|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355328
12/20/12 04:34 PM
12/20/12 04:34 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160
Texas
dannysbee
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160
Texas
|
I for one don't have a Mopar that weighs 4000 lbs runs in the 11's and gets 20 mpg. I am going to be polite and set back and listen. He may not be making 600 ft lbs at 2000 but he certainly has something going on. Your definately not going to get all the details with the warm welcome he has received so far. Merry Christmas
Getting old just means you were smarter than some and luckier than others.
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1355330
12/20/12 05:54 PM
12/20/12 05:54 PM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,562
Downtown Roebuck Ont
Twostick
Still wishing...
|
Still wishing...
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,562
Downtown Roebuck Ont
|
Quote:
pretty easy to figure out, he has an overdrive trans and the car runs on a 350cfm carb w/ tiny jets. Good for him. Now get back to the track, un-cap it, jet it up, and run it... I bet you pick up a few tenths... you will have to spin it a tad higher than 5k 
The mileage is easy to figure, how he gets 600 ft/lbs @ 2000 without 500+ cubes or boost is the puzzle. What and where does it peak?
Kevin
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1355331
12/20/12 05:55 PM
12/20/12 05:55 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 793
Utah
topbrent
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 793
Utah
|
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: dannysbee]
#1355332
12/20/12 06:08 PM
12/20/12 06:08 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
I for one don't have a Mopar that weighs 4000 lbs runs in the 11's and gets 20 mpg. I am going to be polite and set back and listen. He may not be making 600 ft lbs at 2000 but he certainly has something going on. Your definately not going to get all the details with the warm welcome he has received so far. Merry Christmas
Danny if you notice he has been a member since 2008 and he already said he doesn't usually post here for whatever reason.
I too would like to see the dyno sheet , 600 lb/ft at 2000 rpm is a monumental feat ...
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: JohnRR]
#1355333
12/20/12 06:34 PM
12/20/12 06:34 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 293
Kansas City Metro
mbogina
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 293
Kansas City Metro
|
600 Ft Lbs at 2000 RPM is 229 HP, 600 Ft Lbs at 3000 RPM is 343 HP, at 4000 it is 457 HP, at 5000 it is 571 HP,.....a 600 Ft Lb motor from 2000 to 4000 RPM certainly sounds feasible....
Be a Rebel- Break the Laws of Physics!
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: mbogina]
#1355334
12/20/12 06:37 PM
12/20/12 06:37 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
600 Ft Lbs at 2000 RPM is 229 HP, 600 Ft Lbs at 3000 RPM is 343 HP, at 4000 it is 457 HP, at 5000 it is 571 HP,.....a 600 Ft Lb motor from 2000 to 4000 RPM certainly sounds feasible....
thanks ,I was wondering what the HP numbers could be at the specific RPMs ...
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: JohnRR]
#1355335
12/20/12 07:01 PM
12/20/12 07:01 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
Chargervic
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
600 Ft Lbs at 2000 RPM is 229 HP, 600 Ft Lbs at 3000 RPM is 343 HP, at 4000 it is 457 HP, at 5000 it is 571 HP,.....a 600 Ft Lb motor from 2000 to 4000 RPM certainly sounds feasible....
thanks ,I was wondering what the HP numbers could be at the specific RPMs ...
Okay, guys, numbers coming later tonight when I get time to present the facts. I'm busy washing floors and cleaning house 'cause my grandkids start arriving tomorrow for Christmas. Thanks to the people who are politely waiting for this. When I get the next post done it probably be my last for another 4 years, too much criticism from "experts".
Remember, I've been at this since 1960 and one of my teachers learned directly from the Ramchargers in their shop in 1967
Merry Christmas, Vic
68 Charger 451 / 518
65 Cuda 273 / 833
04 Cummins 2500 2WD
02 Grand Caravan
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355336
12/20/12 07:07 PM
12/20/12 07:07 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 293
Kansas City Metro
mbogina
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 293
Kansas City Metro
|
The math is basic, TQ x RPM/5250 = HP. as you can see, at 5250 RPM TQ will always to equal to HP. The low RPM values are what makes Diesels have impressive TQ numbers, 600 Ft Lbs at 1500 RPM is only 171 HP, but will lug that trailer down the road efficiently.
