When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Maybe a electric motor. But if your internal combustion engine is at 0 rpm it's not ******* running. Thus not producing ****.
Actually you can't just look at hp/rpm. Some engines will make the same hp but less tq thus being less powerful in the same rpm span.
Look up engine masters where the furds finisged 1 2 3 and you will see what I'm talking about. The 4th place ls out powered the top 3. There were places in the power band the furds were off 40+ tq while making similar power. I averaged the power from 5k to the 7k (typical rpm swing when racing) mandated shut off once and it was astounding how much more power the ls made......to come in 4th
We were "conversing" about tq & hp. Or power(gigawatt) for you or something. Now you're bringing up "electric" **** & rpm. Lol. Let's talk more about 0 rpm.
Yes you can. It's the same thing backwards. Same rpm "span"?
Yes it matters. Especially if you want to compare engines. Any engine can make alot of power boosted. Those junk *** 4cyl you mention have a **** power curve and are more like on off switches once they make big power and they take a week to spool.
For what?
I'm not gonna splain everything to your dumbass. It's obvious how your car runs you don't pay much attention to even the basics.
Just like i already said you could only look at tq/rpm and throw hp away.
Saying it's all tq is saying precisely what it is. The twisting motion a engine makes is only tq. How the **** do you have tq at 0 rpm? Are you anticipating tq??.....tq gonna fly out of nowhere??
This is why you can't have a conversation with your dumbass........tq at 0 rpm......wtf
It's a full on race engine that only went .3 quicker than the supposedly fastest sealed car.
Just curious what rpm the torque peaks on a bolt on ls6? You say the coyotes dont run well up top, looking for a comparison.
Nah....he's just saying a modular/coyote can't do it.
Actually you can't just look at hp/rpm. Some engines will make the same hp but less tq thus being less powerful in the same rpm span.
Look up engine masters where the furds finisged 1 2 3 and you will see what I'm talking about. The 4th place ls out powered the top 3. There were places in the power band the furds were off 40+ tq while making similar power. I averaged the power from 5k to the 7k (typical rpm swing when racing) mandated shut off once and it was astounding how much more power the ls made......to come in 4th
MOD motor was anyone’s guess. The experienced crew worked the tune, taking advantage of the cold morning air. Every move poured more power into the mighty MOD – these guys could do no wrong. Power output now tagged 721 peak horsepower. Torque was off the hook, with 600 lb-ft at just 3200 rpm, peaking at an astonishing 675 ft-lbs.
they werent trying for peak power. john kaase can make power nobody on this board can approach. he won with those modulars with no experience.
they werent trying for peak torque either. average numbers and he WON.
its history you cant change. we will never know how much peak power that engine could produce. kaase never tried.
displacing 401 cubic inches. With two pushrod engines in the final eliminations, it was a battle with the SAMs team for the Chevy LS engines for the best two-valve engine in the competition. SAMs held a small lead in qualifying, but extended their advantage considerably in their final elimination pulls. It was going to come down to the Also BES team’s ability to tune in more power via their MegaSquirt engine management system. John Lohone and the rest of the crew did a fine job in the final elimination pulls, tuning in a substantial 16.6 points, with peaks of 750 horsepower and 625 lb-ft of torque.
the LS engine made substantially less torque. a lot less.
A Ford also took third place as BES Engines reinforced its third-place from the qualifying round. There it scored 775 horsepower with 632 lb-ft torque
the top LS a new 436ci LS and pulled 775 horsepower and 677 lb-ft
it took a bunch more cubes to just lose lol
The SAM Tech team entered a 436-cubic inch Chevrolet LS engine using a GM Performance Parts LSX block with CIC LS-7-style heads and a Comp Cams camshaft. The engine produced an average peak of 727.00 horsepower and an average peak of 640.67 lb-ft of torque in the tested range.
Last edited by assasinator; 10-25-2017 at 08:48 PM.
Just curious what rpm the torque peaks on a bolt on ls6? You say the coyotes dont run well up top, looking for a comparison.
4700-4800
Yea i say that because they don't. I also explained why.
