FE Torque Curve

[ERA Chas]

See gang?? Engine builders aren't afraid to start 'em and run 'em hard cold-blooded.
They got no stinkin' covered-up url coolers.....
Actually NO coolers.

[blykins]

Just as long as oil temp is up....water temp is a little different.

[blykins]

Mike, it's good to do a little poking every now and again, but at the end of the day, we're all trying to feed our families. I have a good bit of respect for Barry, and I would hope that he would reciprocate that.

Dwight, Undy had it.....hot oil with cold water makes a noticeable difference in horsepower.

[blykins]

Well, keep in mind that it's just a number. A dyno sheet is a necessary evil....

Again, not saying anything about any other builder, but you could probably bring your engine to me or Barry and the numbers would be slightly different.

[blykins]

It doesn't have anything at all to do with the dyno....it has everything to do with the engine.

Still not sure why WOT data is necessary for off-idle performance....

[Gaz64]

Originally Posted by DanEC

I had Keith Craft build my 428 stroker more for torque than raw horsepower. I witnessed the dyno pulls but didn't really sit down and closely study the dyno data until later. The recorder didn't start recording until 4200 rpm and based on everything, I always assumed that was well above the torque peak - which I figured was down somewhere in the 3600 rpm area.

I finally got curious enough to email Tony at Keith Craft and ask if they had any additional data in their file that recorded the max torque and peak rpm. He advised that the recorder starts recording when the motor hits the torque peak - indicating peak torque was at the 4100/4200 area.

I'm having a problem believing this motor's torque peak is at 4200 rpm especially with max power at 5300 rpm. What would you think?

Originally Posted by ERA Chas

I question several other things.
The heading 'A/F Ratio' is listing fuel pressure which is fine but the actual A/F Ratio would be valuable.
I think the BSFC is a bit high for these days but then I see the motor struggles to make more than 50% V/E.
Dan can you post some particulars in the motor's parts list? A 'torque' build should not have a lot of overlap or duration...

I'd want another dyno run without conflicting figures like that.

A/F ratio in the sixes is certainly wrong, and VE in the fiftys?

[ERA Chas]

Originally Posted by Gaz64

I'd want another dyno run without conflicting figures like that.

A/F ratio in the sixes is certainly wrong, and VE in the fiftys?

I think it was mentioned that it was dyno'd with one carb only on a dual plane. dual quad intake-accounting for A/F and VE being 50% readings. I just don't know why KC would dyno that way...
I don't know if it would read that way. And the dyno sheet does not show the test configuration of the engine.

[Bob In Ct]

I know I'm really anal about this stuff but Torque is measured in LB-FT not FT-LBS (a measure of work). Stop looking at your Craftsman torque wrench (which has it incorrect) and start looking at car ads or the charts shown on this post.

Bob