Always been a fan of your videos. You are accurate in your specs of cars which is great for people who know stuff or are learning about engineering. Keep up the good work.
"How big is your engine?" "5.7 liters." "Seven liter V8 modur!" "160 horsepower in the Buick." "It's 200 horsepower okay, how do they get so few horsepower from a V8 modur?" "...I don't know."
that is why a efi 302 V8 gets 30 mpg at 70mph on the interstate and over 20 miles per gallon in a full-size Lincoln Town Car so you sAve nothing buying junk little piece of s*** super charged 4 cylinder engines that last half as long
My favorite Benz V8 is the M117 - it's better than the M100 in every way, being an evolution of it. It also claims AMG glory in the Hammer. But I guess the key detail is that it is based on the M100 which is what makes that engine cooler.
@@mr22guy Another legendary V8 👍 It propelled the glorious Sauber C9 to 400kmh on the Mulsanne straight...so fast, in fact that chicanes were introduced the following year 😎
@@straightbusta2609 You get such results when you take an engine that was designed to run on leaded fuel, force it to run long enough on unleaded fuel until the warranty expires, and try to meet strict efficiency and emissions standards all while spending the least amount of money on RnD. *(Ryder, ni--)*
@@straightbusta2609 new emissions regulation, switching to unleaded fuel and change from measuring gross horsepower to net horsepower. Combine all that and suddenly your horsepower numbers drop to nothing. Oil crisis didn't help either, they needed to make the engines fuel efficient all of a sudden which they hopelessly failed at.
My grandmother drove a '71 Cadillac Eldorado when I was little. Big, smooth, and enough red leather and velvet to make a Parisian whorehouse blush. My grandfather used that car to pull a few stumps as it had a lot of torque.
Those 7.7 and 8.2 litre V8s are truly massive. A few years back, my uncle and I restored a 1971 Cadillac Deville Convertible. As we tore it apart we pulled the engine out, a 472 cui version. For our german standards, this engine was just gigantic. And they are really easy to work on, even if they are mounted in a car.
The earlier high compression Cadillac 472 and 500 motors could move a 5000 lb boat quite effectively. I've owned 3 1973 coupe devilles and they had lower compression ratios and when tuned right were crazy powerful. Torque rules.
They reduced the compression ratio on all the Mercedes engines sold in America too, like the 5.5L m117 which had about 65 less hp than the European version.
My father has 1972 Sedan de ville with the 472(7,7 litre) engine. that car had incredible Torque lay on Throttle just a little I would get whiplash Mr Visioracer I suggest you take back what you said about the Cadillac 472/500 engine The 1972 472 engine hauled ass big time.
All American gasoline OHV V8's had one exhaust valve per cylinder. I think you might be getting this confused with dual exhaust, where each bank has its own exhaust pipe all the way back. My mom had a '77 Cadillac Coupe de Ville, and it's 7.0 liter/425 cubic inch engine made all of 180 hp.... Great video!
Didn't GM experiment with multi-valve OHV engines for the Corvette ZR1 in the late 80s or early 90s? I think I read that somewhere, and i also remember either Cosworth or Lotus were involved in the process... Edit: I checked. It was a DOHC engine in the ZR1. Disregard my reply entirely 😅
@@RickZanardi Chrysler also did build a (prototype) Dohc hemi in the 60's with 4 valves, and Oldsmobile did a proto aswell . I honestly think there are no multi valve pushrod engines
most of these V8s, the American ones at least, were castrated because of emissions and insurance. you can take them from their stock (1970s-1990s) configurations and "return" them to their pre-1970s ones and have pretty good motors.
Same with European engines in America, for example the 1986 Mercedes m117 5.5L v8 had about 65 less hp than the European and Australian version. The American version had lower compression ratio, retarded timing, different camshafts and restrictive exhaust manifolds to fit the emissions crap on. Same with BMW, the American version of the e28 528i usually had about 20 less hp than the rest of the world despite already being a small fuel efficient engine.
@@archygrey9093 Another example is the the V6 of the DeLorean, infamous for it's ridicule power rating, which was rated 30hp more in europe in european cars. Take out the catalytic converter and that's a 30hp instant gain.
The thing with most of these engines are they were doomed due to the smog era of the 70s. They had to be choked down to such an extent that they lacked power.
Good! Ppl are gonna have a global freakout right before we all fry from short wave UVb from no ozone layer. We could have used hemp fuels but look at where we are at now.
@@bhaggen mild cams refer to the profile of the cam (higher or lower), basically how high the valve will open. The duration of the cam is a different matter and it will affect compression ratio.
@@Bata.andrei.....Not true; lift & duration of a cam go hand-in-hand (unless you've invented a square profile cam-lifter arrangement that works) As the lift increases, so does the duration, the pitch of the ramp on the lobe works within a fairly narrow parameter. Look at the cam specs on Comp Cams website
In the USA, almost every engine got a catalytic converter in 1975. Some of the early ones created so much exhaust backpressure that they for sure took away lots of horsepower. General Motors used a "Pellet Cat" instead of "Grid Cat" which made the problem even worse. This may be why several 170s and 1980s GM engines ended on the list.
Back then there were no smog test. Every person would remove the cat soon as W was over. So are the Air exhaust pump. And put a proper dual exhaust back.
@@Oddman1980 Plus the switch from leaded to unleaded fuel, which required the engines to have to be extremely detuned as they had been designed for leaded fuels.
The Cat didn't become effective until the O2 sensor came along. GM engineers actually invented the devise but corporate had no immediate need for it, so they sold the patent to Bosch who was already producing EFI systems in the mid 60s; most subsequent EFI & O2 systems were produced under license from Bosch
Small correction about the Chrysler B 400 engine. All of them had only one exhaust valve per cylinder (not two as claimed for the 260HP variant). The latter variant had a two pipe exhaust.
@@VisioRacer No problem. Probably just a hickup in the translation. On the other hand, I know of NO classical American OHV V8 (the ones with a single camshaft in the V-valley) that had more than two valves (one intake one exhaust) per cylinder.
@@haukesattler446 oh he just meant true dual exhaust? I wondered about that, like wow, multivalve pushrod engines in the '70s! And they picked exhaust instead of intake! But yeah, easy mistake to make in translation.
