Carbed 6.0 HP numbers - check this article out!
08-09-2014, 06:06 AM
#1
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carbed 6.0 HP numbers - check this article out! http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...e/viewall.html
Now tell me, am I missing something here or does this thing seem at least 30hp down from where it should be?
Now tell me, am I missing something here or does this thing seem at least 30hp down from where it should be?
08-09-2014, 11:25 AM
#5
10 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Martin Mi
Posts: 1,068
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The big thing that sticks out to me isn't as much the power it made, but rather WHERE it made it. Were all swinging our 6.0s over 7000. Bret made peak power at 6500 with this one. That's pretty impressive IMHO. And the torque numbers are pretty wicked as well. Besides being a solid roller, talk about some ODD cam specs compared to what were used to? Its interesting. Eric L
08-09-2014, 03:24 PM
#7
head/intake and cam for 8000rpm, and dyno shows 6500 peak? thats PHR for ya.
the whole truth is NEVER in the engine builds they cover for the engine master stuff.
edit, I just read the article - solid roller .810 lift!, and I guarantee those cam specs are FALSE
Trending Topics
08-09-2014, 08:05 PM
#8
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading up on the engine masters challenge, at least back in 2009, apparently scoring was based on average torque and HP numbers from 3000 - 7000 rpm.
Makes sense that they could have designed the cam to bring in strong torque through the entire rev range, and peak HP early and hold out right through to max revs.
3pedals, is this the same Bret Bowers that designed your cam that made some astronomical HP numbers?
Makes sense that they could have designed the cam to bring in strong torque through the entire rev range, and peak HP early and hold out right through to max revs.
3pedals, is this the same Bret Bowers that designed your cam that made some astronomical HP numbers?
08-10-2014, 06:26 PM
#12
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah it'd be interesting to see the correction factor and atmospheric conditions, of all of the above dyno sessions. I don't think a lot of these motors are really making as much power as most think they are. Making near 600hp with under 400 cubic inch isn't an easy feat for a street engine.
08-10-2014, 07:03 PM
#13
so many different ideas and formulas for hp based on lbs/trap speed. I never did see the correction factor on my N/A motor, but heres it's performance:
131mph @ 3505lbs stock 6.0 displacement
Wallace racing calculator says 631 flywheel based on mph/lbs
131mph @ 3505lbs stock 6.0 displacement
Wallace racing calculator says 631 flywheel based on mph/lbs
Last edited by 3pedals; 08-10-2014 at 07:11 PM.
08-11-2014, 04:03 AM
#16
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah interesting. It does seem unrealistic that these simple combo's could make over 600hp. But pro systems calculator says you were making 622hp, and Moroso slide says basically 605hp.
From now on, I am sticking with the Moroso which also seems more accurate with other cars performance I am familiar with.
Although I am wondering if there would be a way to dyno test an engine with the torque converter in place.
Torque converters multiply torque, and HP is merely a calculation of torque at a given RPM. Are torque converters actually increasing flywheel output even at the very top end of the rev range? Which theoretically this could explain why we see engine combo's that by rights should make no more than 550-560hp, are being calculated as making 580-600hp with the quarter mile efforts achieved?
I don't have a definitive answer anyway.
Oh and yeah, I believe you were probably running a stick shift 3pedals.. just theorising on the more common auto/stall situation.
From now on, I am sticking with the Moroso which also seems more accurate with other cars performance I am familiar with.
Although I am wondering if there would be a way to dyno test an engine with the torque converter in place.
Torque converters multiply torque, and HP is merely a calculation of torque at a given RPM. Are torque converters actually increasing flywheel output even at the very top end of the rev range? Which theoretically this could explain why we see engine combo's that by rights should make no more than 550-560hp, are being calculated as making 580-600hp with the quarter mile efforts achieved?
I don't have a definitive answer anyway.
Oh and yeah, I believe you were probably running a stick shift 3pedals.. just theorising on the more common auto/stall situation.
08-11-2014, 09:25 AM
#18
Yeah interesting. It does seem unrealistic that these simple combo's could make over 600hp. But pro systems calculator says you were making 622hp, and Moroso slide says basically 605hp.
From now on, I am sticking with the Moroso which also seems more accurate with other cars performance I am familiar with.
Although I am wondering if there would be a way to dyno test an engine with the torque converter in place.
Torque converters multiply torque, and HP is merely a calculation of torque at a given RPM. Are torque converters actually increasing flywheel output even at the very top end of the rev range? Which theoretically this could explain why we see engine combo's that by rights should make no more than 550-560hp, are being calculated as making 580-600hp with the quarter mile efforts achieved?
I don't have a definitive answer anyway.
Oh and yeah, I believe you were probably running a stick shift 3pedals.. just theorising on the more common auto/stall situation.
From now on, I am sticking with the Moroso which also seems more accurate with other cars performance I am familiar with.
Although I am wondering if there would be a way to dyno test an engine with the torque converter in place.
Torque converters multiply torque, and HP is merely a calculation of torque at a given RPM. Are torque converters actually increasing flywheel output even at the very top end of the rev range? Which theoretically this could explain why we see engine combo's that by rights should make no more than 550-560hp, are being calculated as making 580-600hp with the quarter mile efforts achieved?
I don't have a definitive answer anyway.
Oh and yeah, I believe you were probably running a stick shift 3pedals.. just theorising on the more common auto/stall situation.
Out of all the calculators, I like this one that Doug found:
http://www.wallaceracing.com/hpcalculatorquarter.php
Based on my experience and actual dyno results, I think it is accurate.
