Why the /6
Hmmmmm, 32,746 members and a 160 responses...not all pro /6...many by the same people...
Not even a blip on the interest scale...
The trouble with slant sixes as regards "not even a blip on the interest scale" is that, due to their long-time history of being a non-performer, the great bulk of people reading this forum have a very strong. preconceived notion that from a performance perspective, slant sixes are a waste of time, and uninteresting because they JUST DON'T RUN!
There's a reason for that. The only cylinder head available for the slant six motor was originally designed for the little 170, and has very poor breathing when used on the 225. It's the only game in town, so-to-speak... nothing else has ever been developed for that motor... nothing.
So, we have seen a lifetime of normally-aspirated slant sixes that just don't respond very well to normal hot rodding methods of getting more power, at least, not in the traditional sense. In the general conception of hot rodding as regards slant sixes, the notion exists that, because they have
never seen evidence that a slant-powered car, built right (with forced induction,) then it follows that a true "performance' slant six must not exist.
So, understandably, these folks don't bother to look any further.
The fact is, really fast slant-powered vehicles are so scarce that you really can't blame people for thinking what they do, but I think that the scarcity issue is going to change, soon.
I am sure that most of these "non-believers" are unaware of several pertinent facts about force-fed slant sixes. Facts like: Tom Wolfe's and Ryan Peterson's A-Body cars have engines that produce over 500 horsepower. Yeah, Slant Sixes.
Those engines make their horsepower UNDER 5,500 rpm, with no exotic components on board; no roller-tappet cams, no roller rockers, no exotic ignition systems, no dry sumps, home-made exhaust headers, no fuel injection.... only one 4bbl carb... and they do it on gasoline.
Ryan's '66 Valiant (with a 2.76:1 ring gear and pinion) has run 10.74 @ 127mph, with a power-sapping 727 T-Flite in the mix. With a lighter, more-efficient 904 transmission, it would probably have gone 130 on that run...
It weighs about 2,800 pounds with no driver.
Tom's car is a later Dart (a 1970 hardtop) and is heavier at about 3,300 pounds. It ran 11-flat and 122mph into a 15-mph headwind the last time out.
It takes about 500 horsepower to do that...
Both of those engines have a .065"-overbore, making them 234 cubic inches, each.. That's virtually 2.14 horsepower per cubic inch.
If your 440 made that kind of power, it would have 942 horsepower.
Of course, you can get more power (a LOT more) out of virtually ANY V8 by resorting to forced induction.... but the little slant six is built (by the factory) SO rugged and SO strong, that it is possible to utilize boost levels that would blow the crank right out onto the ground of those V8s, if they tried the high boost levels that Ryan and Tom have utilized in their motors. They both have run boost numbers in the high 20s... with no apparent damage. Try that with a 360 Magnum... I don't think you'll be happy with the results.
I have never driven (nor, ridden in) a car that would run 130 in the quarter, I'd imagine that most people have not. Ryan's car is fast enough to scare the bejesus out of me; my car (a 1972 Valiant) is a supercharged 360 Magnum that has low 11-second capability (118mph) and on the street, it is scary to me... That's 0-60 in 3 seconds...
I'm sure that it would feel like a sled to some of you, but to MOST people, it would get their attention. And Ryan's slant six car will run off and hide from my car!
At least, it runs well-enough to "Create a blip on the interest scale..."
When he word gets out about the true potential of the turbo slant six motors, I think it will result in a LOT of them being built... but, the word has to get out first...:violent1:
