engines that never were, but should have been

Why are American cars so big? :scratch2:

Well because they were originally developed in a temperate zone with regions which cover all the biomes and weather. They were developed in a country with, at the time, iffy roads and large tracts of land to cover. The fuel they used was originally a discarded byproduct of distilling Kerosene and as such was dirt cheap. Also, because it’s fun to:

1) Drive around in your living room; :thmbsp:
2) Go really, really fast; :thmbsp:
3) have testosterone. :D

But hey, that’s just me.

So, anything useful coming out of the rest of the world?
 
whoaru99 said:
Rumor has it that GM actually developed the hemi concept, but decided it was too expensive for regular production and abandon it.
Click to expand...
I Don,t know about passenger car use but for drag and Nascar racing ,,Pontiac had a Hemi Head Conversion in 1963,,,The conversion was developed by the late ,great Mickey Thompson and was made from aluminun,,there is a drag boat with the conversion if you do a google search there is some info on it
 
Last edited:
6thumbs said:
I Don,t know about passenger car use but for drag and Nascar racing ,,Pontiac had a Hemi Head Conversion in 1963,,,The conversion was developed by the late ,great Mickey Thompson and was made from aluminun,,there is a drag boat with the conversion if you do a google search there is some info on it
Click to expand...

If you like Ponchos we have a local guy here who has hundreds of them. Including a MT headed dragster.

http://www.pontiacheaven.org/MY race cars.htm

http://www.pontiacheaven.org/
 
wineslob said:
They did....to a point. Big CID will never get really good fuel milage, but thats not the point with large engines.
GM still makes a great BB : http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/E...Id=502HO&engine=502 HO&sku=12568778&engCat=bb

Stock, this thing tears ass on any SB. With small mods (intake/cam change) it'll hit 600+ HP.
Click to expand...

The old saying goes, there's no replacement for displacement.

They made the BB bigger, but afaik it's still basically the same thing as it was many years ago - as contrasted to the newer SB that seem quite different from the older ones.
 
whoaru99 said:
The old saying goes, there's no replacement for displacement.

They made the BB bigger, but afaik it's still basically the same thing as it was many years ago - as contrasted to the newer SB that seem quite different from the older ones.
Click to expand...

The new "new" SBC is a different beast. Non siamesed ports in the heads, etc...... neat engine.
Oh, whats nice about the 502 BB, it does its power on less than 9:1 comp ratio, mid gas is ok!
 
Adam said:
The Buick straight 8 is one of my favorites, the 320ci Buick straight 8 was produced from '36 through '52. The smaller straight 8 Buick engine was a 248 produced '37-'49, which was later replaced with the 263 in 1950-53.
Click to expand...
Adam said:
Thanks for the memories. I took my driving test on Dad's '51 Roadmaster, & the beast became my Saturday night at the Drive-in movie special. I thought Buick (& others) simply quit the straight eight game to lighten the load of a crankshaft that probably weighed as much as a Yugo.

Ron.
Click to expand...
 
whoaru99 said:
They made the BB bigger, but afaik it's still basically the same thing as it was many years ago - as contrasted to the newer SB that seem quite different from the older ones.
Click to expand...

The last of the production Chevy Big Blocks (Gen 6 and Gen 7) were quite a bit better than the older ones in stock form. I have a 1999 Gen 6 Vortec 454. It gets better mileage than the last Ford 460's and just slightly less than the late model Dodge 318 than a friend had. The heads are supposed to be some of the best heads the factory made for the big block. The Gen 7 (8.1) was even further re-designed and many of the parts won't work with the previous big blocks. The Gen 7 looks like the design followed that of the newest small block. Gas prices and the popularity of the Duramax diesel are likely the reason it isn't offered any more. I really don't like the idea of using a small block in a big block application. Big blocks were designed as heavy duty work engines. Small blocks are going to have to spin faster to make the same power (HP and torque)...... which is potentially going to reduce engine life.
 
The one I am most fascinated with is the Chrysler turbine. I've seen one in person, and I stood there gawking at it for a long time.

It actually DID go to limited production, but I don't know if anybody actually wound up owning one, or if it was like the GM EV-1 of the early 90s that were all recalled and crushed because they were never actually sold; just leased and loaned.

I have a collection of very rare (in the USA) Toyotas from the mid 80s with Diesel engines. They were sold here on a trial basis, and only for a few years. I happened to buy one new when I was 18, and it was HARD to find! They sell plenty of them in other countries, but never again here.

Charles
 
MontreuxBlue said:
..... true dual exhaust that dumped out of the Flowmasters,
Click to expand...

