Jump to content

All audio & non-essesntials on hold - 2 years


Matthews

Recommended Posts

I believe there are GM videos that show what happens to a big block with an 8000 rpm power shift. The block (cast iron) twisted over an 1/8 of an inch. That's why there are clearances set in on all mechanical things.

JJK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt,

Most people are not as lucky to have the equipment you do from your tube setup from Toolshed to all those Lascala's..... You know the ones in every room. Enjoy what you got... Save for what you want..... Just for the next 2 years..... Think of which set.... Or sets of Lascala's would work best in your garage.... OMG .... You may need as set of industrials

G.E.M

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

While the gross and net horsepower change is a large factor to consider so is the fact compression was lowered, aggressive camshaft profiles were reduced by most manufactures along with many casting changes and emission controls over the next few years and by 1975 they were just a shell of what they once were.

 

To say they were essentially the same is not true with the exception they were still V-8's.

 

 

Compression dropped pretty much across the board in 1972.

 

I give Jay Leno no respect with the exception of keeping some vehicles on the road that otherwise would probably be junked.

 

Once electronic ignition came about reliability became much better, points would wear out, were not super reliable and would change your timing as they wore.

 

Newer cars should be slightly more efficient due to fuel injection, properly maintained fuel injection anyways.

 

 

Fuel injection certainly helps reduce fuel consumption, with its improved fuel metering at all temperatures, but another factor is that modern engines run much higher compression than the older ones.  The Chrysler/Dodge Pentastar V-6 wasn't designed for performance, but runs at 10.2:1 in the 2010-2015 engines, and the 2016 engine will have an 11.3:1 compression ratio.  And it will run just fine on regular gas.

 

Similar things happened with motorcycle engines in the 1980s.  The engineers found the improved combustion chamber shapes that would allow for high compression operation on regular fuel and it improved everything:  power, torque, and fuel efficiency.  Back then, 11.2:1 was considered high.  The current top sportbikes like the Yamaha R1 are running with 13:1 compression, but prefer premium fuel.  Back in the day, avgas would have been required.

 

Something else that's only found on recently-built engines is variable valve timing.  It gives the effect of a mild cam at low rpm and a wilder spec with more overlap at high rpm.  This improves both power and fuel consumption.

 

As for points, you've got that right.  When I was racing my streetbike in the 70s, I'd set the timing after Saturday practice so it was spot on for the race on Sunday.  Next Saturday, same thing.  I had to set the timing once a week for best results.  When I ran bikes with electronic ignition, there was one less thing to think about and spend time on.  Much more efficient.

Edited by Islander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt, Most people are not as lucky to have the equipment you do from your tube setup from Toolshed to all those Lascala's..... You know the ones in every room. Enjoy what you got... Save for what you want..... Just for the next 2 years..... Think of which set.... Or sets of Lascala's would work best in your garage.... OMG .... You may need as set of industrials G.E.M

It is not luck, "G.E.M".  It is a blessing    Keeping my feet on the ground and continue moving forward has not always been so easy.  After being knocked down year after year, I have finally been given a reprieve.  Life is good today and for that I am Grateful !

 

Likely only enough room in the garage for a pair of Quintets up in the corners.  Going to be small, enough room for the Vette and a workbench in the back :emotion-21:

 

Matt ♪ ♫ ♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

While the gross and net horsepower change is a large factor to consider so is the fact compression was lowered, aggressive camshaft profiles were reduced by most manufactures along with many casting changes and emission controls over the next few years and by 1975 they were just a shell of what they once were.

 

To say they were essentially the same is not true with the exception they were still V-8's.

 

 

Compression dropped pretty much across the board in 1972.

 

I give Jay Leno no respect with the exception of keeping some vehicles on the road that otherwise would probably be junked.

 

Once electronic ignition came about reliability became much better, points would wear out, were not super reliable and would change your timing as they wore.

 

Newer cars should be slightly more efficient due to fuel injection, properly maintained fuel injection anyways.

 

 

Fuel injection certainly helps reduce fuel consumption, with its improved fuel metering at all temperatures, but another factor is that modern engines run much higher compression than the older ones.  The Chrysler/Dodge Pentastar V-6 wasn't designed for performance, but runs at 10.2:1 in the 2010-2015 engines, and the 2016 engine will have an 11.3:1 compression ratio.  And it will run just fine on regular gas.

 

Similar things happened with motorcycle engines in the 1980s.  The engineers found the improved combustion chamber shapes that would allow for high compression operation on regular fuel and it improved everything:  power, torque, and fuel efficiency.  Back then, 11.2:1 was considered high.  The current top sportbikes like the Yamaha R1 are running with 13:1 compression, but prefer premium fuel.  Back in the day, avgas would have been required.

