[mjm421]

As Don stated, there are a few bigger inch motors out there over 2.0. It could be done.

[tom s]

Stan,is NHRA SS hemi 440 CI making at 1000 HP?

[mjm421]

Tom, someone just set new records in that class. 8.22 @160. Minimum weight is 3200, I'm pretty sure that would be 1000.

[dci]

Originally Posted by mjm421

Tom, someone just set new records in that class. 8.22 @160. Minimum weight is 3200, I'm pretty sure that would be 1000.

Does anyone know the specs on that engine, Cubic inch, compression, cylinder heads, flow etc? If it's the car I think it is, those guy's have been honing that combo for quite awhile and it shows.

Outside of Comp Eliminator and Pro Stock I don't think there are allot of engines making in excess of 1.8 to 2.0 HP per cube NA. Most of the 632 Chevy's I have worked with only make around 1.8 to 1.85 per cube. Some of them have made 1.9, but that's not the norm. Not saying that there are not some that make more than that, but most do not. I would say most engines put together by the owner or the average engine builder only make around 1.4 to 1.6 HP per cube NA. Some of the guys that have kept their original combo and continue to work it will get up around 1.8, but most guy's are to impatient to work the combo until it has been maxed out.

[65nss4spdGTO]

Originally Posted by dci

Does anyone know the specs on that engine, Cubic inch, compression, cylinder heads, flow etc? If it's the car I think it is, those guy's have been honing that combo for quite awhile and it shows.

Outside of Comp Eliminator and Pro Stock I don't think there are allot of engines making in excess of 1.8 to 2.0 HP per cube NA. Most of the 632 Chevy's I have worked with only make around 1.8 to 1.85 per cube. Some of them have made 1.9, but that's not the norm. Not saying that there are not some that make more than that, but most do not. I would say most engines put together by the owner or the average engine builder only make around 1.4 to 1.6 HP per cube NA. Some of the guys that have kept their original combo and continue to work it will get up around 1.8, but most guy's are to impatient to work the combo until it has been maxed out.

SSAH has the same technology as Pro Stock and Comp. Maximize every single area within the combination and look outside the rules for ways to improve and make more HP.

The biggest gains have come from increased RPM (Shocker). Without going into additional detail, rule changes around the valve cover rail and position are being discussed as a way to control what's under the valve cover.

Calvin Hill
Hill Performance
708-250-7420

[Region Warrior]

Give'n the port size, i think if done correct, the RAV with push rod in center could be made to flow faster and have better atomization then one without rod in middle.
BTY, since my junk build is go'n no where do to funds, mess'n with an old set of heads to see what dimple's(golf ball type) in the ports just to see how it affects fluid suspension.
Wet dry vac and a spray bottle. Real red neck operation it is lol.

[dci]

I think you nailed it Chris, $$$$$$$$$ that's what separates the wannabe's and the guy's that get it done !!!!

[Chris Uratchko]

Originally Posted by dci

I think you nailed it Chris, $$$$$$$$$ that's what separates the wannabe's and the guy's that get it done !!!!

It can get close with std bore spacing but I bet would be high 2.2's.... like 2.26-2.28. I bet 2.3 Eludes.... just my opinion.

Didn't McCartys make 1400 or something? I don't know what the details are or what it actually made. Pretty sure it wasn't std bore space.

[Chris Uratchko]

Been thinking, and I think 500 CID, if you're willing to run it 9500 rpm, would go 2.3 pretty easily, possibly 2.35.

One would have to 'De-Pontiac' it, however and get a little more 'modern' like your RAV heads, and probably no pushrod in the port Sorry.

[dci]

JCyou's 609 made around 1240 I think with a highly modified version of a RA5 head. I know there are roomers floating around it made more than that, but I don't think there is any data to back them up. I think your right about 500 cubes, but I hope your wrong about the pushrod (: I know everyone is really distracted by the pushrod, but I think like anything we are not familiar with. It only takes some time and a little outside the box thinking. The more I look at this thing the more I think it can help as much as hurt, but I'm pretty determined or stubborn how ever you want to look at it LOL.