@@claudyfocan731 you don't need or can afford with price gas over there, any thing around 120 HP any way 38 to 50HP get you anywhere with good gas mileage!!LOL
My dad had a B-body with that Olds engine i think, it was a Pontiac Parisienne. He tuned it to make double the horsepower, still naturally aspirated. Shaved cylinder heads for more compression, better carburetor, bigger cam, higher flowing headers too iirc, and straight sidepipes. He took it racing on an ice course one time and came in 2nd from RWD cars, even beating some AWD cars.
that Russian V8 out of a chaika limousine is so expensive these days, people usually swap for a truck/bus version that has 4,25/4,7 L displacement and 115-130 horses
Exactly. Power at what RPM. Torque curve is another way to look at it. In your Cadillac, would you prefer to floor it up to 4400 rpm every time the light turns green, or just ease onto the gas and let it shift at 1800 for the same net effect?
I owned a 1981 Buick Riviera with the 307 4 barrel and it was an absolute dog. Also had a 1980 Chevy Caprice classic with a 267 and a 2 barrel carburetor that was absolutely anemic. Finally a 1980 oldsmobile cutlass cafe with a 260 cubic inch V8 with a 2 barrel that could barely get out of its own way🤣
I had a 1980 Pontiac bonneville with the same 307 as my first car and yes it wasn’t fast. Could get 25 mpg if you drove conservatively though. If you opened it up, it would gobble gas. Rode like a cloud though and so much room. Could easily and comfortably haul 6 adults. Once we crammed 10 people in it just for shits and giggles.
Thing was the laws got pressed so quickly they didn't have time at first then came the fuel crisis and nobody had the money for the R&D so they produced what they had
they did have the technology to produce high output with low emissions but it would not have been cost effective, ie the unit price would have been considerably more and the market was cut throat, so it never eventuated. As early as 1968 all the bigger manufacturers researched their own electronic fuel injection systems and multi-valve overhead cam technology after Bosch released "Jetronic" but eventually the bottom line mattered far more than performance to the Amercan Auto manufacturers and the bean counters won and hence they stuck with pushrod carbureted engines. :(
@@jaredkennedy6576 yes but they could have kept the engine design in production with a few relatively simple design changes for in order to reduce the pollution but that would have taken money out of the billionaires pocket and we can't do that.
People have to remember that a because of emissions equipment a Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow from the 1970s could only make 189 hp despite having a 6.7 L engine.
Since diesels wont rev; they put out no hp; my 1600 VW diesel puts out 10hp less than my 69 1600 Beetle, but more torque; it'll idle up a steep driveway in 2nd gear with a load of bricks
I love this channel, my friend. I hope the channel is picking up. Every business has it's dynamic highs and lows, just keep posting and trying. This channel is amazing.
you need to remember when we Americans got these cars second hand they had the engines stripped then we changed the intake added headers or if we could afford it we even did the heads changing them to aftermarket ones . when these dogs get a chance to actually breath they come alive for the first time in there life's. even today decades later in most cases we can still pull these out of junk yards and get them running they can be amazing when set up like the designers wanted
Another cracking video! An old coworker of mine has a Cadillac 500ci in his 1980s Malobu wagon. It's been heavily built, and is downright scary the way it is now. The torque is absolutely massive!
Look at how low all the compression is on all these engines. The Mercedes engine could have made a ton more power without emissions and more compression.
it actually did, people tend to forget that the 6.5 and 6.9 variants of that V8 have been fiddled with by AMG at the time to go racing, just check the red pig for reference xD
There is something to be said for large-displacement low horsepower powerplants. Lower output translates to lower stress, hence longevity. Case in point, the single cam ford 'modular' V8. No Ferrari engine will rack up half a million miles, as lovely as they may be.
@@timothybayliss6680 it's those fat soviet pipes that resonate noise so well, I love them. Due to low-qual materials, they had to thicken up everything, and as a result, the exhaust pipes are like a gigantic tube bell that rings with the sound of the engine, the only cars you hear with that nowadays is dodge vipers and maybe a C6 7 liter corvette
In 1986 when Australia adopted unleaded fuel, the domestic designed & built V8s from Holden, at 4.2 litre (253 cube) and 5.0 litre (308 cube) had their compression dropped and milder cams added. I remember the 308 was down-rated to from about 225 ~ 230 hp to 175 hp and I forget what the 253 was rated at, but real world, the 253 was well under 100 hp... The Australian made inline 6s of that year weren't terrific either. I think they were rated at about 115 hp but if you actually put one on the dyno, most made 50 hp or less... A year later, Holden bought in a Nissan 3.0 litre which was quite impressive, and the turbo version of that engine was a champion, but all the old school cast iron Australian engines got completely emasculated. They weren't exactly high output engines anyway, but unleaded showed them to be complete dinosaurs.
@@Kamina1703 I love that with the right mods, you can remove the RB30E head, and fit an RB26DETT head, giving you a reduction in turbo lag compared to the RB26DETT.
Didn't the 253 put out less than 100kW in early Commodores? The 304 in the VL only put out 10hp more than the naturally aspirated 3.0L RB30 six. Let's not forget that the red motor was 20 years old at that time, and GMH was strapped for cash.
Great video! I have a diesel truck that has a gross power rating of 21hp / Liter. It's a 1982 Chevy Scottsdale with a 6.2L V-8 naturally aspirated IDI. It sounds great, but is a gutless wonder! I can get a video and send it to you if you'd like. She look pretty rough, but I love it.
Those J-code 6.2/6.5 Detroits sounds like a 427 Chevy dump truck engine with brutal rod knock 🤣 But it is indeed fantastic, even better with bigger pump elements and the rpms turned up to 4600 🤠👍 6.2 NA will run all day and tow most anything up to 20000 pounds, meanwhile using noticeably less fuel then a Cummins or Powerstroke. They are economical workhorses, and do a superb job at it 😉
@@TimmyTantrum ey I have that car, and lemme tell ya, it'll do 95 after a VERY LONG stretch of road xD It also takes 13.5 seconds to get to 60mph Gotta love CFI, and 140 horses from a 5.0 v8
@@Bartonovich52 My 1980 El Camino SS had 155hp from the factory 350...believe me, it did not go 60mph at idle 🤣 The speedo only went to 85mph lol That motor was replaced with race-prepped 355 and the car picked up basically 300hp...I shit you not. Now to be fair, the 355 wanted 100 octane to be happy while the stock 350 would guzzle 87 octane without batting an eye. But if driven conservatively, the race engine would use only a bit more fuel than the stock engine. By using smog pumps and drastically cutting compression, the Malaise engines had poor volumetric efficiency which actually hurt fuel economy and throttle response. In the 90’s, GM would rectify this by increasing compression and then adding a heart-shaped combustion chamber. The Vortec 350 is rated a full 100hp higher than my old stock 350 and gets much better fuel mileage...better late than never I guess 😅
Bs! The only thing that slowed the American cars down for Awhile was the leftist epa regs. Heck my1980 American pinto done130 mph in Italy in 1985 with no cat and leaded gas
Cool! I can listen to the sound of large american V8's for ages! Thanx! BTW: Volga interceptor is GAZ 24-24, convoy vehicle is GAZ 24-25. Both had modified GAZ 13 Chayka engine. ZIL was a totally different story, with it's own larger, and more powerful engine.
