Jon Kaase Modular 4v wins Engine Masters...
#21
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
The competition was not about peak power and torque. What wins is the highest combined average power and torque. This year, the scoring is alittle different, and includes peak numbers in the equation. Kaase's engine peaked over 800hp in testing. Mod motors are dog **** imo in the real world, but for this competition, there is no better platform. This year 4v mod motors are not legal.
#22
Hence... It almost always happens this way, since 1969... The engines that will always win... get banned for being too good for the competition. That's not a slight toward any type of engine. I'm just noting the truth of the matter. NASCAR did it after the "CAMMER" and NHRA did it in 1997 after the DOHC smashed its competition in a Top Fuel setup.
We should also note: The 5 peak hp thing not only doesn't matter, but these engines were in the same c.i. range, considering LSX and Mod. Calling one "little" and the other a "massive boat anchor" when the cubes are this close simply doesn't make sense. Especially when the "boat anchor" proved better than the... paper weight.
Was this Kaase's 5th win? Man... Didn't he bring a Pontiac entry once?
This year 4v mod motors are not legal.
We should also note: The 5 peak hp thing not only doesn't matter, but these engines were in the same c.i. range, considering LSX and Mod. Calling one "little" and the other a "massive boat anchor" when the cubes are this close simply doesn't make sense. Especially when the "boat anchor" proved better than the... paper weight.
Was this Kaase's 5th win? Man... Didn't he bring a Pontiac entry once?
#23
TECH Senior Member
We should also note: The 5 peak hp thing not only doesn't matter, but these engines were in the same c.i. range, considering LSX and Mod. Calling one "little" and the other a "massive boat anchor" when the cubes are this close simply doesn't make sense. Especially when the "boat anchor" proved better than the... paper weight.
Calling one "little" and the other "massive" makes perfect sense considering its the truth, displacement is NOT the engine's physical size. The mod motors are HUGE, 4.6, 5.4 etc, doesn't matter, they are physically massive, heavy engines, where as the LSx, being 4.8L or 7+L are physically much smaller, and lighter.
Which would you call massive and which would you call small? Both are close to the same CI... (the engine on the right is actually more CI)
#24
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yet both of those engines fit quite nicely in the cars they were designed to go in. So unless you are trying to swap an engine into a small space, it doesn't really matter. And for the record I would have no problem swapping an LSx motor into, say, a notchback or something like that.
#26
Yeah, people make far too big a deal about the exterior size of the modular engines. It's been such a "big deal" to argue even the weight, most simply assume the new 5L must be a 500 lb engine.
It fits under the hood and between the fenders of a Fox body Mustang and more... That's not exactly the widest car in the world, for those 2 people who didn't know. For that matter, they've been installed into Mazda Miata's... MX-5 is one of the smallest cars available.
What should one think, though... 'Hmm... I would sure like to use that engine with most potential, but dang, it looks too big!' Nonsense.
It fits under the hood and between the fenders of a Fox body Mustang and more... That's not exactly the widest car in the world, for those 2 people who didn't know. For that matter, they've been installed into Mazda Miata's... MX-5 is one of the smallest cars available.
What should one think, though... 'Hmm... I would sure like to use that engine with most potential, but dang, it looks too big!' Nonsense.
#28
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't doubt that this mod motor was probably quite expensive, but none of the engines in this contest were "budget builds."
#29
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (18)
I really do think it goes to show the capabilities of the 4v heads. You can't call AFR or Trick flow and buy a set of 4v heads and bolt them on for an extra 60rwhp. Its a work of art and skill to really get a set of 4v heads to flow the kind of air to support that power level in a stock casting.
#30
For example: The last race of the season had 9 Fords entered and 12 Chevy's. That's one race and I'm not looking at them all to see, but it's been lopsided for 50yrs or more. Same story for NATIONWIDE... 15 GM's and 7 Fords. Not exactly even. 17 GM's to 3 Fords in the Camping World Trucks series... all that is "as of" the 2013 Ecoboost 200,300,400.
Plus, we know for a fact that NASCAR, for example, has changed rules specifically to slow Fords. After the 1998 Daytona 500, Fords started winning and NASCAR forced a smaller rear wing for the 2nd time in a season, specifically to slow the Fords... It worked.
We also know they did the same thing, BANNING OUTRIGHT, the use of Fords' "CAMMER" 427 even before its absolute dominance in 1964. Later, NHRA also banned it, as always, by rule changes. Now, it can only be used in "vintage" class racing.
Ford big blocks(385 series I think) were BANNED from NHRA... by rule changes that just happened to make their bore spacing illegal.
With that said, why dont you list up all the rule changes that have been made over the years to slow the Chevy's down Irunelevens?
