Quote:

Quote:

You boys about done with the crap so the rest of us here can try and learn something?



Ted, I am trying to learn something here......

Monte says he HAS and WILL win, in a heads up class, with a 632 engine, which has a 4.6 bore x 4.75 stroke,..... but Tim claims that an engine with what he himself calls "stupid" and "Geometrically retarded" bore/stroke like that will not only Never win a heads up race, but will Never EVER win....

Tom says these 2 are very sharp and when they talk, he listens....yet he wants to build a 4.7 bore x 5.5 Minimum stroke engine.....

It is confusing and to me very contradicting statements by 3 guys that each appear to know their stuff. But they all can't be correct....



THere are more than 1 way to skin a cat. Just because Monte and I disagree on engine geometry is not a big deal. What is a big deal is guys like you who have no compass. I have fired customers like you, and I'm proud I have done it. If you don't like what I say, blow off. You can't learn, won't learn.

If I was building what Tom is doing, I would build a 4.560 bore (bigger if I could get it) and use a 4.00 stroke for 523 inches. I would use the absolute longest rod in the tallest block I could buy. My thought is 1250-1275 HP at 8800. That should be high 6's if the rest of the combo is right. And 8800 is not a lot with todays valve train.

See how simple that is.


BTW, it would have 2x4's on it because I think the silliest thing you can do is handicap a package with a kinked up intake.


Flame on keyboard hero.

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