I really like your videos, you have to do a substancial amount of research and have to be interested in these things pretty seriously to be able to make all the content for your channel, and you give a lot of answers to many funny questions one might think only by themselves but would never be curious enough to actually do some digging to see how things actually are, keep up the good work!
Thank you Visio for a great video! One engine you didn't mention was the Chevrolet 5.0 (305) V8 ( even the 5.7, (350), 7.4 (454) shared the same fate) from the late 70's to the mid 80's it was a real gutless wonder. I maybe wrong but HP rating were around 150 or less depending on the model, pickup,car, etc. Those engines at the time were so smoged down, detuned, round cams, soup bowled pistons, highly restricted exhaust, feedback carbs, etc. They could barely pull themselves out of the way. Do to their internal design they possibly only used 40% of the actual displacement to produce power. All the American auto makers faced the same dilemma along with many other issues. later when fuel-injection became available did things got a little better. Those were dark days (mid 70's to the mid 80's) for American auto makers. European car makers have a similar situation but not as extreme. At that same time Asian car makers ( in the US market) really took off. The rest is history. Thanks again for the great video and cheers my friend!!
unfortunately most automakers in the 70s and 80s in America were forced to detune their V8 engines thus making them pretty pathetic out of the box(from the factory), but luckily the hot rodders and aftermarket companies of the day, took task to mitigate that by offering products that
@@gregrowe1168 maybe, but if you're going to do that, you may as well change the camshaft and heads to maximize power (also bam just like that you've just became a hot rodder too)
....... That could make those underpowered V8's a DOHC with variable camshaft's, twin Turbo's, ABT exaust pipe's, ECU upgrade, NOS extra's, and bigger branded radiator and piston head's to make mo pawaaah, and make those pig's fly high on the road.
I’ve either owned or worked on most of the engines shown in this video. I have to say that the biggest p.o.s. motor was the Olds 307. It wasn’t just underpowered. It got shit mpg. Thanks for the video post and best of luck 🍀👍🏼
8:40 something off looking about a big, iron, american pushrod V8 sporting rice rocket air filters... especially stuck onto what looks like a factory air cleaner housing... import style mods on a muscle car... I think I'll call that chili rice 😂
Used to have a Ranger offroad 2000 back then with a Cologne 4L V6 OHV, It had less than 160hp, would chug more fuel than a V8 5.0L or around 16-20+Liters per 100km, also take everything to climb a hill. Worst engine ive ever owned, the only perk is that its bulletproof.
Cologne engines at all are nothing but an anchor designed to barely move the truck and last for a million years, and nothing else. Totally garbage. If Ford wasn't terrible at electronics they'd at least be reliable vehicles
Worst engine ever was the 2.8 Chevy v6 of the late 80s. I had an 87 S10 4x4 with that engine and it was a complete slug. I only paid $400 for the truck in 2004 though. Drove it for about a year and got rid of it when the transmission was slipping badly and about to go out. Still got $400 out of it when I traded it for another s10 4x4 but this one had the 4.3 v6, one of the best engines gm ever made.
You've opened my eyes to so many more engines around the world ... And surprisingly even some here in the United States that I did not know about great job keep it going
I like every Engine that makes power and sounds good. My first love was V8, then Rotary, then I6 and V6. Now I have a fascination with straight 4's and V2. Deltic Engines sounds awesome too. And I even like Electric Engines that makes sounds.
This would be a fantastic discussion over beers for sure, but it might be a bit too subjective for this channel. I could be wrong. Totally agree with the posters above me too. I'd add the Toyota MZ family and Oldsmobile Quad 4.
I have owned three of these engines listed. My first car was a 1975 Oldsmobile Toronado with the 455, which I still own. Had an 1985 Oldsmobile Cutlass with the 307, and a 1972 Cadillac Fleetwood with the 472. The Cadillac and Toronado weren't powerhouses, but the torque produced would snap you neck back every time you gunned it. The 307 was indeed extremely reliable, and last over 400K with basic maintenance. Seriously, I only tuned it, kept the oil changed, and replaced the water pump twice. Good motor, good car.
@My Pronoun is WTF They're not bad looking cars, but they ran closer to 16's then 15's. I have road tests of them running high 15's. Best thing you can do with a 1980's monte ss would be to swap in a LS engine.
It's amazing how far we've come, my Touareg V8 TDi(stage 2) makes 420Hp and 1100nm of torque and is incredibly economical for what it is, currently averaging 31mpg as a daily.
9:03 Visio Racer, gotta stop ya there. I think the confusion is that it was rated for that hp with single exhaust, which means it had only one tailpipe (all 8 cylinders shared one exhaust pipe) vs. dual exhaust system, 2 tailpipes (one for the left bank and a seprate one for the right bank. Essentially 2 seprate, independent exhaust systems) The 400 only had 1 exhaust valve per cylinder in it's entirety of the production run. All domestic (USA) V8's in that era only had one exhaust valve. Most still do.
right - for USA new-car buyers in the 1980s, at least on the west and east coasts where domestic-brand loyalty was weaker, Japanese multi-valve engines of 3 and 4 valves per cylinder were objectively miles ahead of US domestic engines at the time - cheap powerful economical and reliable.
Tatra 87 3.0L V8 power output seems low (75hp), but it was very comparable to mainstream engines of its 1930's era (Ford Flathead V8 3.6L had 65-85hp). Tatra 603 with its 2.5L V8 (105hp) was fine in 1955, but aged quickly and end of production (1975) belongs here. And Tatra 613 with 3.5L V8 (167hp) made since 1975 definitely shall be listed, as it felt like lowest torque V8 on the world.
I had a 1984 4.1 liter digital fuel injection Cadillac Sedan deville. That was 1 bad engine.... bad horsepower and tork.... But the sound was great! Thnx voor the video. See you on the next 1!
