers,
> > > Cobra, RX7 etc.  But they did sell a lot of the basic
> > > Caprice, a great tow vehicle and very good police car that
> > > the police across the nation still lament not being able to
> > > get.  They have never warmed up to the low torque and low HP
> > > "High tech" Crown Vic.
> > >
> > > High emissions?  Not really, the small block chevy lives on
> > > in the Vette and a huge amount of other applications as a
> > > low emissions vehicle!   And don't spout the "low tech"
> > > pushrod cam mantra.  The motor works and puts out more HP
> > > and torque than competing motors from Ford.  Pushrods have
> > > nothing to do with emissions, it is ignition and fuel
> > > control more than anything, and combustion chamber design.
> > > The new small blocks are as good as anything out there,
> > > better than most.
> > >
> > > I am a basic fan of Ford, but there is NO, repeat, NO
> > > arguing with the extreme success of the small block Chevy.
> > > Ford had a similar motor, but they dumped it.  Now they are
> > > really struggling with the more expensive to make and
> > > maintain OHC motors.
> > >
> > > And yes, mods are plentiful, they work, and are cheap.  That
> > > , my friend is the outline and model for the most successful
> > > motor of all time, including today.  I am willing to bet the
> > > small block is around longer than the OHC Ford motor.
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
> > > >
> > > >>I agree with much of what you say, but you imply that the
> > > >>Impala from the mid 90's was not successful.  Nothing could
> > > >>be farther from the truth.  That car sold above sticker for
> > > >>its entire run, and was only killed when GM needed the plant
> > > >>to build more prolific and profitable trucks/suv's.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > Well, I was looking at production nos. awhile ago, and they were
low.
> > So
> > > > what you are saying is that GM kept production low?  That would
> explain
> > low
> > > > sales and remaining residual demand.  Of course the mods will be
> > plentiful
> > > > for that engine, but its old tech, high emissions design dooms it.