[Tim Kish]

What criteria would you consider the basis of comparison between engines? Ignore the supercharged cars (though I know you can't).

Say that the baseline for A/SA is the 69 427 Camaro. NHRA ratings are 425HP with OEM heads and 435HP with aftermarket heads.

This calculates to an NHRA rated HP/cu in ratio of 0.995 and 1.019 respectively.

Now the 6.1L - 370 cu in / 385 HP current rating. This translates to a ratio of 1.041

Per the intial factoring this would indicate that the 6.1L engine should produce a ratio of 1.02 times the power of the 427 or 2% more power per cu in displacement than the combo that has been developed for 40 years. Since the 6.1L is blowing the doors off the Camaro's we know this number is higher.

I am sure it is true do to better cylinder heads, intake manifold and much larger TB. If there were proportional restrictions made for head port size (well out of NHRA's control since this is base engine design) and TB sizing (something NHRA could have regulated) then these engines could have been more equal from the onset.

Bumping this engine all the way to 415 or 425 HP - may be a little harsh, saying that they will outperform the capabilities of the developed combination by 12-15% at their introduction but again there is far too little data to support it not being true either. Not having any data on the combustion chamber efficiencies, pressure drop measured in the ports/intake, its hard to say what the proper ratio of power output per cu in should be when comparing the two different engines.

Again there are many software packages that could take data that is already required for blueprinting these engines with a few extra data points for head flows, etc and evaluate the power potential of the new engines and then properly scale them to align to the established combinations.