[REDHOTRED2015]

Have you driven one of these?

[GretchenGotGrowl]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

My doors blown off? If it comes down nothing more than a mod war, I like my V8's chances of keeping up with Eco boost.

Post the 10.88s time slip when you finish those mods.

[two_wheel_mayhem]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

Funny, I'm sitting here thinking of the 70's and what must've taken place in muscle car discussion circles...there was the V8 - 260, 289, 302, 327, 350, 383, 390, 400, 409, 427, 428, 454, 460, and probably countless others like American Motors offerings I've long forgotten. But I'm sure those smaller V8's were looked down upon when horsepower junkies met. Lol.

For sure, the ever popular 307 was a small block that was looked down upon, because Chevy never made one that had any power, add 20 cubic inches and it's an engine people look back upon fondly to this day.

Then for the 80s I don't think a 305 ever got any respect, nor did it deserve any really, at the same time the FORD camp was being praised for their 5.0

[USAFS197]

This is the video link of that 10.88 pass. Doesn't even look like they left the line that hard - even though that was a 1.566 60'.

[el ess A]

Ah...hot rodding will never die!

While personally, I would never dream of spending big $$$ to modify a 4-cyl. to just break 11s, there are some that still want to push the limits with what you got to work with. The world's fastest 4 banger holds about as much regard to me as the world's fastest balsa wood toy plane. Because it really is a hidden agenda. Anyone worth their salt knows that the $$ spent on the mods, if spent on say, a 5.0L Mustang, would hopefully land better than a 10.88. Far from world's fastest V8. But still faster than the world's fastest 4 banger.

The Livernois project doesn't knock me off my feet with the wow factor, because for every lb of extra boost has to result in a tradeoff with the reliability, and that goes for any power adder on any engine. But it does prove that with enough know-how, perseverance, and especially $$$, you can make anything go fast.

It also proves to me that the bottom line here is that vendors are going to follow the $$. The manufacturers are trying to do more with less. (Sound familiar? Like at your jobs?)The people who buy the 4 cyl. cars at least have hope for further performance gains. Livernois, as well as others, will be bringing out packages for those 4 cyl. guys who want more out of their turbo'ed wonders. And trust me, they will.

In the true spirit of hot rodding.

An old, flat-head hot rodder once told me three simple words that sums up that spirit and I remember them to this day when it comes to horsepower: "Enough's never enough."

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by GMTool

When and overloaded 4 cylinder 8' bed full size pick up truck can strongly accelerate up hill on a hot and humid summer day with the A/C blasting, then I will consider a 4 banger.

I'd imagine you'll see something like this in less than a decade. Especially seeing as the 2.7EB V6's displacement is easily matched in I4 configuration and it has no issues towing (max payload 2250lbs, max towing 8500lbs).

I've only test driven a 2.7 and it felt like very good power delivery. Just as good if not better than my old '06 5.4 equipped truck I used to have.

PS: you should never overload a vehicle, that's just not safe.

[Moto-Mojo]

Let's just get it over with. A TWO cylinder towing a payload - horse trailer...Probably turns in decent 1/4 mile times sans trailer too.

[MikosV6]

Originally Posted by two_wheel_mayhem

For sure, the ever popular 307 was a small block that was looked down upon, because Chevy never made one that had any power, add 20 cubic inches and it's an engine people look back upon fondly to this day.

Then for the 80s I don't think a 305 ever got any respect, nor did it deserve any really, at the same time the FORD camp was being praised for their 5.0

The reason why the 305 never got any respect was due to the fact that GM purposely downrated the engine with low performance parts , like the peanut cam for '86, to keep it slower than the L98. The TPI long runner setup was originally designed for the 305 to boost low end torque and with a good cam, performed quite well for the era.

The thing that hurt it, design wise, was it had a smaller bore than even the original 265 SBC so the rev potential was limited sacrificing horsepower. However, with the right parts , 13's shouldn't be a problem N/A.

[Bad@ssCamaro]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

Let's just get it over with. A TWO cylinder towing a payload - horse trailer...Probably turns in decent 1/4 mile times sans trailer too.

That not a horse trailer, that's a hearse

[CamaroCracka]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

I'd imagine you'll see something like this in less than a decade. Especially seeing as the 2.7EB V6's displacement is easily matched in I4 configuration and it has no issues towing (max payload 2250lbs, max towing 8500lbs).

I've only test driven a 2.7 and it felt like very good power delivery. Just as good if not better than my old '06 5.4 equipped truck I used to have.

PS: you should never overload a vehicle, that's just not safe.

In '02 a 300hp 6.0 Siverado was rated at 9200lbs and would do every bit of that. People already complain about towing with the EcoBoost and my guess is when those motors hit 100k, they will be toast. It's one thing to suggest muscle cars will be dominated by boosted 4 and 6 cyl engines, but in the truck world where low end grunt is mandatory, the V8 gas and diesels will dominate for a long time to come, at least for those that use a truck for it's intended purpose.

[two_wheel_mayhem]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

Let's just get it over with. A TWO cylinder towing a payload - horse trailer...Probably turns in decent 1/4 mile times sans trailer too.

That turd bike would be lucky to beat a V6 Camaro without the trailer, my stock SS would lay waste to it. That thing is a 1999 model at best. Horse trailer, ha ha.

I really hate seeing that thing though, because it usually means I'm following it with 200 other riders headed to a hole in the ground.

[GretchenGotGrowl]

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

In '02 a 300hp 6.0 Siverado was rated at 9200lbs and would do every bit of that. People already complain about towing with the EcoBoost and my guess is when those motors hit 100k, they will be toast. It's one thing to suggest muscle cars will be dominated by boosted 4 and 6 cyl engines, but in the truck world where low end grunt is mandatory, the V8 gas and diesels will dominate for a long time to come, at least for those that use a truck for it's intended purpose.

Never heard anyone complain about towing with the ecoboost f150. Most of my friends want to take mine when we are hauling a car somewhere. Unless you have a superduty, it is hard to beat the ecoboost when towing.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

In '02 a 300hp 6.0 Siverado was rated at 9200lbs and would do every bit of that. People already complain about towing with the EcoBoost and my guess is when those motors hit 100k, they will be toast. It's one thing to suggest muscle cars will be dominated by boosted 4 and 6 cyl engines, but in the truck world where low end grunt is mandatory, the V8 gas and diesels will dominate for a long time to come, at least for those that use a truck for it's intended purpose.

I currently own, and tow with, a '13 FX4 EB. It goes very well and without complaint. I love in Wyoming so level highways don't really exist. I've pulled a flat, open, 18' trailer with a '88 Supra loaded on it over South Pass. The trailer weight about 1300lbs, the car about 3,400lbs, and the pass is 7,411ft in elevation.

The truck never struggled once to pull itself, 3 passengers, and the load. It's got just over 80k miles and i have had no issues whatsoever with mine.

Maybe I'm just lucky. Maybe my truck is a freak. Who knows.

As to your comment about how "low end grunt is mandatory". . . have you ever looked at a dyno for the 2.7EB?

Here's one:

The 2.7 is in red and the 5.3 in green. Hiws that torque curve look to you?
http://www.fordf150blog.com/2-7-lite...-chevy-5-3-v8/

[102SS]

The only problem I have with that graph is the Torque doesn't meet the Horsepower at 5250 rpm?