why do modern engines makes so much power from relatively small cubic inches?

Saw something today that said there was more computing power in our cell phones that what NASA used to put a man on the moon in the Apollo capsule

 

The 1hp per cubic inch of displacement was a major milestone in automotive history. There may have been an earlier vehicle to achieve this, but for some reason I remember several automotive articles pointing to the milestone car being a early '60's Olds Cutlass/Jet-Fire (1962 or '63?) as a mass produced mainstream production car achieving the this goal (215 cubic inch and 215hp).

Then, 100hp per liter of displacement became the new goal. One liter equals 61.0237 cubic inches. With all the advances in engine design and controls, etc., that was achieved and is rather routine now.

The next goal was for mainstream engines to produce 200hp per liter and we are pretty much there. Many engines already produce over this goal, but chances are the newer the design, the closer to this mark that engine will be (especially direct injection (GDI)).

As a response to the original question in this thread - simply put, technology has advanced on every front of the internal combustion engine: design, metallurgy/materials, mechanical reduction of friction, airflow/induction, fuel management/distribution, electronic monitors/controls **especially variable valve timing**, exhaust/fluid-dynamics ..... and especially mass production which allows it to all come together at reduced ultimate cost. Really, I think of it as the second coming of the musclecar [engine] installed in every type of passenger vehicle imaginable.

But, before you give the present technology all the credit, remember that you are witnessing all these various technologies "come together" in a modern engine. There is a lot to be said for applying certain modern advances to our older engines with great advances in power - I am sure JW would agree with the engines he builds and the various experiments he is doing to 455's. Also, GM Powertrain Engineers in the late '60's and early '70's were readily exploring a Corporate GM directive to examine (pre 1973 Oil Embargo) how much more power could be obtained from the various big blocks from Olds and Buick, in particular. Olds and Buick experimented with overhead cams (OHC) on their 455's and some exotic induction systems (Olds had 4 valve per cylinder 455 heads). At that time, GM, for example, thought that the next decade would bring even larger cars well in excess of 5,000lbs. and would need even more power (OPEC and the Federal Gov't changed all that) from existing engines and wanted to explore new technologies (to them) to see if that was viable. I know I have read several articles where Denis Manner (ex-Buick Engineer and father of the 455) inferred that the Stage 2 program was intended to "explore the maximum power of the 455" and I am left to wonder if he was able to kind of sell his Stage 2 program work as exploring the limits of the 455 for that corporate need. Look at the 1970 Hot Rod (I believe) magazine cover for all the experimental Buick V-8's including the OHC. I believe that the Olds 455 cammer was a 500 to 600 hp engine (maybe more). You know Buick's involvement in turbo charging production vehicles and that the production Buick turbo V-6's go back to the late '70's, but Buick was experimenting with turbocharging it's V-8's in the early '60's on a Nailhead and there was serious consideration of making that engine a regular production engine (RPO), but it kept breaking either the transmissions or the rear axles. What kind of power does it take to do that?! Probably well north of 600hp. My second point is that there is still quite a bit of potential in our older engines.

 

Well it is widely known that they could never fire an Apollo using the same computer system. No one knows how to run it anymore.
Todays cars are more powerful. The 2.0 4cyl in my Focus ST was 252 hp. The 3.6 V6 in my 2016 Impala limited is 300 hp. I heard it is the same as the V6 in the camaro so with tuning, better intake and exhaust I could bump it up. For about maybe $1000 I could get a drivable 335HP or more. I would have to spend way more than that to bump my wagon up by 30 horse. Then my wagon is way cooler by comparison.

Tim

 

I believe the 13 second range is all the big three were ever after. through muscle car era and the modern performance area most of these cars run 13s. some in the 12s. no doubt they are all capable of more with a few bolt on pieces. the factory all stops in the 13s. must be an insurance restriction?

 

The newer engines, 4, V6 and V8's don't make the low end torque the old V8's made.
They're all made and allowed to rev to make their power.

 

I don't know about that, my challenger makes 475 net lb ft of torque and it's 390 cubic inches. the LS3 (377 Ci) engine makes 425 net lb feet and it doesnt have variable valve timing. as far as new cars being slower , i'm not sure I buy that. a 2011-2014 automatic equipped Mustang GT will run mid 12's bone stock, a 2015-2016 Scat pack or SRT challenger will run low 12's bone stock and high 11's with a drag radial. the new 2017 Camaro will run high 11's stock.

 

I guess my point was: we have excellent pistons and rods for the 455 now, roller cams are readily available, good fuel and ignition systems are also out there. do the stage 2 se heads flow as good as the LS or Hemi heads ? are the heads the key component?

 

Pushrod V-8's will always provide far more low end torque than smaller tech engines which must rev much higher or even the few OHC V-8's .... like the Coyote and Voodoo engines from Ford ... they have to rev much higher.

Truth be told, it's the torque which is such an under appreciated force. I believe I am attributing this quote correctly to Dennis Manner, "People buy horsepower, but they drive torque." Frankly, the usable (meaning extraordinarily low RPM) and abundance (510 lbs/feet) of the '70 455 is as much the 'secret' of the GS's quickness as anything. Not even close to the highest horsepower figures in older musclecars version 1.0, but max torque available at 2800 RPM! Shoot! can you imagine how quickly the flywheel and torque converter spin up to the flash point and then to 2800?! Pretty damn quick ... and then the torque's all-in. Isn't there an old saying, "Torque gets you started and horsepower carries you across the finish line'? Fact is, Dennis Manner has talked before about how proud he was of the torque the Buick 455 made - as it was designed to do, and how inside the automotive industry amongst engineers and execs, torque was a prestige issue among American and British car companies. Note Rolls Royce and Bentley used to not bother with promoting or labeling HP figures ..... they did do so with torque figures. Remember Buick marketing its engines with torque figures rather than cubic inches ( up until the intro of the 400/430)?