[tom s]

I think for the pontiac bore spacing my sweet spot has been in the 460-500 CI range.A 9.2 block 440 CI engine would be my pick if I had stupid money to throw at it and it would not have a pushrod in the port.Would like a canted valve head.Tom

[Chris Uratchko]

440 would be cool. Big RPM for the big number...

Small inch stuff like 440 range, all of a sudden the bore and valve aren't so small. All of a sudden you can take all your small block data, and begin to realize you have a really big bore space small block type engine and if you operate it like that.... it'll make big power.

I know people here hate talking about other brands. But consider a SBC or SBF with 2.350 inlet, a 4.375-ish bore, 3.75 Stroke, operating at 10,000 rpm.

How much power could that SB make? No reason the pontiac can't apply that.... just get creative.

You could even leave a dumb 7.00" rod hanging in there.... it'll still make big smoke.

[John Langer]

Originally Posted by Chris Uratchko

440 would be cool. Big RPM for the big number...

Small inch stuff like 440 range, all of a sudden the bore and valve aren't so small. All of a sudden you can take all your small block data, and begin to realize you have a really big bore space small block type engine and if you operate it like that.... it'll make big power.

I know people here hate talking about other brands. But consider a SBC or SBF with 2.350 inlet, a 4.375-ish bore, 3.75 Stroke, operating at 10,000 rpm.

How much power could that SB make? No reason the pontiac can't apply that.... just get creative.

You could even leave a dumb 7.00" rod hanging in there.... it'll still make big smoke.

4.600 cfe sb head on a 4.420 bore 9.500 deck block with 2.5" mains would be a screamer. Just need to figure out if you could turn down the counter weights enough so it wouldn't hit the piston skirt. Now getting a car to weight that could compete in an existing series would cost more and require more thought then the motor...

[Chris Uratchko]

Originally Posted by John Langer

4.600 cfe sb head on a 4.420 bore 9.500 deck block with 2.5" mains would be a screamer. Just need to figure out if you could turn down the counter weights enough so it wouldn't hit the piston skirt. Now getting a car to weight that could compete in an existing series would cost more and require more thought then the motor...

Well get busy!!

[twinturrbo406]

i agree on the short deck smaller c.i. approach and spinning it 9000-10000, the problem would then become the camshaft & lifter locations in the aftermarket blocks, which all are still inline wedge based, because once you try to apply a head like the Australian Prostock head (example) over a shortdeck Pontiac block the angles get increasingly worse due to the shorter deck height ...
... and the wideport wedge heads won't look good either on the short deck block as the deck height is working against you still, but all this obviously being directed at very high rpm, the valvetrain must be happy to live at 10k ...

[Stan Weiss]

Talking about the short deck block and 10,000 rpm the range should be in the 2.7 and up HP per ci.

Didn't John Marcella's 481 ci Pontiac produce over 2.3 HP per ci?

Stan

[LiL Jack]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Talking about the short deck block and 10,000 rpm the range should be in the 2.7 and up HP per ci.

Didn't John Marcella's 481 ci Pontiac produce over 2.3 HP per ci?

Stan

That was just on the fantasy dyno

[john marcella]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Talking about the short deck block and 10,000 rpm the range should be in the 2.7 and up HP per ci.

Didn't John Marcella's 481 ci Pontiac produce over 2.3 HP per ci?

Stan

Yes , but sad to say my data shows that dyno to be a bit on the happy side (at that point in time)!

My 521 on different pump made 2.17X

[Chris Uratchko]

2.7 ain't gonna happen.

As for lifter bores and geometry. It would be nice to see the Dart approach to the lifter banks and just put a big old bar front to rear in the block for lifter placement. That would offer the pontiac guys room to move lifter bores dramatically.

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by Chris Uratchko

2.7 ain't gonna happen.

As for lifter bores and geometry. It would be nice to see the Dart approach to the lifter banks and just put a big old bar front to rear in the block for lifter placement. That would offer the pontiac guys room to move lifter bores dramatically.

... exactly Chris, to have a curved type shape to lifter valley area with built in material for custom camshaft and lifter locations could open the door for a truely high end race head based on the Pontiac b/s ...
... then the Pontiac's could become the small block to have ...