Wasn’t that gms first attempt at cylinder deactivation? I know they had a v8 that would go into 4 cylinder mode back then to save fuel. It was a complete failure.
@@gregrowe1168 no it was the fist with the aluminium heads, cast iron block and iron head bolts. That was no succes.... Had the power of a Zippo and a nightmare to work on...
I might have an interesting request: European Hillclimb Cars. As an example, there's an Opel Kadett C in the 2 liter naturally aspirated class, using an Opel Diesel Block, and a Hayabusa Head, producing 320hp! (160hp per liter)
The US HP numbers are SEA ratings, the European DIN rating. You can't compare them one to one. The 6.9 Mercedes S class was one of the fastest sedans of its time.
There's a great line in the book, Cosworth: The Search For Power, which recounts Mike Costin's assessment of the 427ci big block Chevy motor - ".. it should have arrows in the ports to tell the gases which way they should be going."
What about the 90s Ford 302ci 5.0l at 210 hp what a sad situation that is, I managed to get 300hp out of mine with some serious internal work and bolt ons.
Even sadder is that I cannot hear about a 90s Ford 5.0 without thinking of Vanilla Ice. 🤣 That generation of Mustang wasn't officially sold outside the US (most of those you see outside the US were personal imports from US servicemen stationed overseas, and a small number of cars were exported for motorsport), so outside of the US it is heavily associated with the song "Ice Ice Baby".
Had a 96 F150 4x4 with the 5.0. Bad part is it still got horrible fuel economy, 10-12 mpg was the norm and no lift either just stock tires. I can imagine you’d go down into the mid single digits with a lift and 35s.
GM has always been known for the biggest & most powerful V8's, but never gave it a 2nd thought, of the least powerful V8 engines. Makes me wonder now, how much power, the GMC 637 V8 from the early 60's made. Cool video!
My 305 had to need a cam as well, it had something like 160hp when new (at least one cylinder had no compression by then). Wasn't interested in more power as the wagon suspension was barely capable of keeping it on the road with 160hp (not to mention the horrors of gas mileage). Still powerful enough to force itself onto the DC beltway during the doublenickle era (rt1 on ramp had almost no on ramp at the time).
Not really.. tiny cams, low compression, lousy flowing cylinder heads, retarded timing and other minor things were the real offenders. Straight pipe just makes you go slowly louder...
my auto teacher has a 6.9 450 those things have some get up and go, it cooked both tires going up hill in the dry it was a riot to ride in and if you wherent hammering it cruised super well
It's almost like the Americans took it upon themselves to compete against each other to create the least powerful largest displacement engine possible.
The thing is most of them were low revving engines with more torque than horsepower. That's the thing, the easiest way to increase horsepower is to increase rpm, which for large old engines makes them exceedingly unreliable. So the answer for large, heavy American cars, they opted for large displacement, high torque engines
Hoped that you wouldn't forget the caddy 500 engines! Had the joy to drive a 1971 eldorado and a 1975 eldorado too, and the difference is REALLY big. Mostly the same car, but man, the '71 bites much better.... Also, i had the honor to be part of restoring the '71 engine when it got rod knock.
Great video, small correction though. Cadillac was 190 hp for 1975 & 1976 due to the catalyst. Late 1975 & 1976, throttle body electronic fuel injection was available, hp was 215. I learned to drive on my dad's '75 EFI Coupe deVille. (And my mom's '75 Buick Regal). 5.7 liter, 2-bbl, 145hp.
Diesel has incredible torque vs hp. That's the tradeoff. The 7.3 IDI in my 88 F350 dumptruck can haul quite a load with out really straining the engine, sure it's not winning any races or any beauty contests for that matter.😄
@@evi1dav3 That is true but it has nothing to do with it being a "diesel". Because of the higher compression ratio's, diesels are "clearance limited". That means piston to valve clearance is tight. Therefore the much milder valve event timing so valves don't hit pistons moves the peak torque RPM down in the range. That is the factor in the good low speed torque characteristics. If you look at the old big truck and industrial gasoline engines specifications, you'll see torque peak RPM's from 900 to 1600 RPMs on many of them. Diesels have nothing on gasoline engines in that regard. The low horsepower comes from the fact diesel fuel burns at a slower flame speed than gasoline. You just can't burn it fast enough at high engine speeds, so less is injected to prevent black smoke (unburned fuel). The torque is lower so the horsepower is lower. HP is a calculated number based on torque and RPM. One other point. When comparing a 4 cycle OHV gasoline engine to a 4 cycle diesel (all are OHV) engine of the same displacement and manifold pressure, the gasoline engine out torques and way out horse powers the diesel engine (see my explanation on combustion speed of the two fuels). The "diesel has more torque than a gasoline engine" is an old myth with no basis in realiity (or specifications).
Oh man this video is pure ear candy. I don't care if the power is low - that can be remedied - that sound, man. It excites the nerves like no 4-cylinder (or 5, 6, 10, or 12) can.
Russian viewer here :) ZiL had own V8 lineup and it's diffent :) also what's shown on the screen is custom swapped GAZ truck V8 which is even more pathetic 135 horse power 4,25 liter version. Original 23, 24-24 and 24-34 Volgas are extremely rare, most of the cases destroyed after decommissioning, sometimes (as an exclusion) being sold to the public but with regular engine) Hope that wasn't rude by me to mention)
The real reason why the Mercedes 6.9 is an underperforming car is the gearing, as you mentioned. Not the engine itself. The final drive ratio is 2.65 and 1st is 2.31 - imagine a C5 z06 corvette, starting in 2nd gear.
I'd love to see a series of videos about the Chevy 350, and other iconic engines, that are just various builds of one, upping the horsepower each time. There are some amazing ones out there.
as a reference, the 3.5L v6 Honda uses in it's minivans, pickup, SUV's, and some sedans makes 78.6 hp/L, though this varies by the tune and applications.
It is a dual exhaust, not dual exhaust valve. Huge mistake, sorry for that. Please, don’t get carried away just by that and enjoy the video!
No worries. You owned up to it.
Always been a fan of your videos.
You are accurate in your specs of cars which is great for people who know stuff or are learning about engineering.
Keep up the good work.
@@MavAuto-Pete I more respect for him than Scotty Lying-azz Kilmer.
*Insert Clarkon's "7 liter V8 mot'r" line*
Vee eight modur
@Victor Masson "it's 200 in this one"
how do they get so few horsepower out of a 7 liter v8 MOUHdur
"How big is your engine?"
