Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Kish
You guys still don't get it. In 2010 when the factory advertises an engine makes say 300HP. It must dyno 300HP +/-3%.
Now look at the evolution of engine manufacturing and performance technology improvements over the last 40 years. Take a look at how 200ci V-6's are making as much horsepower as 400ci V8's were in the 60's. Do you really think that in Stock eliminator trim both engines have the same max power potential. If you do your morons. Current OEM technology is wringing HP out of engines the same way guys building stockers have done it for years. So an OEM engine which already comes with good valve springs, good flowing heads, roller cams, far better tuned intakes, larger TB's and a factory rating of 425HP (new car rating, not NHRAshould have an equivalent amount of inefficiency in the OEM design and power to be gained? Some of the performance vehicles offered today have tubular exhaust manifolds that rival the flow performance of a set of headers - not some junk cast iron log exhaust manifold that was designed for a utility truck 40yrs ago. Aside from the LS & LT engines from GM, prior to the CJ's and Drag Paks, what other engine combinations that have gone in the books the last 15 or so years have been able to compete when entered with the OEM advertised HP ratings? Most get submitted by someone that has no idea how NHRA's HP rating system works, the NHRA guys I doubt spend the effort to challenge an OEM submission if they think its overfactored.
I'm not defending the final numbers assigned to some of the combos as correctly factored. But if anyone thinks that they should go in with the 2010 OEM advertised HP ratings, i repeat - your a moron.
|
And this little rant comes from the er uh gentleman who claimed the CJ's could never make 800 hp with those little tiny throttles. Consider the source when reading this guy's stuff. He, of all people, is no positon to be calling people morons.