Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Clayton
As for crank weights---today I balanced a couple of engines--
|
That means the BB crank is 32% heavier than a SB crank. The rest of the rotating and reciprocating assembly is probably a lot closer in weight. But still, you can expect the entire assembly to around 30% heavier. That's a lot. A tire and wheel assembly that's 5# lighter is a real boon to the racer. So why wouldn't a similar weight savings inside the engine provide a similar benifit?
I'm not arguing with anyone, I'm asking the question. I sure would like to see real data on that sort of thing. Not only HP and torque on an rpm scale, but also on a time scale. I think that would be interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by madmaxx
With a difference of 14.5lb (alot of ounces) it would be impossible for the dumptruck big block to rev as fast as the small block. One truck engine will be linear in acceleration where the small block will be exponential. It comes down to performance or looks. A 500hp small block will beat any 500hp or larger big block in a blast from zero to 60. The small block will spool up faster and more than 500hp in a cobra cannot be effectively put to the pavement.
|
I wouldn't think it would be imposible, but I think it would be difficult. I think (but could be wrong) that if you built similar Windser and FE engines (compression, head specs, cam, etc) and raced them, the SB would win. The rotating assembly is lighter, and most likely quicker. The BB is heavier all around, and weight is the enemy of any race car.
And, yes, you can put more than 500hp to the ground effectivly. It's been done many times. It's just not easy.
Besides, who really cares about HP anyway? It's torque and area under the curve that matters. The slightly longer stroke of the FE may give that engine an advantage.
8Likes
Threaded Mode
