[lesmore49]

Yeah, big differences in technology. Remember when it was said that you could not get more than 1 HP from an cubic inch?

There was my '57 Ford that got 190HP from 272cu.inches while the Mondeo gets 245HP from 122cu.inches. That's the equivalent of the 272 Y-block making 546 horses!

You should be able to get 441 horses from that 3.6! LOL

They do.

GM gets more than 441 HP from turbocharging. The 2022 Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing generates 472 HP and 445 lb ft of torque from the twin turbocharged 3.6 V6 in the Cadillac.


" Year(s) Model Power Torque Dyno chart
2016–2019 Cadillac ATS-V, Cadillac ATS-V Coupe 464 hp (346 kW; 470 PS) @ 5850 RPM 445 lb⋅ft (603 N⋅m) @ 3500 RPM 2016 link
2022–present Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing 472 hp (352 kW; 479 PS) 445 lb⋅ft (603 N⋅m) "

Quote from Wikipedia.

I do recall when 1 hp per cube was phenomenal. Although the motorcycle world started making these engines in the 1960's. My '66 Yamaha YDS3 Super Sports, 250cc, 5 speed, twin cylinder, two stroke...two carbs, redline of 8600 rpm, was rated at 28.6 hp...from just 15 cubic inches.

Back then, it could run fairly competitively in acceleration with a British 500cc (30.5 cubic inches) , single carb, twin cylinder 4 stroke.

Back then, the Yamaha and Suzuki sports twins, were known as hooligan bikes.

Can't imagine me as a hooligan, even at 17...can you ?

---

Last edited by lesmore49; 09-05-2022 at 08:58 PM.

[MarkJerling]

They do.

GM gets more than 441 HP from turbocharging. The 2022 Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing generates 472 HP and 445 lb ft of torque from the twin turbocharged 3.6 V6 in the Cadillac.


" Year(s) Model Power Torque Dyno chart
2016–2019 Cadillac ATS-V, Cadillac ATS-V Coupe 464 hp (346 kW; 470 PS) @ 5850 RPM 445 lb⋅ft (603 N⋅m) @ 3500 RPM 2016 link
2022–present Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing 472 hp (352 kW; 479 PS) 445 lb⋅ft (603 N⋅m) "

Quote from Wikipedia.

I do recall when 1 hp per cube was phenomenal. Although the motorcycle world started making these engines in the 1960's. My '66 Yamaha YDS3 Super Sports, 250cc, 5 speed, twin cylinder, two stroke...two carbs, redline of 8600 rpm, was rated at 28.6 hp...from just 15 cubic inches.

Back then, it could run fairly competitively in acceleration with a British 500cc (30.5 cubic inches) , single carb, twin cylinder 4 stroke.

Back then, the Yamaha and Suzuki sports twins, were known as hooligan bikes.

Can't imagine me as a hooligan, even at 17...can you ?

If you stick one of those Caddie engines in the Chev, we'll have to consider you a hooligan Les!

[StiffLegged]

… My understanding is that you need higher octane numbers at the coast and lower octane numbers at higher elevation.

WW2 fighter aircraft, on the other hand, flying at over 30,000ft, needed 150 octane fuel for proper performance. Summat don’t add up…?

[savoche]

I think Norway should be added to that list..after all lutefisk is on the list, but is lutefisk Icelandic, or Norwegian.

Seems more likely lutefisk's origins are Norwegian, as I think Icelanders were settled by Norwegians, also some Scottish and Irish women...way back when.

Nah, I think we're represented well enough by the lutefisk

Lutefisk is mainly a Norwegian thing, but you also find a tradition for it in Sweden and Finland.

But since you mention Iceland, hákarl should be on the list, as should the Swedish delicacy of surströmming

[savoche]

My understanding is that you need higher octane numbers at the coast and lower octane numbers at higher elevation.

WW2 fighter aircraft, on the other hand, flying at over 30,000ft, needed 150 octane fuel for proper performance. Summat don’t add up…?

From what I've read the 100/150 octane fuel (100 for lean mix, 150 for rich) would be designated as 100 octane by today's standards. And I think a turbo charger is needed if you want to run at a rich mix at high altitude. With a normally aspirated engine you would need to run leaner at higher altitudes due to the lower air pressure.

