600hp C6!!!!!!

[03'svtlight]

http://www.procharger.com/c6_corvette.shtml :bows

[L8 APEX]

Where's your diesel buddy? Now a Procharged C6 z06 will be nice 427 cubes has to make something over 650 to the wheels all day long.

[FRDRCING]

Im not a fan of the chevy, but I do respect them as they make some serious power top end.

[L8 APEX]

And they do it with pushrods and two valve per cylinder since 1953:tu:

[03'svtlight]

Where's your diesel buddy? Now a Procharged C6 z06 will be nice 427 cubes has to make something over 650 to the wheels all day long.
He's had a couple of Freightliner problems over the weekend but he did mention he was gonna get it done this week. :cool:

[WA 2 FST]

Im not a fan of the chevy, but I do respect them as they make some serious power top end.

They don't just make top-end. Take a N/A 2v LS1 motor vs. a N/A 4v Ford "mod" motor ... Ford is bringing a knife to the gunfight. The LS1 engine has one of the flattest torque curves in smallblock history.

Ford claimed huge top-end improvements by going to the 4v setup, and that it would make the vehicles more smooth, refined, and "European"-like. The big deal was that they could spin to 6500+rpm with no problem while the pushrod crowd couldn't touch that.

Funny thing is that the LS1/etc motors can easily spin as high as Ford's 4v engines.

I love Ford, but except for their blown 4.6 and blown 5.4 engines, I'm not impressed with the engine lineup (and yes, I have a N/A 5.4 in my garage...wife's SUV).

[Ivanhoe_Farms]

They don't just make top-end. Take a N/A 2v LS1 motor vs. a N/A 4v Ford "mod" motor ... Ford is bringing a knife to the gunfight. The LS1 engine has one of the flattest torque curves in smallblock history.

Ford claimed huge top-end improvements by going to the 4v setup, and that it would make the vehicles more smooth, refined, and "European"-like. The big deal was that they could spin to 6500+rpm with no problem while the pushrod crowd couldn't touch that.

Funny thing is that the LS1/etc motors can easily spin as high as Ford's 4v engines.

I love Ford, but except for their blown 4.6 and blown 5.4 engines, I'm not impressed with the engine lineup (and yes, I have a N/A 5.4 in my garage...wife's SUV).


Uh, I hate to rain on someone's parade, but we have been spinning small block Chevy's over 10,000 RPM since the mid-60s for sure --- NASCAR pushrod engines turn 9400 RPM in the straights, so someone is smoking something other than tires :throw:

[WA 2 FST]

Notice I said, "Ford claimed...". That was one of their marketing strategies... to get everyone to buy into the DOHC is a better platform for a performance engine.

As far as spinning pushrod motors into the stratosphere, I know all about that and concur with your examples. We also both know that none of those examples involve street engines, that needs to pass emissions (tight piston/cylinder wall clearances) and 100k mile endurance tests (to keep warranty costs down). We're pampered today with hydraulic roller valvetrains... you would have a hard time marketing a solid, mechanical valvetrain (that needs to be adjusted every 3-4k miles) to the general public... even if it could effectively spin to 7500-8000rpm. Not to mention the manufacturer's nightmare of having to warranty something like that.

Ask most Windsor motor nuts and they'll tell you that the hyd. roller lifters start to float much over 6500rpm. I think Anderson Ford and a few others claim to sell a lighter lifter that won't create problems to ~7000rpm. Otherwise, its time to step up to a mechanical roller.

The LSX GM engines are turning ~7000rpm with hydraulic rollers and have had great success.

[Ivanhoe_Farms]

Notice I said, "Ford claimed...". That was one of their marketing strategies... to get everyone to buy into the DOHC is a better platform for a performance engine.

As far as spinning pushrod motors into the stratosphere, I know all about that and concur with your examples. We also both know that none of those examples involve street engines, that needs to pass emissions (tight piston/cylinder wall clearances) and 100k mile endurance tests (to keep warranty costs down). We're pampered today with hydraulic roller valvetrains... you would have a hard time marketing a solid, mechanical valvetrain (that needs to be adjusted every 3-4k miles) to the general public... even if it could effectively spin to 7500-8000rpm. Not to mention the manufacturer's nightmare of having to warranty something like that.

Ask most Windsor motor nuts and they'll tell you that the hyd. roller lifters start to float much over 6500rpm. I think Anderson Ford and a few others claim to sell a lighter lifter that won't create problems to ~7000rpm. Otherwise, its time to step up to a mechanical roller.

The LSX GM engines are turning ~7000rpm with hydraulic rollers and have had great success.

Since Horsepowere and torque cross at 5252 RPM, and it is torque that moves a vehicle along, there are rare cases other than built engines where it makes much sense to exceed 5500-6000 RPM,

I happen to like the sewing machine sound of mechanical lifters myself, and am willing to spend the time on a sporty type car to keep them adjusted:cool:

[dboat]

Since Horsepowere and torque cross at 5252 RPM, and it is torque that moves a vehicle along, there are rare cases other than built engines where it makes much sense to exceed 5500-6000 RPM,

Mark is gonna :throw: me here but I have to disagree..gotta love those 19,000 rpm Formula One engines... but Mark has a higher regard for weedeater engines.. :hammer:




Mark, j/k... somehow I still love the idea of those things doing 19,000 rpm's..

[Mark #2]

Mark is gonna :throw: me here but I have to disagree..gotta love those 19,000 rpm Formula One engines... but Mark has a higher regard for weedeater engines.. :hammer:

Mark, j/k... somehow I still love the idea of those things doing 19,000 rpm's..

Okay, I never said 19000 RPM wasn't cool... it was the sparkplug thing.
I fired up the 911 motor and it spins to 7800 in a second and it sounds pretty cool.

10K on a Chevy pushrod motor as others have mentioned is easily 40 years old.

[dboat]

Okay, I never said 19000 RPM wasn't cool... it was the sparkplug thing.
I fired up the 911 motor and it spins to 7800 in a second and it sounds pretty cool.

10K on a Chevy pushrod motor as others have mentioned is easily 40 years old.

I know that I am fascinated by the simple things, but somehow that sparkplug thing always gets me on a 19k rpm motor..

In terms of spinup on the Porsche, how heavy is the flywheel compared to other motors? and just what basis are flywheels compared? by weight but what is the numerator or denominator that is used for comparisons? hmmm
the ramblings of the simple mind stir up again..

[Ivanhoe_Farms]

I know that I am fascinated by the simple things, but somehow that sparkplug thing always gets me on a 19k rpm motor..

In terms of spinup on the Porsche, how heavy is the flywheel compared to other motors? and just what basis are flywheels compared? by weight but what is the numerator or denominator that is used for comparisons? hmmm
the ramblings of the simple mind stir up again..

It is not just the flywheel that is at issue, it is the whole reciprocating mass from the front pulley all the way through the clutch pressure plate that determines how much mass is to be spun up. By merely changing the pressure plate one can greatly affect the reciprocating mass, that is one reason on round track vehicles you normally see a very small diameter clutch -- taking the reciprocating mass closer to the center line so it will rev quicker.

Since you seem to like the high spinning formulat one engines, you may get a kick out of looking at the stroke on one of the crankshafts. I had the priveledge to go to the Donnington Formula I museum in Donnington, England, and I can hold two fourmula one pistons and rods in the flat of my hand, and they will not hang over anywhere.:rolleyes:

If they did not turn up such high RPM, they would produce no power.:D