Quote:

Monte,
When I go to the big shootouts, and I see someone with a mopar bodied car, and an 800+ cubic inch nitrous combination, I have no problem rooting for them. This didn't happen overnight, I had my head stuck in the sand for years. I'm not close minded, just a little stubborn!

Tom,
I understand that desire to use the same car for multiple purposes. I just think T/D is advancing at a pace that makes that difficult, or darn near impossible.

Mad Scientist
You make it sound like Mopar guys are the only ones in love with big dumb torque motors. Every time a great flowing chevy head comes out, that makes great power at 10 grand, somebody figures out how to throw 200 more inches under it and shift at 7500. Is it faster? No. It's more tractable, repeatable, and easier on parts. Not everyone desires to be the tip of the spear.

Eric.
Do you have a problem with the Indy Maxx blocks, other than price point?

When I hear some of you talk about how good the chevy guys have it, I'm reminded of An American Tail with all the mice singing "There are no cats in America". I have many friends who run that stuff, and end up frustrated as well.



Well lets do some math.
The SR20 head is good for about 572 CID and maybe, maybe 8500 with a TR. A 1x4 will lose 3-400 rpm. This considered a "conventional" head for BBC's. What does Chrysler or anyone making aftermarket parts have to compare with this?
8500 rpm's with todays valve train parts is duck soup, IF THE BLOCK WILL TAKE THE CRANK SPEED, ASSOCIATED HARMONICS, FRICTION AND WINDAGE LOSSES.
My math for the 572 is 4.5 bore and 4.5 stroke.
So.....what if we used a 4.7 bore and a 4 inch stroke? You would be 555 CID. You would have less frictional losses (from a longer rod), less windage, less harmonics (frequency and order) and 4-500 more useable RPM.

I could cite a dozen more times similar scenarios. What point would it be? When you consider that all, ALL 2 valve engines are intake valve area limited, you have to make that up by bigger bores to gain more intake valve area. When you max out bore size you add stroke to gain CID. But you didn't add piston area (which is bore squared times .7854 times number of cylinders) so the HP will stay the same. All you did was design an engine that will be harder to hook (especially in the gear changes) and less forgiving on marginal tracks.

There will always be the crowd who think stoke equals HP. I'm am nowhere near as smart as Harold Bettes, so I will leave you with a direct quote from HIM.
Quote "The phrase 'I would rather have more torque than horsepower...' is often heard and misguided" Pretty straight forward isn't it? Here is one more to think about.
Quote "Commit this one to memory.There is an old saying that goes 'there is no replacement for displacement' and although that is novel, it is NOT necessarily the TRUTH"
Emphasis mine.

Just because you think it won't make it true. Horsepower is KING. To dispute this is stupid. C. Alston