Was it a custom bent system with Flowmaster mufflers or was it a cat back system from Flowmaster? Plenty of companies build systems for the 350, but few for the 454. The stock system is actually pretty good, right up to a few inches from the muffler, as uses dual cats connected by some good size pipe. One of these days, I'd like to do something with my exhaust.

Dana 60 rear with 3.73 gear....
Click to expand...

Why did you dwap rear axles? Didn't the Suburban have a 14bolt (10.5" ring gear) from the factory?

I would still get close to 14 mpg on the highway, which is way better than my current stock 2003 2500HD with the 6.0 that gets a little over 10 mpg on the highway.
Click to expand...

I used to get 14mpg on the highway. Right now, I'm only getting a little over 10mpg, like your 6.0L. I think that once I change my oxygen sensors my mileage will go back up. I still have the originals at almost 170K miles.
 
MontreuxBlue said:
#1
Came factory with dual 3" exhaust from the manifolds to the original muffler, I put on 2 mufflers. 3" inlet, 3" outlet.
Click to expand...

I wish I could see how you did that...... any pictures? The factory system on my truck has a big flange type thing with two short reducing pipe and an 02 sensor..... Oh and a frame crossmember too. Everything is really packed together in that area.


#2
It is a 3/4 ton 4x4 2500 and came factory with the rear Dana 60 with 3.73 and Dana 44 up front as far as I can remember.
Click to expand...

Your not remembering correctly. I don't think GM used Dana axles, front or rear in the 90's on their light trucks. The front definatly wasn't a Dana 44, that's a straight axle.

#3
I changed all 4 O2 sensor on the Suburban, due to low gas mileage, about 10mpg, when I first got with about 100K on it. Didn't have any check engine lights on, took it to the dealership and they said it had 2 bad O2 sensor in the "hidden codes". The gas mileage went back up after that.
Click to expand...

That's good to know. I've pulled various O2 codes. I've also had code telling me that it was operating in closed loop too long. If I can regain the "good" mileage I used to have I be very happy!!

My 2003 is geared for towing so that doesn't help the gas mileage. I hardly ever drive it, only about 3,000 miles a year, since I have a free company truck. It only has a little more than 18,000 miles on it now. I might do about the same as I did to the Suburban over the next few years.
Click to expand...

4:10's in the rear axle? That's what I've got behind my 454.


Have you changed the intake manifold gaskets to stop the common antifreeze leak?
Click to expand...

The intake has been bad for some time...... I think since new, really. I've always lost a small amount of coolant, but didn't know where it was going until a few years ago. I had it changed this past fall when it was really bad...... I should have done it sooner.

By the way the front passenger side O2 sensor was a b****, no room to wrench on it.
Click to expand...

I could see that one quite well when I did the front suspension last fall. I figured it wouldn't be too bad. Thats frustrating when you can see something just fine, but the wrench hits everything and anything.

The truck is a 99, and up until this last fall, I hadn't done much to it, save for a fuel pump just after 100K miles or so. The truck has almost 170K miles now. It's been pretty reliable, especially considering that I haven't gotten things done as soon as I should have.
 
Always wondered how much power a 455, 460, 472, or 500 would put out if they did the DOHC multivalve "works" on 'em...A Northstar is what, 275 cubic inches or somesuch ? Imagine what it could do w/nearly DOUBLE that displacement ? The V-10 in The Mighty Valdez is a OHC of 412 cubic inches...Big, but not gargantuan by yesterday's standards...
 
meanwhile, over in Europe...

The "Big Three" European car companies developed a 2.7 liter V6 engine that was originally supposed to be a V8. Peugeot, Renault, and Volvo, that is.

But the oil crisis of '73 had big impact over there too, so to my knowledge, it never made it past being a V6, with a somewhat awkward angle between the banks of cylinders.
 
In 1930 Packard built a straight 12 motor that was said to be extremely smooth but but needed a long hood to cover it. In 1932 they went with a V-12.
 
I'll add that Chrysler had on the deign table- a "ball stud" Hemi for 1972, to replace the rocker shaft Hemi that was last made in 1971.

It was supposed to be offered in 400 and 444 or 451 displacements.

One or two were actually produced and one was recently installed in an A body Barracuda.

The traditional Mopar big blocks (400and 440 at that time) last year was 1978, and the tooling was sold to company that I can't for the life of me find the name of.
AFAIK, nothing ever became of it, and I wonder what possible motivation someone would have to make a purchase like that and then do nothing with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom