[DMCForum] Re: Help, Andrei's Fallen Into the HP Trap [Slightly T]

["content22207" <brobertson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrei, Andrei, Andrei -- don't fall into the HP trap. 

Horsepower is calculated from 2 numbers: Torque and RPM's. An engine
that "only" produces a couple hundred HP, but does so at low RPM's, is
MUCH more powerful than an engine rated even higher at high RPM's.

Consider a semi trailer tractor. "Only" puts out 300-400 HP. But it
does so at 1,500 RPM. Do you suppose your Porsche -- with the same HP
rating -- could pull 80,000 lbs as that tractor does? The answer is of
course "no" because it would never be able to rev anywhere near its
power band (actually it would stall the minute you let the clutch out).

Domestic big blocks have tremendous torque -- 3 or 4 times as much as
a little sports car engine. That's why you see people towing boats and
trailers with a Cadillac, but never a Honda.

FYI: HP = Torque x RPM / 5252.

The 450 HP rating of your 454 is probably a gross number, calculated
out of the vehicle with no accessories on the front. That's the way
American manufacturers did it in the 1960s. Actual net HP in the car
averaged a hundred ponies or so lower. Domestic manufacturers switched
to net HP ratings at the same time they dropped compression ratios --
lower compression does lower HP, but not as badly as the 1972 numbers
make it appear.

If you're having problems with the 454 in your boat, consider a Ford
460. I know it's a popular marine application.

Bill Robertson
#5939

>--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Andrei Cular" <andreic@xxxx> wrote:
> I'll have a charged battery and fuel waiting for your arrival.  I would
> really like to run the engine a little, it has been about a year since I
> even turned it over.  But I did poor some mystery oil into the
cylinders.
> 
> 1200lb of steel is a bit much considering it only puts out 450hp.  A
Porsche
> 944 can run 350hp for 200k miles with no problem and the block and head
> can't weigh more than 120lb.  Its only 200k cause the car isn't that old
> yet.
> 
> Andrei
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "content22207" <brobertson@xxxx>
> To: <DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 1:06 PM
> Subject: [DMCForum] Re: Fixing Andrei's Engine [OT]
> 
> 
> > I can fix that...
> >
> > Seriously, my biggest objection to 1970's emissions is the Rube
> > Goldberg way manufacturers went about it. Studying one of those vacuum
> > diagrams gives me a headache. All it takes is one leaking check or
> > delay valve to render the car undriveable. Ford used both hot and cold
> > ported vacuum switches, and woe to the owner who got them backwards.
> > Just give me one vacuum line (ported from the carburetor) straight to
> > my distributor and I'm happy.
> >
> > If the old model engines upset Uncle Sam so much, manufacturers should
> > have put them to rest rather than strangling them with all this add on
> > crap.
> >
> > On the plus side -- it is very easy to remove it all and return an
> > engine back to its original design (less square bore carb, flat top
> > pistons, and low/closed chamber heads of course).
> >
> > I also plug the EGR port, which after 100,000 miles has so much soot
> > and carbon built up as to basically have plugged itself anyway.
> >
> > Breakerless ignition *IS* cool. I converted my 1969 model engine to a
> > neat little unit Pertronix puts out. Mounts inside the distributor
> > where the points used to be. Allowed me to keep the original advance
> > curve, which is probably the only aspect of that engine that could
> > make Martin happy.
> >
> > Re: excessive metal in big blocks -- you're not supposed to be able to
> > hold one up towards the sun and see light shining though...
> >
> > Bill Robertson
> > #5939

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.