[Shotimes] N/A Dyno 318hp 279tq

[Ron Porter]

Yep.

Here's the old bit I wrote many years ago from the SHOtimes FAQ about HP numbers
games:

http://www.shotimes.com/php-bin/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&si
d=21&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

or http://makeashorterlink.com/?O226232BD


Ron Porter


-----Original Message-----
From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net [mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net] On
Behalf Of Mark Nunnally
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 4:15 PM
To: shotimes
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] N/A Dyno 318hp 279tq

> Yep most definitely BS. Hrinsin's 3.4 has a similar setup, and he is only
> 245-250 WHP. On a Dynojet, IIRC.

It's the torque (280 ft/lbs to the tires) that's the pipe dream.  Since
torque (sheer rotating power of the crank) comes pretty much (in an
atmospheric breathing engine) soley from VE (and mostly from sheer
displacement), getting WELL over 300 ft/lbs at the crank with 183 cubic
inches would need a very long stroke, an out of this world (impossible?) VE
number, and some NASA spec rocket fuel for huge power on the power stroke.
And it would probably rev like a tractor motor if you come up with something
as such.

Since hp is just a mathematical problem of torque and rpm (time) you can
skew that if you dial everything to shift the torque curve up in the rpm
band.  Ie, you could get 300+ hp out of a 183 CI engine with the right
cam/intake tuning, take your 200 ft/lbs of torque and be able to make it at
high rpm.  There ya go.

But 300 ft/lbs, ain't no way.  Something was skewed in the calibration or
something.  


mark
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes