[QUOTE]Who wants a motor that starts making power at 3000 rpm's or so.....Boring![/QUOTE]

I like one that starts coming alive about 3-3500 and feels like a semi rearended you at 5000. not practical but a kick in the azz to drive.

Torque motors make more sense and are more liveable for sure but theres something about rolling down the street at 30 and that sucker is still loping.

Quote:i agree and disagree, if you have an unusable amount of torque what do you have? a slow dyno queen cause all its doing is spinning.... a great quote i love to use on all my turbo buggy friends is "spinning ain't winning".

Quote:

....and there it is. OK, I'll say what all are thinking. Jsup, why do you cause such conflict in every engine thread that someone asks a question? Why do you get involved in EVERY engine thread? Can't you ever just answer the question instead of saying things like "the basis of the question is flawed"? Or perhaps just read one and not reply if you don't like the question asked? You ruined another thread with long posts about your point instead of letting the thread run it's course with the point of the original poster. Just look at this mess. Then you will act all innocent about it like you didn't mean for it to go this way. We all know better. I hate to say anything but I can't take anymore. I like this forum too much to see this happen to it. Every engine thread on this forum now is 3 or 4 pages long with posts from you that nobody wants to take the time to read once they read the first one and see where it is going. Will you please stop it? I honestly am not coming to this forum as much any more because of the way every engine or head post turns into 5 pages of bullshit.

To the OP, good question! Critiquing builds of others is what helps us to learn more about future builds of our own. I agree with TPI421's opinion. The CR is low and it is hurting both HP and torque. Another option for that combo would be about 10 or 12 lbs of boost and it could probably still run on low octane gas. Definitely agree that with that big of cam it is bleeding off too much of the already low CR, and they are leaving alot on the table.

Quote:i noted in my post that it the low compression effected the power it made and if you look at the end of the article they put a supercharger on it.

Not exactly sure why or how this got into another brand "x" vs brand "y" head (ok I do know) but the low numbers can attributed to many different factors. Cam selection, head selection and the biggest factor is piston selection.

Running a 9:3 compression ratio on any motor is going to bring down overall power numbers. But they never had any plans for even leaving that motor NA. I think with a better piston alone, bringing the CR up to a 11:0 or even 11:5 that they might pick up maybe 25-30 on both sides. And then factor in a better cam you will pick up more power. But they wanted a stock idle and low speed drivability.

With all that said I take any magazine article and read it with an open mind, then after I look for the bias. All of them are biased to something.

tap tap.. is this on??

I like torque motors for street/strip cars.... run a tight converter and still 60 ft fairly hard.