Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41D9A978.9DC328D9@cox.net... > Brian? "prehistoric pushrod engine"? Say what? There is no modern OHC > engine that compare their horsepower and torque to any engine designed > and sold to the public during the fifties. When the public demanded > power, guess what, they brought back the old Hemi, and of course > performance cars such as Corvette, or the Ford and Chevrolet police cars > never stopped producing their small blocks. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just answering his question. There's no replacement for displacment. -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41D9A978.9DC328D9@cox.net... > Brian? "prehistoric pushrod engine"? Say what? There is no modern OHC > engine that compare their horsepower and torque to any engine designed > and sold to the public during the fifties. When the public demanded > power, guess what, they brought back the old Hemi, and of course > performance cars such as Corvette, or the Ford and Chevrolet police cars > never stopped producing their small blocks. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just answering his question. There's no replacement for displacment. -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41D9A978.9DC328D9@cox.net... > Brian? "prehistoric pushrod engine"? Say what? There is no modern OHC > engine that compare their horsepower and torque to any engine designed > and sold to the public during the fifties. When the public demanded > power, guess what, they brought back the old Hemi, and of course > performance cars such as Corvette, or the Ford and Chevrolet police cars > never stopped producing their small blocks. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just answering his question. There's no replacement for displacment. -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like,
can you find one with a record at: http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories are far less than three litters. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > answering his question. > There's no replacement for displacment. > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like,
can you find one with a record at: http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories are far less than three litters. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > answering his question. > There's no replacement for displacment. > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
"... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like,
can you find one with a record at: http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories are far less than three litters. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > answering his question. > There's no replacement for displacment. > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
That is about right for a F1 engine although, I think the Ferrari one can
rev up to around 18,000 rpm. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41DAEC72.F527EC3@cox.net... > "... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like, > can you find one with a record at: > http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories > are far less than three litters. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > > answering his question. > > There's no replacement for displacment. > > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
That is about right for a F1 engine although, I think the Ferrari one can
rev up to around 18,000 rpm. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41DAEC72.F527EC3@cox.net... > "... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like, > can you find one with a record at: > http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories > are far less than three litters. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > > answering his question. > > There's no replacement for displacment. > > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
That is about right for a F1 engine although, I think the Ferrari one can
rev up to around 18,000 rpm. Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message news:41DAEC72.F527EC3@cox.net... > "... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm." Like, > can you find one with a record at: > http://www.nhra.com/stats/natrecord.html ? Where some record categories > are far less than three litters. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ > > Cherokee-Ltd wrote: > > > > Hey Bill, it didn't take too long to offend you this year! lol > > The OP was asking how/why a 3.5 could have more hp than the 4.0. Fact is > > that hp ratings are derived from torque and rpm. If you can build a small > > engine that spins really fast, you can support a claim for higher > > horsepower.... like a 3L F1 engine putting out 900 hp at 16000 rpm. > > Don't worry, I'm still a big fan of 400-500 cu-in motors, I was just > > answering his question. > > There's no replacement for displacment. > > -Brian |
Re: New at this, trying to understand horse power
I'm not doubting that, what I'm saying is they can't produce the
grunt horsepower needed to accelerate a mass through the quarter mile in record times, like an American push rod engine, sure they're great for going around in circles like an Indy car and sounding like a bunch of little bees. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/ Dave Milne wrote: > > That is about right for a F1 engine although, I think the Ferrari one can > rev up to around 18,000 rpm. > > Dave Milne, Scotland > '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands