Original Posted By: Steve Eldredge
SteeveeWhat's the biggest displacement for those engines anyway?Figuring on 1/2 hp per cube when turning at 2700 rpm,an engine (bored out if necessary) at 2.2 litres, having atruck cam (torque peak probably around 3000rpm) should be able to make 2.2x61=134 one half of which is 67 hp. Not bad.Probably about 50lbs heavier than an A65 at least though.John________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: NAPS-Z
Pietenpol-List: Re: NAPS-Z
Original Posted By: "Gerard L. Huber"
John Kahn wrote: Steevee What's the biggest displacement for those engines anyway? Figuring on 1/2 hp per cube when turning at 2700 rpm, an engine (bored out if necessary) at 2.2 litres, having a truck cam (torque peak probably around 3000rpm) should be able to make 2.2x61=134 one half of which is 67 hp. Not bad. Probably about 50lbs heavier than an A65 at least though. John My truck has the 2.4 liter in it. I think that is the largest in thedual ignition version as well.Stevee________________________________________________________________________________
John Kahn wrote: Steevee What's the biggest displacement for those engines anyway? Figuring on 1/2 hp per cube when turning at 2700 rpm, an engine (bored out if necessary) at 2.2 litres, having a truck cam (torque peak probably around 3000rpm) should be able to make 2.2x61=134 one half of which is 67 hp. Not bad. Probably about 50lbs heavier than an A65 at least though. John My truck has the 2.4 liter in it. I think that is the largest in thedual ignition version as well.Stevee________________________________________________________________________________