"5.7 liters."
"Seven liter V8 modur!"
"160 horsepower in the Buick."
"It's 200 horsepower okay, how do they get so few horsepower from a V8 modur?"
"...I don't know."
Itt is vannak magyarok rajtam kívül?
The moment I saw this video, my first thought was: “There’s gonna be a LOT of American engines in this video, isn’t there?”
Thanks to the American EPA!
It's because of the government
Yeah! The malase-era!
Baloney! It wasn't the fault of the EPA, it was the fault of lazy engineering and the corporate bosses not wanting to improve the cars.
that is why a efi 302 V8 gets 30 mpg at 70mph on the interstate and over 20 miles per gallon in a full-size Lincoln Town Car so you sAve nothing buying junk little piece of s*** super charged 4 cylinder engines that last half as long
The M100 is hands down my favourite Benz V8. The mad lads at AMG got 430hp and 460ftlbs out of it back in 1971!
My favorite Benz V8 is the M117 - it's better than the M100 in every way, being an evolution of it. It also claims AMG glory in the Hammer. But I guess the key detail is that it is based on the M100 which is what makes that engine cooler.
@@mr22guy Another legendary V8 👍 It propelled the glorious Sauber C9 to 400kmh on the Mulsanne straight...so fast, in fact that chicanes were introduced the following year 😎
It can probably handle twice that without breaking a sweat.
Swabian quality 👍 My favourite Engine from Benz is the OM617. Diesel POWER!
@@movinmetal2596Correction, it's the M119 that propelled the C9. Yet another amazing Benz engine as well
I'm expecting every American car from the mid to late 70s.
"7 liter V8 moudur"
"200 HP"
"How do the Americans get so few horsepower out of a V8 moudur"
@@straightbusta2609
You get such results when you take an engine that was designed to run on leaded fuel, force it to run long enough on unleaded fuel until the warranty expires, and try to meet strict efficiency and emissions standards all while spending the least amount of money on RnD.
*(Ryder, ni--)*
Yep, I pretty much figured that too
@@straightbusta2609 new emissions regulation, switching to unleaded fuel and change from measuring gross horsepower to net horsepower. Combine all that and suddenly your horsepower numbers drop to nothing. Oil crisis didn't help either, they needed to make the engines fuel efficient all of a sudden which they hopelessly failed at.
And 80s
My grandmother drove a '71 Cadillac Eldorado when I was little. Big, smooth, and enough red leather and velvet to make a Parisian whorehouse blush. My grandfather used that car to pull a few stumps as it had a lot of torque.
Those 7.7 and 8.2 litre V8s are truly massive. A few years back, my uncle and I restored a 1971 Cadillac Deville Convertible. As we tore it apart we pulled the engine out, a 472 cui version. For our german standards, this engine was just gigantic. And they are really easy to work on, even if they are mounted in a car.
The earlier high compression Cadillac 472 and 500 motors could move a 5000 lb boat quite effectively. I've owned 3 1973 coupe devilles and they had lower compression ratios and when tuned right were crazy powerful. Torque rules.
Did owned a 73 eldo. Very nice riding for the era. GAS consumption no object too.
As Jay Leno says, "Horsepower sells cars, torque moves them"
They reduced the compression ratio on all the Mercedes engines sold in America too, like the 5.5L m117 which had about 65 less hp than the European version.
A kid I went to school with had a cadillac 500ci and could smoke the tires loaded with people, that was a badass boat!
My father has 1972 Sedan de ville with the 472(7,7 litre) engine. that car had incredible Torque lay on Throttle just a little I would get whiplash Mr Visioracer I suggest you take back what you said about the Cadillac 472/500 engine The 1972 472 engine hauled ass big time.
All American gasoline OHV V8's had one exhaust valve per cylinder. I think you might be getting this confused with dual exhaust, where each bank has its own exhaust pipe all the way back.
My mom had a '77 Cadillac Coupe de Ville, and it's 7.0 liter/425 cubic inch engine made all of 180 hp....
Great video!
Yeah exactly what I thought. There are no multi valve Chrysler bigblocks 😁
Didn't GM experiment with multi-valve OHV engines for the Corvette ZR1 in the late 80s or early 90s? I think I read that somewhere, and i also remember either Cosworth or Lotus were involved in the process...
Edit: I checked. It was a DOHC engine in the ZR1. Disregard my reply entirely 😅
@@RickZanardi Chrysler also did build a (prototype) Dohc hemi in the 60's with 4 valves, and Oldsmobile did a proto aswell . I honestly think there are no multi valve pushrod engines
@@gorkzop the only 4 valve pushrod motors I can think of are Harley's Milwaukee 8 and the newer Moto Guzzi twins.
GM LT1 (2014) is a multivalve OHV engine@@gorkzop
9:57 nice touch when the subtitle pulls out with the same speed as the Caddy 👌
most of these V8s, the American ones at least, were castrated because of emissions and insurance. you can take them from their stock (1970s-1990s) configurations and "return" them to their pre-1970s ones and have pretty good motors.
*EPA WANTS TO KNOW YOUR LOCATION*
But for real go sign the sema thing
Same with European engines in America, for example the 1986 Mercedes m117 5.5L v8 had about 65 less hp than the European and Australian version.
The American version had lower compression ratio, retarded timing, different camshafts and restrictive exhaust manifolds to fit the emissions crap on.
Same with BMW, the American version of the e28 528i usually had about 20 less hp than the rest of the world despite already being a small fuel efficient engine.
@@archygrey9093 Another example is the the V6 of the DeLorean, infamous for it's ridicule power rating, which was rated 30hp more in europe in european cars. Take out the catalytic converter and that's a 30hp instant gain.
@@Damien.D A good flowing cat isn't really the problem.. most if not all high hp cars nowadays have cats and can make crazy power.
@@nitro2525 Yup many cats were bodged on untuned engines at that time.
The thing with most of these engines are they were doomed due to the smog era of the 70s. They had to be choked down to such an extent that they lacked power.
Not the old bmw v8 although it's a very small v8 but still should make close to 200 like 180 hp
And the C3 Corvette though it was still a shell of it's former self
@@manuelsilva3365 Early top trim C3s made 425 horsepower
@@hanoimenace Ik, but mid to late 70s killed the car
Good! Ppl are gonna have a global freakout right before we all fry from short wave UVb from no ozone layer. We could have used hemp fuels but look at where we are at now.
I love the sound of low compression, mild cam V8's.
Milder cams produce more actual compression since the valves are closed longer; to compensate, the compression RATIO must be dropped
@@bhaggen mild cams refer to the profile of the cam (higher or lower), basically how high the valve will open. The duration of the cam is a different matter and it will affect compression ratio.
@@Bata.andrei.....Not true; lift & duration of a cam go hand-in-hand (unless you've invented a square profile cam-lifter arrangement that works) As the lift increases, so does the duration, the pitch of the ramp on the lobe works within a fairly narrow parameter. Look at the cam specs on Comp Cams website
In the USA, almost every engine got a catalytic converter in 1975. Some of the early ones created so much exhaust backpressure that they for sure took away lots of horsepower. General Motors used a "Pellet Cat" instead of "Grid Cat" which made the problem even worse. This may be why several 170s and 1980s GM engines ended on the list.
Never knew of the pellet cat... Thanks
Those bad catalysts, along with lower compression and milder cams... they were trying to make the engines run clean, and they really had no idea how.
Back then there were no smog test. Every person would remove the cat soon as W was over. So are the Air exhaust pump. And put a proper dual exhaust back.
@@Oddman1980 Plus the switch from leaded to unleaded fuel, which required the engines to have to be extremely detuned as they had been designed for leaded fuels.
The Cat didn't become effective until the O2 sensor came along. GM engineers actually invented the devise but corporate had no immediate need for it, so they sold the patent to Bosch who was already producing EFI systems in the mid 60s; most subsequent EFI & O2 systems were produced under license from Bosch
They all sound so smooth and relaxed I love these vehicles!
Small correction about the Chrysler B 400 engine. All of them had only one exhaust valve per cylinder (not two as claimed for the 260HP variant). The latter variant had a two pipe exhaust.
Mea culpa, sorry
@@VisioRacer No problem. Probably just a hickup in the translation. On the other hand, I know of NO classical American OHV V8 (the ones with a single camshaft in the V-valley) that had more than two valves (one intake one exhaust) per cylinder.
@@haukesattler446 oh he just meant true dual exhaust? I wondered about that, like wow, multivalve pushrod engines in the '70s! And they picked exhaust instead of intake!
But yeah, easy mistake to make in translation.
Video ideea: The most underpowered European engines ever to be put on passanger cars
Maybe also Japan and other countries too?!
that would be 8 hours video!! and you can not up load it to you tube !! LOL
@@ahoorakia at least we don’t need 7.0l and 8-cyl. To make 120hp 🤡
@@claudyfocan731 you don't need or can afford with price gas over there, any thing around 120 HP any way
38 to 50HP get you anywhere with good gas mileage!!LOL
Great idea! There really were some ridiculously underpowered shitboxes here in Europe. I remember the Opel Astra Station Wagon with a 60hp 1.4 litre…
My dad had a B-body with that Olds engine i think, it was a Pontiac Parisienne. He tuned it to make double the horsepower, still naturally aspirated.
Shaved cylinder heads for more compression, better carburetor, bigger cam, higher flowing headers too iirc, and straight sidepipes.
He took it racing on an ice course one time and came in 2nd from RWD cars, even beating some AWD cars.
Stock engine internals?
@@Creeperboy099 Can't remember, probably was.
that Russian V8 out of a chaika limousine is so expensive these days, people usually swap for a truck/bus version that has 4,25/4,7 L displacement and 115-130 horses
I always thought the purpose of low powered V8s was to reach a certain power output effortlessly. For the sake of a smooth, luxurious ride.
Exactly. Power at what RPM. Torque curve is another way to look at it.
In your Cadillac, would you prefer to floor it up to 4400 rpm every time the light turns green, or just ease onto the gas and let it shift at 1800 for the same net effect?
I owned a 1981 Buick Riviera with the 307 4 barrel and it was an absolute dog. Also had a 1980 Chevy Caprice classic with a 267 and a 2 barrel carburetor that was absolutely anemic. Finally a 1980 oldsmobile cutlass cafe with a 260 cubic inch V8 with a 2 barrel that could barely get out of its own way🤣
I had a 1980 Pontiac bonneville with the same 307 as my first car and yes it wasn’t fast. Could get 25 mpg if you drove conservatively though. If you opened it up, it would gobble gas. Rode like a cloud though and so much room. Could easily and comfortably haul 6 adults. Once we crammed 10 people in it just for shits and giggles.
My faverite part of his videos, is when he says, "carburetor", or "weber carburetor". Best engine channel on the tube.
What do you mean? People say weber when it's not? Low power output wouldn't be a weber normally right?
*Carburettor
:)
It is truly sad that they couldn't figure out how to reduce emissions without absolutely crippling the engines for so long.
It is truly sad the government put in stupid emissions requirements in the first place
@@Pissrust69 As I said elsewhere, breathing is a good thing.
Thing was the laws got pressed so quickly they didn't have time at first then came the fuel crisis and nobody had the money for the R&D so they produced what they had
they did have the technology to produce high output with low emissions but it would not have been cost effective, ie the unit price would have been considerably more and the market was cut throat, so it never eventuated. As early as 1968 all the bigger manufacturers researched their own electronic fuel injection systems and multi-valve overhead cam technology after Bosch released "Jetronic" but eventually the bottom line mattered far more than performance to the Amercan Auto manufacturers and the bean counters won and hence they stuck with pushrod carbureted engines. :(
They did though, 30 years later. Might as well complain that it's a shame the ancient Greeks never figured out fuel injection.
It really is sad that so many good design were basically neutered just to please government regs.
Sadder yet that the US auto manufacturers were so ill prepared for the inevitable; "necessity is the mother of invention"
Well, I mean, breathing is a good thing.
@@jaredkennedy6576 yes but they could have kept the engine design in production with a few relatively simple design changes for in order to reduce the pollution but that would have taken money out of the billionaires pocket and we can't do that.
@@bhaggen it all happened within a year, what the hell are you on about???
Dark times indeed, but thanks to the hardships for innovation we can have V8 engines that can easily achieve thousands of HP
Seventies and Eighties were definitely a weird era for cars
So peugeot diesel 505grd ?
People have to remember that a because of emissions equipment a Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow from the 1970s could only make 189 hp despite having a 6.7 L engine.
The malaise era took its toll on us all
Olds 350 diesel gotta be one of the lowest hp V8s ever
and i love them 🤩
Since diesels wont rev; they put out no hp; my 1600 VW diesel puts out 10hp less than my 69 1600 Beetle, but more torque; it'll idle up a steep driveway in 2nd gear with a load of bricks
@@bhaggen diesels do rev and as all other engines should not be lugged. driving at idle in second gear loaded is no good idea for your engine.
Yeah I was surprised not to see it on the list. Also the ford flathead that was mentioned.
He probably didn't want to add diesels and gas together
I love this channel, my friend. I hope the channel is picking up. Every business has it's dynamic highs and lows, just keep posting and trying. This channel is amazing.
you need to remember when we Americans got these cars second hand they had the engines stripped then we changed the intake added headers or if we could afford it we even did the heads changing them to aftermarket ones . when these dogs get a chance to actually breath they come alive for the first time in there life's. even today decades later in most cases we can still pull these out of junk yards and get them running they can be amazing when set up like the designers wanted
Like a badly neglected house they 'have potential'.
Same can be said for many engines to be honest. Let them breath properly and they’ll make a good bit more power
Another cracking video! An old coworker of mine has a Cadillac 500ci in his 1980s Malobu wagon. It's been heavily built, and is downright scary the way it is now. The torque is absolutely massive!
Look at how low all the compression is on all these engines. The Mercedes engine could have made a ton more power without emissions and more compression.
it actually did, people tend to forget that the 6.5 and 6.9 variants of that V8 have been fiddled with by AMG at the time to go racing, just check the red pig for reference xD
That's the switch from leaded to unleaded. Lots of places didn't have higher octane gas. Same reason many soviet motors were low compression.
That means that with higher octane gas you could add a turbo, provided the engine is built well enough, and get more power.
The same could be said for pretty much all these engines. (better cams would help too)
The one good thing about low powered V8’s is they seem to run indefinitely with minimum maintenance.
There is something to be said for large-displacement low horsepower powerplants. Lower output translates to lower stress, hence longevity. Case in point, the single cam ford 'modular' V8. No Ferrari engine will rack up half a million miles, as lovely as they may be.
Gotta love a V8. Even the comunist one sounds good
I dont know why the Zil V8 sounds so good
@@timothybayliss6680 it's those fat soviet pipes that resonate noise so well, I love them. Due to low-qual materials, they had to thicken up everything, and as a result, the exhaust pipes are like a gigantic tube bell that rings with the sound of the engine, the only cars you hear with that nowadays is dodge vipers and maybe a C6 7 liter corvette
@@THESLlCK It was the first all aluminium V8 into series production if, I have the dates right; pre-dating Western efforts by some years!
Didn’t know that an engine can become a communist but okay
@@timothybayliss6680 because it’s a V8?
Also they were used in some BTRs aswell
As a Brit I always thought the low-comp Rover V8 was pretty weak at 130bhp from 3.5l. But, actually it would beat most of these on specific output..
Like the fact you put y blocks in. As well as the early 80s stop gap motors. Cool list of motors despite the low horse!
Great video, as usual Visio, The Buick/rover 3528cc V8 was quite low powered in standard form, especially in land rover tune, and the MG B V8,
In 1986 when Australia adopted unleaded fuel, the domestic designed & built V8s from Holden, at 4.2 litre (253 cube) and 5.0 litre (308 cube) had their compression dropped and milder cams added. I remember the 308 was down-rated to from about 225 ~ 230 hp to 175 hp and I forget what the 253 was rated at, but real world, the 253 was well under 100 hp... The Australian made inline 6s of that year weren't terrific either. I think they were rated at about 115 hp but if you actually put one on the dyno, most made 50 hp or less... A year later, Holden bought in a Nissan 3.0 litre which was quite impressive, and the turbo version of that engine was a champion, but all the old school cast iron Australian engines got completely emasculated. They weren't exactly high output engines anyway, but unleaded showed them to be complete dinosaurs.
@@Kamina1703 I love that with the right mods, you can remove the RB30E head, and fit an RB26DETT head, giving you a reduction in turbo lag compared to the RB26DETT.
Didn't the 253 put out less than 100kW in early Commodores?
The 304 in the VL only put out 10hp more than the naturally aspirated 3.0L RB30 six.
Let's not forget that the red motor was 20 years old at that time, and GMH was strapped for cash.
Great video! I have a diesel truck that has a gross power rating of 21hp / Liter. It's a 1982 Chevy Scottsdale with a 6.2L V-8 naturally aspirated IDI. It sounds great, but is a gutless wonder! I can get a video and send it to you if you'd like. She look pretty rough, but I love it.
Those J-code 6.2/6.5 Detroits sounds like a 427 Chevy dump truck engine with brutal rod knock 🤣
But it is indeed fantastic, even better with bigger pump elements and the rpms turned up to 4600 🤠👍
6.2 NA will run all day and tow most anything up to 20000 pounds, meanwhile using noticeably less fuel then a Cummins or Powerstroke. They are economical workhorses, and do a superb job at it 😉
Us Americans were pretty good at converting gasoline to noise, and not much else.
Torque.
Who needs HP when you can go 60 MPH at idle? Even in the Malaise era?
@@Bartonovich52 60 at idle, then 80 at full throttle. Least that's as fast as I could get the family's '85 Grand Marquis up to.
@@TimmyTantrum ey I have that car, and lemme tell ya, it'll do 95 after a VERY LONG stretch of road xD
It also takes 13.5 seconds to get to 60mph
Gotta love CFI, and 140 horses from a 5.0 v8
@@Bartonovich52 My 1980 El Camino SS had 155hp from the factory 350...believe me, it did not go 60mph at idle 🤣 The speedo only went to 85mph lol
That motor was replaced with race-prepped 355 and the car picked up basically 300hp...I shit you not.
Now to be fair, the 355 wanted 100 octane to be happy while the stock 350 would guzzle 87 octane without batting an eye. But if driven conservatively, the race engine would use only a bit more fuel than the stock engine.
By using smog pumps and drastically cutting compression, the Malaise engines had poor volumetric efficiency which actually hurt fuel economy and throttle response. In the 90’s, GM would rectify this by increasing compression and then adding a heart-shaped combustion chamber. The Vortec 350 is rated a full 100hp higher than my old stock 350 and gets much better fuel mileage...better late than never I guess 😅
Bs! The only thing that slowed the American cars down for
Awhile was the leftist epa regs. Heck my1980 American pinto done130 mph in Italy in 1985 with no cat and leaded gas
Cool!
I can listen to the sound of large american V8's for ages!
Thanx!
