Quote:

---

.........and 409 rwhp (roughly 545 at the crank, assuming they're running a torqueflite),........

---

Quote:

---

Just read the Car Craft 512 stroker build and the dyno numbers seem pretty low to me. Especially for the money spent. 409hp, 411tq for $8K?? Yikes! Not much bang for the buck there.

I was thinking about doing a stroker for my next build, but if that's all you can get, why should I??


http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1211_rb_series_mopar_440ci_engine_upgrade_to_512ci/

---

Those numbers sound reasonable given RWHP and through a lossy drivetrain like a TF727. I had a thread about this a few weeks ago when I dyno'd my 500 stroker but a loss of 20% from crank to wheels isn't out of the question.

What you make with a stroker has a lot to do with having a top end that can fully feed that bottom end. If the engine is fairly mildly cammed with iron heads the numbers ain't bad at all.

Don't listen to the naysayers up here who bash those numbers and can get those with a SB stroker or even just a SB. The 512 stroker will make those numbers at 4500 RPM while the non-stroker will need 6000 to get there. It's not all about about how much but when it comes in. If you are dragging, yeah the peak numbers matter. For a street car, where the numbers come in matters more.

My stroker came in at 384HP/441TQ IIRC at the wheels. That's all in at 5200/4200 RPMs with a very flat curve. My car is street driven and is a blast to have it all in there at street RPMs to enjoy. Yeah, my motor is way undercammed and I am leaving a lot of top end on the table. Just remember, you add to the top end (to get the higher peak numbers) usually it has to come from somewhere else (low end).

Ask the guys up here with the 318 strokers if they can make that 500 HP with 16" of vacuum at idle, pump gas, and have it all in by 5K RPM. Possible, yes, but likely with very nice (read full roller) drivetrain and extensive head work. So all the sudden that 8K doesn't sound so high. Also, where are your dyno slips....

I digress but my point is, the numbers aren't bad for a street engine. Yeah you could make the same numbers with a smaller/cheaper motor but at a higher RPM with less driveability most likely. It just depends what you want.

Not to bash SB strokers or anyone's build here. Just pointing out that some people here like to compare apples to oranges.

Quote:

---

thats rear wheel horsepower.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

.........and 409 rwhp (roughly 545 at the crank, assuming they're running a torqueflite),........

---

Really?

---

Quote:

---

another factor; maybe these guys used an honest dyno rather than the typical magazine dyno, .

---

Quote:

---

Just read the Car Craft 512 stroker build and the dyno numbers seem pretty low to me. Especially for the money spent. 409hp, 411tq for $8K?? Yikes! Not much bang for the buck there.

I was thinking about doing a stroker for my next build, but if that's all you can get, why should I??


http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1211_rb_series_mopar_440ci_engine_upgrade_to_512ci/

---

Maybe the engine builders choice of components makes a difference What would you expect from a jouralist compared to a racer Do you remember the old adage, don't listen(trust) to anything you hear, in words or print, and half of what you (actually )see :think A decent pump gas 512 stroker motor will make a lot more HP and torque than they got Been there, done that My first 511 C.I. (4.250 stroke with a 4.375 bore) 400 block with Ross 22.0 CC dish pistons that made 9.25 to 1 actual comp. ratio with a set of mildly ported big valve 906 iron heads and a six pak with a custom ground solid roller motor made 612 HP at 5600 RPM and 544 Ft. lbs on CA pump swill back in 2003 on a very stingy DTS engine dyno Knowing what I know now it would make closer to 700 HP on pump gas with better heads, better quench and better rocker arms You can to PM me if you like.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Just read the Car Craft 512 stroker build and the dyno numbers seem pretty low to me. Especially for the money spent. 409hp, 411tq for $8K?? Yikes! Not much bang for the buck there.

I was thinking about doing a stroker for my next build, but if that's all you can get, why should I??


http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1211_rb_series_mopar_440ci_engine_upgrade_to_512ci/

---

Knowing what I know now it would make closer to 700 HP on pump gas with better heads, better quench and better rocker arms You can to PM me if you like.

---

Thanks! When I get ready, I will do that!

Quote:

---

A car woth a 4.56 gear can do X work in say 10 seconds where same everything but a 3.23 gear may take 15 seconds to complete the task.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A car woth a 4.56 gear can do X work in say 10 seconds where same everything but a 3.23 gear may take 15 seconds to complete the task.

---

But its not completing the same task. It takes longer because it is doing more work.

---

Quote:

---

The mufflers used and final gearing play a huge factor as hp and tq numbers are the amount of work done and over what time period.
A car woth a 4.56 gear can do X work in say 10 seconds where same everything but a 3.23 gear may take 15 seconds to complete the task.
restricted mufflers and a 3.23 gear may be a 28% loss where open headers and 4.88's may be 10 or 12% loss!

---

I have done back to back testing on a car with a pair of 2.5 inch I.D. old turbo muffs and a side exit exhaust pipe in front of the rear tires, 440 motor in a 1969 Dart with Hooker 1 7/8 fenderwell headers and 3.5 inch collectors, that car picked up .84 ET, from 12.23 to 11.39 ET and 8.2 MPH ,from 109.5 MPH to 117.86 MPH by removing the complete exhaust system. My 440 block 464 C.I. pump gas stroker picked up .04 ET and .2 MPH in the eight mile by removing the three inch full length exhaust system that the muffs are mounted behind the rear end housing, not worth taking off, IMO My message is the exhaust can make a difference, smalere system make more han larger systems As far as gear ratio changes my 518 C.I. low deck pump gas stroker didn't change very much going from 3.73 gears to 4.10, including 3.91 in between, the stupid car ran 10.39 to 10.43 ET at 128.6 MPH with all three gear ratio in the car on different weekends with very similar weather I've seen similar results in other cars also The torque converter can make more differences than the rear gear ratio can on some applications

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A car woth a 4.56 gear can do X work in say 10 seconds where same everything but a 3.23 gear may take 15 seconds to complete the task.

---

But its not completing the same task. It takes longer because it is doing more work.

---

You are completing the same task!

horse power is the rate at which work is done so doing X amount of work in less time = more horse power better gearing (more mechanical advantage) allows the work to be done quicker and thus equates to higher horse power number on your measuring device.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower

---