Be a Rebel- Break the Laws of Physics!
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: dangina]
#1355339
12/20/12 09:24 PM
12/20/12 09:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813
Ontario,Canada
brads70
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813
Ontario,Canada
|
Quote:
If you have more info on the build I'd be very interested in reading on it - I plan on doing a 451 within the next year or so - the more info I can read on the swap before hand the better!
 great combo you'll love it.... revs like a motorcycle 
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: mbogina]
#1355340
12/21/12 02:29 AM
12/21/12 02:29 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
Chargervic
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
|
Quote:
600 Ft Lbs at 2000 RPM is 229 HP, 600 Ft Lbs at 3000 RPM is 343 HP, at 4000 it is 457 HP, at 5000 it is 571 HP,.....a 600 Ft Lb motor from 2000 to 4000 RPM certainly sounds feasible....
Hi Guys,
Here’s hoping this post helps those looking for help and doesn’t create a poop storm for the others.
Before I get too deep into this I would ask that the readers read ALL of the story and not pick out small things out of context.
Yes, the numbers I used for my own engine do come from Desk Top Dyno, BUT, I have been using this tool for over 12 years in engine design work and know that if you feed it the truth, it tells you the truth within a couple of percentage points. This has been confirmed by other engine builders I know, and also by an engine test I just completed a short while ago.
This other engine is a 496 low deck stroker built to almost the exact same specs as my engine with two exceptions. The CR is 10.2:1 instead of 10.55:1 which is what I have in mine. The other is of course, the extra cubic inches. They both use the same heads, cam and Six Pack carburetion. The 496 has lighter, shorter pistons due to the longer stoke but that won’t affect performance on the dyno. For a point of interest, we ran a test with only the center carb and made 405 HP, then added only one outboard carb at a time time found that the max HP was available with just one outboard. The second one did not add any power. Of course, most of us with Six Packs just like the eye candy. If you haven't got a Hemi under the hood, a Six Pack is the nest sexiest thing, right?
Here are the numbers for the 496.
Desk Top numbers are first, then the real dyno numbers.
................ HP TQ HP TQ
RPM 3000 324 566 321 561
RPM 3500 381 572 387 580
RPM 4000 431 566 448 588
RPM 4500 470 548 489 571
RPM 5000 491 515 491 518
These are the only places where the two charts have similar RPM values. The max HP on the real dyno occurred at 4800 @ 496.7 HP . Max torque occurred at 3900 @ 590 lb/ft.
As you can see, the overall numbers were very close to each other and, actually the Desk Top Dyno numbers were a bit conservative. For those of you who think that the DTD is from fairly tale land have only seen results from people who enter garbage in and get garbage out. I use the actual facts of the engine as built and enter real flow numbers for the heads, not the generic stuff in the program.
Now for the numbers from my engine which seem to have stirred up a lot of conversation.
I am including the numbers from 2000 RPM to 5500, although I shift at 5000 due to the heavy hydraulic roller lifters and light valve springs and try to avoid any valve float.
............... HP TQ
RPM 2000 229 602
RPM 2500 288 606
RPM 3000 348 609
RPM 3500 403 605
RPM 4000 453 594
RPM 4500 499 569
RPM 5000 502 527
RPM 5500 496 474
Now, the naysayers can dispute the numbers at 2000 RPM and I won’t defend those numbers, for the reason is that my converter is a 2700 RPM stall and therefore I don’t see that RPM under load. However, all those that have ridden in the car both before and after this upgrade will attest that there is a huge amount of torque at those low numbers that wasn’t there before. I’m not talking about a bunch of chebbie guys that wouldn’t know torque if hit them on the head, I’m talking about lifelong Mopar guys who have been in many Mopar hot rods. I have 9.5” wide street tires on it and they are nowhere near enough tire.
