[74SDformula]

Originally Posted by Scott Stoneburg

MD, i have a question for you. Why would you want to come onto this thread and throw down on this guys day, he is obviously happy with the performance of his combo. he didn't start this thread asking if we thought his combo made enough power. seemed like he just wanted to brag about finally having it come together.i for one am happy for him, great job ksgto. sounds like you'll have plenty of fun.

I agree, too often these threads take a turn for the worse. But I have always heard that "Misery Loves Company".

[paint guy]

well stated by both scott stoneburg and74SDFormula.BTW,ksgto,I would'nt worry too much about how "big" your cam looks on paper.You've got a real torquer on your hands,and both you and your daughter should have a blast driving it,and at that point,it does'nt matter a hill of beans what the cam numbers are,as long as you're happy with it.Good luck!

[440GP69]

Definately, The mustangs and cameros in your neighborhood are going to hate you!, 500+lb feet of torque is no joke, It should run mid to low 12's and easliy drive anywhere !!! Goodluck and Have fun I bet you can't wait to drive it!

[Cliff R]

I'm interested in all the specifics of the build, static compression ratio, head flow numbers, camshaft specs, etc, for comparison purposes. We'd built and dyno'd quite a few 455's, and observed quite a few more up on the dyno. The numbers look like it's in the mid 9 to 1 range for compression ratio, and using a pretty "small" cam. Probably an XE268, but that's just a guess?.....Cliff

[GTOGreg]

Originally Posted by Scott Stoneburg

MD, i have a question for you. Why would you want to come onto this thread and throw down on this guys day, he is obviously happy with the performance of his combo. he didn't start this thread asking if we thought his combo made enough power. seemed like he just wanted to brag about finally having it come together.i for one am happy for him, great job ksgto. sounds like you'll have plenty of fun.

x2!

[WFO]

I just did this procedure, of course it was outlined to me by Keisler Engineering, (great people, products and service by the way) What i did was measure the dist. from the METAL end of the tranny tailhouse to the pinion flange face, I got 56 1/8. Type in Keisler engineering and they have a diagram to do this. Keisler's tech guy Richard @ ext. 201 is THE MAN, he has seen it all and has helped me immensely. He's awesome, I am sure he can answer any ? you have. Good luck.

[gtofreek]

Originally Posted by WFO

I just did this procedure, of course it was outlined to me by Keisler Engineering, (great people, products and service by the way) What i did was measure the dist. from the METAL end of the tranny tailhouse to the pinion flange face, I got 56 1/8. Type in Keisler engineering and they have a diagram to do this. Keisler's tech guy Richard @ ext. 201 is THE MAN, he has seen it all and has helped me immensely. He's awesome, I am sure he can answer any ? you have. Good luck.

I think you posted to the wrong thread.

[KO]

BTW Dynos only measure torque. HP is a mathematical dirivative or torque over time.

HP=Torque times RPM divided by 5250 So all engines will make the same horsepower as torque at 5250 RPM. The abilty to sustain torque at a higher RPM will generate higher HP levels. IE 10500 RPM the HP will be 2 times torque.

Also, V twin Harleys are dominating NHRA Pro Stock MC two valve v twins vs four valve 4 cyl

Just because we call it a stroker, the reality is it is just a 455 with 3" mains and 400HP 500TQ out of a stock type 455 is pretty good.

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

BTW Dynos only measure torque. HP is a mathematical dirivative or torque over time.

HP=Torque times RPM divided by 5250 So all engines will make the same horsepower as torque at 5250 RPM. The abilty to sustain torque at a higher RPM will generate higher HP levels. IE 10500 RPM the HP will be 2 times torque.

Also, V twin Harleys are dominating NHRA Pro Stock MC two valve v twins vs four valve 4 cyl

Just because we call it a stroker, the reality is it is just a 455 with 3" mains and 400HP 500TQ out of a stock type 455 is pretty good.

Why is it that people keep posting when I said I already overstayed my welcome? If you want me to stop posting on this thread than stop making false statements that I feel I must correct your ignorance of the situation.

1. HP is not torque over time. I can apply 100 lb-ft of torque to a head bolt for a second or an hour, the power is ZERO if it doesn't have any motion.

2. It's not "5250," it's 5252, because 33,000/6.2832=5252 rounded off.

3. 400 HP is pretty good, but a 400 with stock heads and smallish cam makes more. So there goes the "bigger is better" mentality out the window.

4. Who cares what the modified big twins do? You can have 1,000 lb-ft of torque and be slow, or you can have 100 lb-ft of torque and be fast. What's your point?

5. If the following curves were actual dyno curves, which one would you pick to be the best race engine (ultimately run the quickest ET)?

[KO]

5252/5250 you are splitting hairs three significant digits 5252 rounded off is 5250

TORQUE times RPM which mean revolution per minute which is TIME
Your head bolt comparison does not hold because it is static NOT applying a constant torque over time...if you appliied 500 ft lb of torque to the bolt and continued to stretch the bolt over a period of time.


That is not a real dyno sheet, it is a simulation. A real dyno does not need head flow or cam spec input just an engine fuel and operator.