 

1) Computer aided design allows for rapid optimization of designs.
2) Microprocessors keep timing and fuel mixture optimized over a wide range of conditions.

 

I have my 14 mustang gt scary fast factory 420 hp I believe almost 400 lb torque very high revving with a 6spd manual and 373 rear
I love the car but it isnt the same as the brute ness I like of the old cars
but I can get 22 mpg with air cond and a comfortable ride and do great burnouts lol
Id rather drive a 12 second 60s car any day but as far as drive ability the newer technology wins
but like comparing apples to oranges , Im just glad to see the second muscle car phase to enjoy in my life
after a lot of lame years of new cars
of coarse I don't recognize anything under the hood of my gt

 

I have driven several big cube smog engine cars that had low hp numbers (403 Trans Am, 425 DeVille, '76 Electra) that had satisfying 'umph' (and better than expected ETs) despite their published numbers thanks to torque. I've also been underwhelmed by engines that had good numbers but had to be wrung out to keep moving. The Honda S2000 was a magazine darling (a friend lusted for one) with its output and nearly 8k redline, but when it's noted that it makes no power below about 5k, the fun is only had with a lot of stabbing and gear rowing. My friend chose an LS powered Camaro instead after driving one. That said, being able to test a variable with software vs. building it to see if it works does aide the process. Being able to use software to keep the engines within 'safe' parameters is a great help, too. Keep in mind, cars have to 'work' as drivers for young and old, novices and the more knowledgeable, in winter and summer, from Alaska to Denver to Key West. Denny and his contemporaries had to achieve that with carburetors and mechanical distributors, with either no or very simple sensors. I also agree that software allows the builders to get everything out of or engineer 'just enough' strength into the whole package vs. having a safety net of excess capacity. Look at a Turbo Regal, you can double or triple its rated power and abuse the hell out of it without things coming apart. Aside ftom GM's LS engines, there aren't many today that'll take that. Also, if the computer cuts power of a 400hp engine to save the trans or converters, is it still a 400hp engine?
Patrick

 

Technology is amazing, just imagine if the technology that is out there now could be adapted to our BBB or any other big block for that matter. With the technology they have now adapted to our 455s 1.5 HP streetable horsepower per cubic inch would be easy. That would be 682.5 street driving go to the store or where ever horsepower.



Bob H.

 

With the advent of direct injection (fuel injection nozzles in the chambers) fuel economy will increase as well as torque. Very complicated though it takes lots of fuel pressure. Plus another nozzle to the intake manifold port to keep the backside of the valve clean. The big 3 know years in advance what they will produce. It's always been that way.
Ray

 

I like your attitude! I'm with you. I will drive old iron and make it competitive.

Mikey

 

BBBs are unparalleled for building torque early on the RPM range. The force is with us.

 

The engine is designed to handle over 1000 hp in stock configuration and that is why it was redesigned as well as being able to stand up to repeated racing and transbrake use and all while still carrying a 3/36 bumper to bumper factory warranty. The one thing I really dislike about the new cars is the torque management, the computer decides how much power you get and when and that's all you get no matter how hard you smash the pedal to the floor.

 

We have a 2013 Taurus SHO (stands for Sh_t - Hold On!). It is twin turbo 3.5 liter and AWD. Max torque (350) comes on at 1500 rpm and is a flat line to 5200 rpm, reported 365 HP. Zero to 60 is FIVE seconds or so and low 13 second quarters. It feels every bit as quick as the GS - it's probably faster for lack of traction issues - and it roars out the twice pipes unlike other turbo cars I've heard. Weight is portly at 4500#. 30+ mpg observed freeway; 18 mpg combined. The engine is complex and can suffer electronic and mechanical idiosyncrasies. Two weeks ago it was in the shop because one or both cams were 20 degrees advanced at idle. It idled like a top fueler. Resolved by jumping pins on the test gear, cycling the solenoid, and "probably clearing a blocked oil passage." Made me feel all warm and fuzzy to know that nobody really knows anything but speculation. But there you have it - complexity and computers and forced induction - oh my.

 

my whole point with this discussion is to see what we can do to get similar type power curves and results from classic engines. especially the Buick 350 engines.

 

If in the white whale heads ever become available for sale and they flow worth a dam then it would be relatively easy if you have a deep enough wallet! The factory heads can also be ported to get decent flow out of them if in someone didn't want to count on or wait for the white whales to show up. It has been reported that a talented ported can get 270 to 290 CFM out of the intake which would be good enough to support over 600 HP if it could be spun fast enough or enough extra cubes could be added to bring the power down in a lower usable RPM band.

Roller cams are available now as well as decent pistons and finally good aftermarket rods that are supposed to be bolt ins and an single plane intake. Now also available affordable self tuning throttle body fuel injection from FItech.

The ignition can be converted to distributor less coil on plug, I believe there are a couple of threads here from a couple guys that have already done this.

Block can be altered for better needed oil flow, this has been known for decades though but is a needed mod if in all that there fansifide parts and new fangled electrofied confuser controlled gizmos are installed on it.

Seeing how the sbb 350 has a very flat power curve already from just off idle to around 5,000, adding all the upgrade parts mentioned above(especially better flowing heads) would increase power throughout the power band and enabling the RPM to keep making power above 5,000 RPM. Now slap one together and have some fun! GL



Derek

 

Well, there are guys on this board turbocharging and supercharging 350s and 455s (our old iron).... and adding EFI as well as using newer more modern internal components.