...torque was as important, of not moreso, than hp---in producing acceleration. The other aspects of gearing, tire-diameter, fragility of components, etc. Insights I gained from having a 1952 Ford F-100 pick-up with a 396(?)ci "Police Interceptor" engine from the Wareham (Mass.) Police chief's cruiser---wh/ was "outpointed" by a phone-pole. I ended up flipping the step-and-tow, melting my skin-diving belt-weights, pouring them in and STILL having problems hooking up the
massive biased-ply fiberglas-belted (13" wide) "Tigerpaws". The truck also displayed gargantuan understeer, followed by INSTANT rear-first "parking".
Having thus acquired some experience with overpowered vehicles, I decided to build up the power of the 351C. By going out to 408, I am trying to get 450+ ft/lbs. and similar hp. I added the inches (stroking) so that the motor could make these numbers without being hugely overstressed. I was taught that if your cubic inches are roughly equal to your generated hp (and ft/lbs) then your motor will last longer(?) because it's less highly "stressed". I may be wrong. That's exactly why I threw this "ci=hp.-ft/lbs" formula into the mix. I would appreciate comments and corrections on the latter.
That's why I love this forum----I learn a lot from each of yuz.
Good thread Hal.