We're already totally
I really do think it goes to show the capabilities of the 4v heads. You can't call AFR or Trick flow and buy a set of 4v heads and bolt them on for an extra 60rwhp. Its a work of art and skill to really get a set of 4v heads to flow the kind of air to support that power level in a stock casting.
#31
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
That works both ways. They played with spoiler rules to the cars in 1995/6 when the then new Monte Carlo's were laying an unholy whipping on the Thunderbirds. Taurus was new for 1998 and nobody really new what they had until the real races started. Common template has eneded that discussion.
#32
TECH Senior Member
And yet both of those engines fit quite nicely in the cars they were designed to go in. So unless you are trying to swap an engine into a small space, it doesn't really matter. And for the record I would have no problem swapping an LSx motor into, say, a notchback or something like that.
"And its not just about getting the engine to fit (although im sure in most cases it take quite a bit of cutting to get a mod motor to fit in most smaller engine bays), but its about where it fits. With a smaller engine you can mount it lower and closer to the center of the chassis for better all around performance." from post #17.
It fits under the hood and between the fenders of a Fox body Mustang and more... That's not exactly the widest car in the world, for those 2 people who didn't know. For that matter, they've been installed into Mazda Miata's... MX-5 is one of the smallest cars available.
Why do so many high cost independent brand supercars run LSx engines and not mod motors? It can't just be cost of performance...
What should one think, though... 'Hmm... I would sure like to use that engine with most potential, but dang, it looks too big!' Nonsense.
Or maybe
"I want a light/small engine that makes a ton of power without breaking the bank... Well that rules out modular engines..."
Or
"Damn I might as well go with a BBC/BBF/BB hemi, its the same size/weight but WAY more power potential for cheaper."
Salt for the wounds:
4.6L Modular compared to 520ci (8.5L) BB hemi.
Problem?
#33
That works both ways. They played with spoiler rules to the cars in 1995/6 when the then new Monte Carlo's were laying an unholy whipping on the Thunderbirds. Taurus was new for 1998 and nobody really new what they had until the real races started. Common template has eneded that discussion.
#36
Conversely, the Dodge is sitting on a tire, lowering it as compared to the mod and if they were both a a crate, the Dodge would look smaller anyway, because it would crush the milk crate. If each was on a tire though, the Elephant would look bigger.
Side note: It's more nonsense to point out the cubes of the Chrylser vs the Ford because we're ONLY comparing exterior size.
PS I've never heard of anyone using a 426 Hemi in a Miata...
Fixed it.
There is more money in that thing then some ppl houses
#37
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
To a point, I disagree... To a point, I do agree. The mod is missing several pieces, including an intake, timing cover, crankshaft... apparently. My eyes are getting older and I have a bit of trouble with some of these.
Conversely, the Dodge is sitting on a tire, lowering it as compared to the mod and if they were both a a crate, the Dodge would look smaller anyway, because it would crush the milk crate. If each was on a tire though, the Elephant would look bigger.
Side note: It's more nonsense to point out the cubes of the Chrylser vs the Ford because we're ONLY comparing exterior size.
PS I've never heard of anyone using a 426 Hemi in a Miata...
Fixed it.
If they live in a cardboard box or the like... I mean, sure, if you're living in a 20yr + old trailer, I agree because it's value has dropped, regardless condition. Even so, these modular engines typically use not only factory heads, but crank and block as well. Machine work simply cannot cost all that much for a machine shop. Their bigger costs are in labor hours and not parts.
Conversely, the Dodge is sitting on a tire, lowering it as compared to the mod and if they were both a a crate, the Dodge would look smaller anyway, because it would crush the milk crate. If each was on a tire though, the Elephant would look bigger.
Side note: It's more nonsense to point out the cubes of the Chrylser vs the Ford because we're ONLY comparing exterior size.
PS I've never heard of anyone using a 426 Hemi in a Miata...
Fixed it.
If they live in a cardboard box or the like... I mean, sure, if you're living in a 20yr + old trailer, I agree because it's value has dropped, regardless condition. Even so, these modular engines typically use not only factory heads, but crank and block as well. Machine work simply cannot cost all that much for a machine shop. Their bigger costs are in labor hours and not parts.
#38
My only question with that intake was, why did they use it... Did the rules require factory stuff? Anyway, I still think labor cost him far more than the engine parts and I suspect he had several of the parts before he even considered building a 5.4L for the challenge.
#40
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
They were essentially the same size before the second rule change in 1998. Plus, NASCAR forced not only the Taurus, but also T-bird to change that spoiler in 1998. It slowed them, no question. The only places they were allowed to use the the 2nd rendition(as opposed to 3rd), if memory serves here, was on Super Speedways.
Point of the story is that both manufacturers were fighting and monkeying with the rules in those days.