 

Something else that's only found on recently-built engines is variable valve timing.  It gives the effect of a mild cam at low rpm and a wilder spec with more overlap at high rpm.  This improves both power and fuel consumption.

 

As for points, you've got that right.  When I was racing my streetbike in the 70s, I'd set the timing after Saturday practice so it was spot on for the race on Sunday.  Next Saturday, same thing.  I had to set the timing once a week for best results.  When I ran bikes with electronic ignition, there was one less thing to think about and spend time on.  Much more efficient.

 

I am going to add to what you have said. Note that this is not being written with the intent of contradicting anything said previously.

 

Early "mechanical" gasoline fuel injection wasn't an improvement, it was a giant pain. It wasn't until the advent of electronic fuel injection that things truly started getting better. The onboard computers and sensors like the lambda, TPI, MAP, MAF, vac, manifold temp, and engine temp working alongside the ignition maps and the fuel maps were the disruptive technology that rendered carb tune and mechanical or vac advance pretty much obsolete outside push mowers and weedeaters. 

 

As for compression, older engines were timed closer to top dead center than modern ones. For example, in 67 the SBC were timed mostly at 4-6 deg BTDC, and SBF were 6 deg BTDC.  In 1967, regular fuel was 94 octane, and premium was 100 octane. That means that if you have a 1967 HiPo 289, and you time it according to the specs, you will be timing it for 100 test gas. The timing needs retarded way back for today's high test (93 octane) fuel or pre-detonation occurs and the engine can be damaged. Unfortunately, turning the timing back takes away power in the worst place, torque. You can buy 100 octane in some places or even mix race fuel like cam2 to bring up the numbers. There is also a product called Race Gas which I have not tried. There is a mix ratio on the back which tells how many oz for each gallon to go from a start octane to your intended final octane.

 

By the 60's they understood combustion and flow. Modern cars have benefited from the 426 hemi miracle and from the grease monkey's gasket matching and porting and polishing heads and intakes. Modern cars today are what they are much because of these two ideas. Fuel injection is just a way to make a computer do what a carb does. Mix fuel and air in the right amount at the right time depending on the conditions.

 

None of the above mentions the removal of lead from gas, but the only benefit of lead was lubrication and shock absorption of the moving parts in the head like the valves and lifters. Without lead dampening each valve clap, valve seats need to be much larder than the old iron ones. Instead, steel machined seats can be installed. There are lead replacement additives that work, but there again you need to add even more crap to your gas. 

 

I believe that technology has definitely improved everything about engines over these decades. Nevertheless, there is a certain amount of thrill you get when you hammer down in an old big block muscle car that you can't get in a 2017 Shelby Mustang GT350. Mostly it's fear and respect for just how dangerous it is to go that fast that quick with shitty brakes and lap belts. :)

Edited by mustang guy
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chrysler started using Hemi's in 1950 on their production line.

 

Powerhouses for the era.

The 50's Gen 1 hemis were, but the 750 HP Gen II 426 was a beast. The 426 swept Daytona and put the fear of God into Ford. To this day, the basic 426 engine is arguably the best motor to come out of Chrysler corp. The V10 of the Viper and the SRT-10 aint bad, but I have see more truck pulls won with the 426 than anything, and the sound they produce can be matched by few engines that aren't pushing fighter jets. 

 

Ya'll know I'm a Mustang guy and I love the 429 Boss and the 427 Cammer and ya gotta love the HiPo 289 and I do love the Chevy 409, who wouldn't?, but my absolute favorite muscle engine of all time has to be the 426. That motor has sent more chills up my spine than any other.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Chrysler started using Hemi's in 1950 on their production line.

 

Powerhouses for the era.

The 50's Gen 1 hemis were, but the 750 HP Gen II 426 was a beast. The 426 swept Daytona and put the fear of God into Ford. To this day, the basic 426 engine is arguably the best motor to come out of Chrysler corp. The V10 of the Viper and the SRT-10 aint bad, but I have see more truck pulls won with the 426 than anything, and the sound they produce can be matched by few engines that aren't pushing fighter jets. 

 

Ya'll know I'm a Mustang guy and I love the 429 Boss and the 427 Cammer and ya gotta love the HiPo 289 and I do love the Chevy 409, who wouldn't?, but my absolute favorite muscle engine of all time has to be the 426. That motor has sent more chills up my spine than any other.   :)

 

 

I had many Mopars in my younger days, never a hemi but raced a few at the track. The hot rodded 440 easily beat the stock hemi but that is apples to oranges.

 

383,413,440 and a punny 318 in a 74 Satellite.

 

Shoved them in all types of stuff, Diplomat, Fifth Avenue, Le Baron, Gremlin, Dart. The old Mopars rotted away quickly around here but i made sure the motors lived on.

Edited by jason str
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...