For those who said they’d like a ride…. if you’re anywhere near me in the summer, you’re on. Rides freely given. The reason I claimed 515 HP is due to the 115 MPH speed at the track. If you enter that data into the accepted formula in the racing world, it equates to 515 HP at the flywheel. I hope that doesn’t start another controversy. Even if it is not 100% accurate, I can tell you that it is still a blast to drive and I can go well over 250 miles on a stock tank of fuel. That, my friends, is a fun ride.
As for the inevitable question of why my small engine makes more HP & TQ than the bigger one, that is something I struggled with during the computer design phase quite a bit. I ran the numbers many times to make sure I wasn’t missing anything, but finally came to the conclusion that the cam and heads are too small for the bigger displacement and are a perfect fit for the 451. Another small reason for the 496 real dyno numbers being on the light side may be that it is a fresh engine and could easily make more real power after a few hundred miles on the road. We also didn’t spend a lot of time tuning it on the dyno. This is a street engine and we weren’t after the last couple of HP at full RPM. This stroker is replacing a stock HP 383 in a 69 Sport Satellite and my buddy says “I’ll probably notice the difference”. For sure!
I am willing to share any of the finer details of either build with those who are genuinely interested, but please PM me individually. I will answer them as soon as the holidays are over. My family arrives in the morning, so I won’t be on here till after Christmas.
I also have the full documentation of the 518 installation in the Charger for those who would like it. It is well detailed and has several pictures. Will share.
68 Charger 451 / 518
65 Cuda 273 / 833
04 Cummins 2500 2WD
02 Grand Caravan
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355341
12/21/12 02:40 AM
12/21/12 02:40 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
Chargervic
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 42
British Columbia Canada
|
Too bad this website can't see the difference between a comma and an apostrophe. My spelling and composing are taking a hit.
For those who asked, here's a picture of the car. I tried to upload it before but couldn't.
Have a Mopar Christmas and a Hemi New Year.
68 Charger 451 / 518
65 Cuda 273 / 833
04 Cummins 2500 2WD
02 Grand Caravan
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355342
12/21/12 02:52 AM
12/21/12 02:52 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Too bad this website can't see the difference between a comma and an apostrophe. My spelling and composing are taking a hit.
For those who asked, here's a picture of the car. I tried to upload it before but couldn't.
Have a Mopar Christmas and a Hemi New Year.
None of your attachments work
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355343
12/21/12 02:54 AM
12/21/12 02:54 AM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
451Mopar
master
|
master
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
|
Sounds like it has alot of dynamic compression, 10.55:1 with a small cam should build a bunch of low end torque if you can prevent detonation.
The build sounds much like my 505" stroked 440, 10.3:1 compression, mild ported stealth heads, Comp 23-712-9 (XR286HR-10) hydraulic roller cam, Hughes lifters, smith brothers pushrods, 1.7:1 cat stainless rockers (I know they are cheap, but I'm experimenting with them), RPM intake, Holley 770 HP carb, TTI 1-7/8" headers with the 2.5" TTI "X" exhaust. I have the Keisler SS700 (0.68 od) 5-speed on order (since early August), so hopefully in 2013 I will have some MPG numbers, and chassis dyno numbers. Right now the stock clutch slips at WOT.
Almost forgot the rear axle is 4.10:1 with 27" tall tires. With the 0.68 OD, that is 2.79:1 drive ratio in OD.
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355345
12/21/12 03:08 AM
12/21/12 03:08 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Too bad this website can't see the difference between a comma and an apostrophe. My spelling and composing are taking a hit.
For those who asked, here's a picture of the car. I tried to upload it before but couldn't.
Have a Mopar Christmas and a Hemi New Year.
None of your attachments work
Sorry about the picture not coming up. Not sure why, I did what the site asked for, I thought. Any hints?
If the pics are on your computer, hit the browse
button then find your pic then double click the pic
then hit the submit on here
|
|
|
Re: 68 Charger 451 engine build 25 MPG and 515 HP
[Re: Chargervic]
#1355347
12/21/12 03:49 AM
12/21/12 03:49 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Cool... now do me a favor and post up your dyno sheet... I'm trying to compare your numbers thanks
|
|
|
|
|
