eightinavee
Well-Known Member
And have you ever tried to feed a Chev mouse motor - let alone a rat ?I'm not trying to ram german cars down anyones neck, i suggested a chevy v8 rather than a rover.
And have you ever tried to feed a Chev mouse motor - let alone a rat ?I'm not trying to ram german cars down anyones neck, i suggested a chevy v8 rather than a rover.
I'm not trying to ram german cars down anyones neck, i suggested a chevy v8 rather than a rover.
I was mistaken
Ford - YUK.
Yup, that is right, and Torque and BHP are numerically equal at 5250 revs.hey - take 5 - that implies that bhp goes up as revs increase, providing the torque remains constant, but it dont - torque normally peaks at low rpm (relatively) but bhp keeps climbing to somewhere near max revs.
i dinna ken yo formula
Do chevy make a 3.5ltr V8 I thought they started around the 4.2ltr mark
not really a fair comparison is it.
Yup, that is right, and Torque and BHP are numerically equal at 5250 revs.
bollix!
Just look at the attached graphs - there is no way that Torque and BHP are numerically equal at 5250 RPM.
As I stated before, Torque tends to peak low down the rev range and then taper off - the BHP peaks a lot higher.
will yer stop sproutin utter ****, when yer finally grow up and start work you'll look back at yer time on LZ and cringe.I'm thinking the Chevy V8 will be a better engine to put in than the rover. Didn't Overfinch use Chevy engines in the RR?
was it too much HP or too much tork wot done this?
I dunno, you spend 4 years of yer life studying Engineering, then no-one believes you when you sprout **** about basic engineering concepts
Ah well...