engineermike
Well-Known Member
The point of that post is that the old 454 only made 320 ftlb peak at a lofty 3900 rpm. The current 5.0 makes 320 ftlb at only 2400 rpm and by 3900 rpm is making 375 ftlb. This flies in the face of the OP's constant and disproven assertions. If you have some dyno graphs of lower performance Big Blocks of the era, please post them up, but I still think the current 5.0 will make more low-end torque.I don't have a horse in this race, pun intended, but the dyno you linked to isn't really a good comparison shot of older big block torque numbers. The LS6 Chevelle was a solid cammed big block, with deep gearing, designed to make more mid range / top end HP than typical big block engines of the time period. While many consider it the "king" of the Muscle cars - it isn't really representative of the low end grunt of "old school" big blocks. .
I dunno man....I'll be the first to admit that butt dyno's are the worst. I've been fooled half a second before due to noise alone, but I'm pretty sure I can tell 2 seconds difference regardless.....That car FELT faster. Even though my brain KNEW it was slower - it was hard to deny the difference in how it FELT. In fact it was a good 2 seconds slower in the 1/4 mile......
The Cadillac 500 is a good example of a huge engine with great low-end torque that rarely found itself the subject of awesome engine swaps. It is everything the OP wants, but not very many got swapped into smaller lighter cars.Look at the Cadillac 500 engine. I've personally wrenched on a couple of these and the off idle speed torque on these engines was simply ridiculous - but makes sense - when you figure it was designed to pull around a 4,000lb + boat of a car. I've personally seen a MILDLY modified (by that I mean replacement valve springs that don't float at 3000 RPM, a dual plane aluminum intake - the weight reduction was ridiculous versus the OEM cast iron monster of an intake, and a tuned Q-jet and headers) 500 make over 550 ft/lbs of torque on a flywheel dyno and that's with pump gas friendly compression ratio. That same engine made over 450 ft/lbs of torque at 2500 RPM.
I completely agree, but again, the OP incessantly referenced the Big Blocks of yesteryear as the epitome of all desirable in an engine. That is also why I posted graphs of a modern truck engine (the 6.2 Ford), for a modern reference point of what a truck motor is.....And if we're being honest - and trying to make a fair comparison - it would be hard pressed to not address the elephant in the room - electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition, computer controls versus points and a Holley carb on the LS6 - not to mention the advancement in technology on pretty much every other front - roller drivetrains with less power loss through friction for example.
Agree! This IS the golden age of performance! Look at the snowmobiles, PWC's, outboards, cars, motorcycles, UTV's....we're seeing performance levels never seen before in every category!We're spoiled right now. Spoiled by cars that anyone with the financial means can walk onto a dealer's lot and buy with zero hassle. Cars that run 12, 11 or even 10 second 1/4 mile times with no or minimal modifications all while having AC, power windows, cruise control, stereos, navigation, power steering, ABS - and the same cars actually drive nice and handle well. And personally I'm okay with being spoiled like that and I'll continue to enjoy it while it lasts.
Sponsored