273ci thoughts?
oh oh...this is getting' emotional
I knew it would; 273 guys all come out of the woodwork when you dis their little motors, just like the BB boys scorn the SBMers..
By 273ers thinking it seems a 383 would would outpower a 440 in same configuration. I mean it's the same plus 16.5% displacement.
Let's go to 1969, and examine these 2bbl engines;
>The 2bbl 273 was advertised to make peak torque at 2400IIRC. And I think the 318-2bbl was at same.
>The 273 was advertised to be a 9.0 engine and the 318 was 9.2
>They both used the same heads, same cam, and same spec rods.
>The 318 pistons come in 43 gms heavier at 592, versus 549 to the 273
> in 69 all SBMs had steel cranks
SO,
lemmee get this right;
in 1969, the only differences were;
45 more cubes for the 318, and
0.2 point more compression for the 318 ..........
But somehow the 273 was the better engine?
I think what the 273 guys miss, is that in comparison, at low rpm, like you would find with 2.76s that most most of these cars were saddled with, and at same weight,and with the same TCs, the 318 can torque away with these, whereas the 273 couldn't torque it's way out of a wet paper bag.
One more; at 140ps cranking pressure, the 273 piston is applying 1450 pounds of force to the crank.
Whereas at same pressure, the 318 is pushing with 1681; there is that plus 16% again...
It doesn't matter what you do to a 273, labor wise it costs exactly the same to do it to a 318, and parts wise it costs MORE for the 273, and the bottom line is always
you just give up the cubes.
That makes no sense to me whatsoever. That will cost you more cam, more gear, and more stall... just to play catchup in third gear.