Originally Posted by assasinator
MOD motor was anyone’s guess. The experienced crew worked the tune, taking advantage of the cold morning air. Every move poured more power into the mighty MOD – these guys could do no wrong. Power output now tagged 721 peak horsepower. Torque was off the hook, with 600 lb-ft at just 3200 rpm, peaking at an astonishing 675 ft-lbs.
they werent trying for peak power. john kaase can make power nobody on this board can approach. he won with those modulars with no experience.
they werent trying for peak torque either. average numbers and he WON.
its history you cant change. we will never know how much peak power that engine could produce. kaase never tried.
the LS engine made substantially less torque. a lot less.
it took a bunch more cubes to just lose lol
Pretty much all bull ****. They won on points.......not power. Full on custom modular **** to get to 4xx ci vs a basic overbore ls7 to get to 43x. Not only that the furds used headers that don't even fit in a chassis
Now anyone feel free to average these numbers in the basic racing rpm range that they would be used in.....and all that would fit in my screen shot.
1st place modular.
2nd place modular
3rd place modular
4th place ls. Notice how it makes more power
Again feel free to average those and draw your own conclusion to which ine you would rather have in your car to go run the others. Not to mention the cost difference.
Anyone else notice the massive difference in power here here. Even the most powerful modular falls way short by 40tq and as much as 70ish hp at places in the power curve.
Looks Like JK won with Ford motor again for 2017. WTF is this witchcraft?
Hio better send a nasty memo and cry about this....
That's some funky vintage class. If your gonna post **** then atleast post full information or it just looks shady.
Originally Posted by big hammer
Is ok that modular is the popular vote president friend
Lolz
It sure as **** didn't win the electoral vote with less average power.
Oh wait....less peak power to.
What did it win on??....oh points. Just the the popular vote as you said. The electoral vote covers more ground. Just like you want to do in a race car.
Hiho poasting charts. Well, in my opinion that test is just kind of weird. The calc method they used looks like it came from hammer. Also the rpm range being 3-7k on all motors. Also the first two mod motors are very weird. They make peak hp at 6400 & drop 40-50hp to 7000. WTF? My tow truck 383 looses half as much power in that rpm span. Odd.
Now the 3rd mod motor seemed more correct. Oh but it stops at 7k rpm. How the heck do you know the power stopped climbing or carrying? Didn't we just see a mod motor spinning past 9k? He still had a plastic manifold too.
You say some LS guys scarred to go past 7k. Looks like Hot Rod is too.
Hiho poasting charts. Well, in my opinion that test is just kind of weird. The calc method they used looks like it came from hammer. Also the rpm range being 3-7k on all motors. Also the first two mod motors are very weird. They make peak hp at 6400 & drop 40-50hp to 7000. WTF? My tow truck 383 looses half as much power in that rpm span. Odd.
Now the 3rd mod motor seemed more correct. Oh but it stops at 7k rpm. How the heck do you know the power stopped climbing or carrying? Didn't we just see a mod motor spinning past 9k? He still had a plastic manifold too.
You say some LS guys scarred to go past 7k. Looks like Hot Rod is too.
It's per class rules IIRC. There's a lot of nonsense involved
Hiho poasting charts. Well, in my opinion that test is just kind of weird. The calc method they used looks like it came from hammer. Also the rpm range being 3-7k on all motors. Also the first two mod motors are very weird. They make peak hp at 6400 & drop 40-50hp to 7000. WTF? My tow truck 383 looses half as much power in that rpm span. Odd.
Now the 3rd mod motor seemed more correct. Oh but it stops at 7k rpm. How the heck do you know the power stopped climbing or carrying? Didn't we just see a mod motor spinning past 9k? He still had a plastic manifold too.
You say some LS guys scarred to go past 7k. Looks like Hot Rod is too.
The furds used lots of trickery to even get there.
As i said i got all in the screen shot i could. But 3k rpm doesn't really matter much unless you're racing @ 3k rpm. I'm not but you feel free to.
Besides that on a engine turning 7k rpm with a t56 you are not even below 5k except on the 1-2 shift unless you have the wide ratio t56. Most of us don't. So there for that's the range that matters. Besides....the ls beat them at 5k to and likely below that atleast some of the time.
Notice the tq difference on even the 3rd place modular vs the ls? It's huge.....when you look at that section of power even at 6k rpm the furd is down 70hp. That's YUGE! That modular woukd take such a thrashing on track that it's insane. And the other 2 aren't even worth comparing.
Rules dictate stopping at 7k.
Originally Posted by big hammer
It's per class rules IIRC. There's a lot of nonsense involved
Yup.....lots of nonsense for sure.
That's ok tho. We seen what happened in the typical build in the ls3 vs 5br0 challenge.
10-25-2017, 04:05 PM
:merica:
