Not H.P. but Torque..........

[tiger9297]

There are many sites that list their crate engines and tout the HP they make, and HP is what everyone brags about. However, I would like to see a buildup of an xtreme TORQUE producing engine. Anyone know of a company that builds a crate that fits this description. I'm talking 500+ lb. ft. of torque.

 

[77crewcab]

502HT is IIRC 335hp/512tq and the tq is at 2800 rpm!

 

[trailblazer86]

I think Chevy High Performance Magazine is planning a build with trucks in mind.
500 LBS. is a little over kill for me. But a nice smooth engine that makes its power way down low in the revs’ would be nice.
Throttle response, towing and drivability are more important to me than a lopey idle.

 

[tiger9297]

Yea 500 lb/ft. may be a tad bit over the top but 400 is not. An engine that could produce this waaaaaay down low would be very nice.

 

[dyeager535]

Ugh. I don't usually post up on these things, because there is ALWAYS someone pushing more power than you are, but it always depends on cost and application. In your case it sounds about like what my motor *theoretically* is.

Hate doing that to dialup folks, but we get so spoiled with high speed access. I also hate seeing my site keep going dead and wasting peoples time, hosting the pic for use here is a way around that.

I do not for one instant claim those numbers to be accurate. I used the program to see what kind of changes I could expect with certain cam's, and thats about it. DD2K is over-optimistic when it comes to roller cams, however, at least in that "test" I wasn't running it with long tube headers, which I am now. That said, with good data, DD2K has shown itself to be fairly accurate. David Vizard himself tested this software and realized that the DD2K numbers weren't what actual dyno numbers were. Then he tried another dyno and realized the *dynos* were the problem and not calibrated the same. I think Vizard found that it was within 5% of "real life" dyno tests. It's fun to play around with if nothing else.

If I were to plug the same specs into engine analyzer, it would show under 2000RPM, which is what interests me really. As you can tell its not made for high RPM, or I wouldn't have used TPI.

All that said, I eventually plan to strap the truck to the dyno for a couple of pulls, to get "real" numbers. Just have to hope the dyno is accurate too I guess.

 

[sled_dog]

I didn't bother reading this full post cause I just don't feel like explaining the same stuff I'm sure dyeager535 did. However I will say I am of the opinion that the numbers DD2k produces with a roller camshaft setup are bull. Something about the torque curves just get messed up.

I'm hoping to throw 450ft-lbs to the crank with my 383. Maybe more. Wyotech has a chassis dyno so hopefully before I leave here I will have a real dyno sheet for the motor with my 39s and everything

 

[surpip]

Hot rod did a build up of the HT383 just for torque.
They got it to be over 400 lbs-ft from 2000rpm all the way to redline with a peak of over 500

Might do a shearch on thier web isite for the build up

 

[mikayak390]

I don't know about current crate engines, but the only easy way I know of to get close to 500ft lbs at the bottom end is to swap in a late 60's early 70's buick, olds 455 or some of the big fords. 390 ,360 460 ect.

I have owned a buick, and an olds 455 and both were torque monsters mid 400's at 2000-2500rpm completely factory stock. for 3000 in heads and machine work they can put some serious power to the road. 700's HP and torque are not un-common for guys who like to go fast.

Even my 390 ford is no whimp. 430 ft lbs plus at 2300rpm. HP is around 410 at the same. Of course the car is 5300lbs empty so it needs the big motor.

We all love are 350's because they are cheap, reliable and easy to build, but there is something to be said for old big blocks. especially the buick/olds. I know everyone here is die hard chevy, but In my opinion even the 454 is really not as impressive at the 455. Cost wise however Chevy wins every time for parts and availability.

 

[NEplainsman]

this one pulled me from my hiding spot,I ran a caddy500cid for about four years in my 65 2WD chev,only dyno'd @374HP but torque maxed @582 and started right off idle,it was heck on tires and drivetrain but had more low end grunt than a fella needed,and was a simple swap,if it were'nt for the extra cost of my 4WD the caddy would be in my current truck.