But what little I "know" of these matters is gleaned from the infinite wisdom of the Internet, so...

[savoche]

Are you sure you don't mean 87? Most of the USA seems to run 87 regular and 91-93 premium.

I've always been fascinated with the different octane ratings. In South Africa, with leaded fuel "Regular" at the coast was 93 octane and "Premium" was 98. These days it's 93 and 95, with unleaded.

Here, 91 is regular and 95 is premium, but some filling stations also sell 98. On the South Island, they have 89, 91, 95, 98 and 100 octane. My son likes to run his 350Z on 100, or 98 minimum.

My understanding is that you need higher octane numbers at the coast and lower octane numbers at higher elevation.

The norm here is 95, but with some added butane during winter (15 Sept to 1 April). You can still get 98 at some places, though.

[slartibartfast01]

Are you sure you don't mean 87? Most of the USA seems to run 87 regular and 91-93 premium.



I've always been fascinated with the different octane ratings. In South Africa, with leaded fuel "Regular" at the coast was 93 octane and "Premium" was 98. These days it's 93 and 95, with unleaded.



Here, 91 is regular and 95 is premium, but some filling stations also sell 98. On the South Island, they have 89, 91, 95, 98 and 100 octane. My son likes to run his 350Z on 100, or 98 minimum.



My understanding is that you need higher octane numbers at the coast and lower octane numbers at higher elevation.

Would you believe Octane is yet another thing that America has to do differently from the rest of the world
https://www.etuners.gr/fuel/

[savoche]

Would you believe Octane is yet another thing that America has to do differently from the rest of the world
https://www.etuners.gr/fuel/

Well, there you go. I wasn't aware of the "pump octane" variant, just RON and MON. I suppose 87 octane PON is roughly the same as 93 octane RON, then.

Since standards are a good thing, multiple standards must be better than a single one, right?

[slartibartfast01]

Well, there you go. I wasn't aware of the "pump octane" variant, just RON and MON. I suppose 87 octane PON is roughly the same as 93 octane RON, then.



Since standards are a good thing, multiple standards must be better than a single one, right?

We should have stayed with 2,3 and 4 star, whatever happened to them?

[Racer X 69]

From what I've read the 100/150 octane fuel (100 for lean mix, 150 for rich) would be designated as 100 octane by today's standards. And I think a turbo charger is needed if you want to run at a rich mix at high altitude. With a normally aspirated engine you would need to run leaner at higher altitudes due to the lower air pressure.

But what little I "know" of these matters is gleaned from the infinite wisdom of the Internet, so...

Reciprocal airplane engines were usually supercharged to make power at altitude.

[CharLac]

Never understood why people have so much trouble with wiper changes. It is a simple mechanism, a little plastic tab with a hole that corresponds to a button on the wiper arm. Lift the tab with your thumbnail, slide off the old wiper, slide the new one on until it clicks into place, then wait for some rain.

Or even easier, if your wiper supports it, slide out the old rubber blade and slide in a new one. Cheap AND easy.

[CharLac]

A shot of the aero rakes on a Red Bull F1 car.

Andrian Newey's genius and innovation at work no doubt.

[Parallax]

Are you sure you don't mean 87? Most of the USA seems to run 87 regular and 91-93 premium.

Well, I'm sure, now that you pointed it out that I meant 87. The highest we have around here is 91. I saw 93 on the East Coast when we were there a few years ago.

[CharLac]

True - and not so true. It depends on where you live. In a low-income, low-cost country a million dollars still is quite a fortune.

A friend of mine lives in Argentina; he does very well.

[lesmore49]

Nah, I think we're represented well enough by the lutefisk

Lutefisk is mainly a Norwegian thing, but you also find a tradition for it in Sweden and Finland.

But since you mention Iceland, hákarl should be on the list, as should the Swedish delicacy of surströmming

I've never tried Lutefisk. And I've had opportunity to try this dish, as there are plenty of Icelanders in my province, and many Norwegians, just 70 miles away, across the border in North Dakota and Minnesota.

My Scottish grandfather introduced me to Haggis and Black Pudding when I was but a callow child. And I developed a taste for these delicacies, from this early age.

So the only thing I can think of, is maybe my liking for Haggis and Black Pudding, has kept me well satisfied, so I haven't felt the yearning to try some food such as Lutefisk.