[KO]

All else being equal a 455 is worth at LEAST 3 tenths over a 400 in the REAL world quarter mile. This is from actual testing REAL world experience

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

5252/5250 you are splitting hairs three significant digits 5252 rounded off is 5250

So now being accurate is "splitting hairs?" How about you make correct statements if you are trying to teach me what torque and HP is, and how it works??

Originally Posted by KO

TORQUE times RPM which mean revolution per minute which is TIME

So 100 lb-ft of torque times 100 RPM is 10,000 units of time? How does my clock support that idea? Say, do you know what time it is? Sure, it's 10,000 lb-ft-RPM.

Originally Posted by KO

Your head bolt comparison does not hold because it is static NOT applying a constant torque over time...if you appliied 500 ft lb of torque to the bolt and continued to stretch the bolt over a period of time.

I said I could apply 100 lb-ft to a head bolt for a second or an hour, if it doesn't move the power is ZERO. Reading comprehension not your strong suit, eh?

Originally Posted by KO

That is not a real dyno sheet, it is a simulation. A real dyno does not need head flow or cam spec input just an engine fuel and operator.

So those curves aren't possible for any REAL engine??

By looking at the curves, which one would you say would ultimately be faster??

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

All else being equal a 455 is worth at LEAST 3 tenths over a 400 in the REAL world quarter mile. This is from actual testing REAL world experience

Please, do tell. What were all the specifics of each combo? Don't spare the details. I want to know everything from air temp to traction coefficient to drive-line loss to A/F ratio, to VE%.

[KO]

Peak numbers mean nothing, you will only be at the HP peak and torque peaks for an instant. The area under the curve, average mean alot more. From real experience all else being equal, the 455 will be quicker than a 400, ALWAYS

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

Peak numbers mean nothing, you will only be at the HP peak and torque peaks for an instant. The area under the curve, average mean alot more. From real experience all else being equal, the 455 will be quicker than a 400, ALWAYS

Can you back that up mathematically?

Here's my take on the deal.

Engine A in second gear (1.98) with a 3.23 rear gear and 26.5" tire.

2000 464 lb-ft 176 hp 24 mph 2967 RWTQ
2500 482 lb-ft 229 hp 30 mph 3082 RWTQ
3000 496 lb-ft 283 hp 37 mph 3172 RWTQ
3500 511 lb-ft 340 hp 43 mph 3268 RWTQ
4000 506 lb-ft 385 hp 49 mph 3236 RWTQ
4500 481 lb-ft 412 hp 55 mph 3076 RWTQ
5000 427 lb-ft 406 hp 61 mph 2730 RWTQ
5500 363 lb-ft 380 hp 67 mph 2321 RWTQ


Engine B in second gear (1.98) with a 3.73 rear gear and 26.5" tire.

2309 410 lb-ft 180 hp 24 mph 3028 RWTQ
2887 430 lb-ft 236 hp 30 mph 3175 RWTQ
3464 460 lb-ft 303 hp 37 mph 3397 RWTQ
4041 465 lb-ft 357 hp 43 mph 3434 RWTQ
4619 465 lb-ft 408 hp 49 mph 3434 RWTQ
5196 445 lb-ft 440 hp 55 mph 3286 RWTQ
5773 390 lb-ft 428 hp 61 mph 2880 RWTQ
6351 330 lb-ft 399 hp 67 mph 2437 RWTQ


Two identical cars (except for engine and gears, same weight) are moving along at a steady 24 mph in second gear side by side. They both punch it at the same exact time. Which one will pull ahead immediately, and get to 67 mph the soonest, and cover the greatest distance in the same time period? The one with the greatest engine TORQUE, or the one with the greatest engine HP??



BTW, these are the numbers from the curves I posted earlier. Engine A is the 455, Engine B is the 400.

[KO]

1 example of many REAL WORLD examples:
Completely stock 1969 Ram Air IV 370HP rated, stock convertor TH400 4.10 gears 13.4xx best over a 3 year period. Afraid of hurting the rare engine installed a completely stock 1971 455HO rated at 335HP 8.4:1 compression vs. 10.75:1, Ram Air III AT cam vs. Ram AIr IV cam. 12.8xx best.

[KO]

Keep racing your computer and I will race and win in the real world

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

1 example of many REAL WORLD examples:
Completely stock 1969 Ram Air IV 370HP rated, stock convertor TH400 4.10 gears 13.4xx best over a 3 year period. Afraid of hurting the rare engine installed a completely stock 1971 455HO rated at 335HP 8.4:1 compression vs. 10.75:1, Ram Air III AT cam vs. Ram AIr IV cam. 12.8xx best.

Why are you giving me fruit punch? I wanted 2 apples.

Your data is so flawed it isn't funny.

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by KO

Keep racing your computer and I will race and win in the real world

...and rocks will fall to the ground if you lift them up and release them, but that doesn't mean you know the cause of gravity.

[KO]

Originally Posted by motor-daddy

Why are you giving me fruit punch? I wanted 2 apples.

Your data is so flawed it isn't funny.

DATA???? HARD FACTS, REAL WORLD, 28 years of actually racing a real car