BTW: Volga interceptor is GAZ 24-24, convoy vehicle is GAZ 24-25. Both had modified GAZ 13 Chayka engine. ZIL was a totally different story, with it's own larger, and more powerful engine.
I really like your videos, you have to do a substancial amount of research and have to be interested in these things pretty seriously to be able to make all the content for your channel, and you give a lot of answers to many funny questions one might think only by themselves but would never be curious enough to actually do some digging to see how things actually are, keep up the good work!
Thank you Visio for a great video! One engine you didn't mention was the Chevrolet 5.0 (305) V8 ( even the 5.7, (350), 7.4 (454) shared the same fate) from the late 70's to the mid 80's it was a real gutless wonder. I maybe wrong but HP rating were around 150 or less depending on the model, pickup,car, etc. Those engines at the time were so smoged down, detuned, round cams, soup bowled pistons, highly restricted exhaust, feedback carbs, etc. They could barely pull themselves out of the way. Do to their internal design they possibly only used 40% of the actual displacement to produce power. All the American auto makers faced the same dilemma along with many other issues. later when fuel-injection became available did things got a little better. Those were dark days (mid 70's to the mid 80's) for American auto makers. European car makers have a similar situation but not as extreme. At that same time Asian car makers ( in the US market) really took off. The rest is history. Thanks again for the great video and cheers my friend!!
unfortunately most automakers in the 70s and 80s in America were forced to detune their V8 engines thus making them pretty pathetic out of the box(from the factory), but luckily the hot rodders and aftermarket companies of the day, took task to mitigate that by offering products that
...that? what? the suspense is killing me
@@kinaritakashima sorry mitigate the fact that the american v8 engines in the 70s and 80s were "underpowered"
Basically take off the smog crap and you could get the full power of those engines.
@@gregrowe1168 maybe, but if you're going to do that, you may as well change the camshaft and heads to maximize power (also bam just like that you've just became a hot rodder too)
....... That could make those underpowered V8's a DOHC with variable camshaft's, twin Turbo's, ABT exaust pipe's, ECU upgrade, NOS extra's, and bigger branded radiator and piston head's to make mo pawaaah, and make those pig's fly high on the road.
I’ve either owned or worked on most of the engines shown in this video. I have to say that the biggest p.o.s. motor was the Olds 307. It wasn’t just underpowered. It got shit mpg. Thanks for the video post and best of luck 🍀👍🏼
8:40 something off looking about a big, iron, american pushrod V8 sporting rice rocket air filters... especially stuck onto what looks like a factory air cleaner housing...
import style mods on a muscle car... I think I'll call that chili rice 😂
Superbly explained. I really like and enjoy the technicalities discussed. 👍
Used to have a Ranger offroad 2000 back then with a Cologne 4L V6 OHV, It had less than 160hp, would chug more fuel than a V8 5.0L or around 16-20+Liters per 100km, also take everything to climb a hill. Worst engine ive ever owned, the only perk is that its bulletproof.
Cologne engines at all are nothing but an anchor designed to barely move the truck and last for a million years, and nothing else. Totally garbage. If Ford wasn't terrible at electronics they'd at least be reliable vehicles
Worst engine ever was the 2.8 Chevy v6 of the late 80s. I had an 87 S10 4x4 with that engine and it was a complete slug. I only paid $400 for the truck in 2004 though. Drove it for about a year and got rid of it when the transmission was slipping badly and about to go out. Still got $400 out of it when I traded it for another s10 4x4 but this one had the 4.3 v6, one of the best engines gm ever made.
You've opened my eyes to so many more engines around the world ...
And surprisingly even some here in the United States that I did not know about great job keep it going
My dad has a few of thos pontiac 301’s. Theyre so damn fast when you let them breathe a bit
I like every Engine that makes power and sounds good. My first love was V8, then Rotary, then I6 and V6. Now I have a fascination with straight 4's and V2. Deltic Engines sounds awesome too. And I even like Electric Engines that makes sounds.
They all were decent for their day and age.
And they all contributed to the character of the cars they were in. Slow is not bad, it's just not fast.
You did such a nice job on this videoYou made sure that you found the true sound of all these engines and explained everything about them correctly
2:49 Omg hear that low rev thunder sound!!!!!!!!
Very raw!
+5 Likes other cars suck.
oh, found an american
@@funkygreenjean4734 Lol nope:)
Do you peugeot petrol 604sl ?
Crazy how my 06 vortec 4.8 V8 can make around 300 hp, how far mechanics and technology has come is incredible
Great video, man! I got a video suggestion.
Can you do the most underrated car engines?
M113k is one of them voor sure
Surely the 2zzge @visioracer
This would be a fantastic discussion over beers for sure, but it might be a bit too subjective for this channel. I could be wrong.
Totally agree with the posters above me too. I'd add the Toyota MZ family and Oldsmobile Quad 4.
I have owned three of these engines listed.
My first car was a 1975 Oldsmobile Toronado with the 455, which I still own. Had an 1985 Oldsmobile Cutlass with the 307, and a 1972 Cadillac Fleetwood with the 472. The Cadillac and Toronado weren't powerhouses, but the torque produced would snap you neck back every time you gunned it. The 307 was indeed extremely reliable, and last over 400K with basic maintenance. Seriously, I only tuned it, kept the oil changed, and replaced the water pump twice. Good motor, good car.
Don't know how he missed the chevy 305 boat anchor of the 80's!
@My Pronoun is WTF They're not bad looking cars, but they ran closer to 16's then 15's. I have road tests of them running high 15's. Best thing you can do with a 1980's monte ss would be to swap in a LS engine.
It's amazing how far we've come, my Touareg V8 TDi(stage 2) makes 420Hp and 1100nm of torque and is incredibly economical for what it is, currently averaging 31mpg as a daily.
9:03 Visio Racer, gotta stop ya there. I think the confusion is that it was rated for that hp with single exhaust, which means it had only one tailpipe (all 8 cylinders shared one exhaust pipe) vs. dual exhaust system, 2 tailpipes (one for the left bank and a seprate one for the right bank. Essentially 2 seprate, independent exhaust systems) The 400 only had 1 exhaust valve per cylinder in it's entirety of the production run. All domestic (USA) V8's in that era only had one exhaust valve. Most still do.
Agreed - there is nothing here about dual exhaust valves. www.allpar.com/threads/the-b-engines-350-361-383-and-400.230034/
right - for USA new-car buyers in the 1980s, at least on the west and east coasts where domestic-brand loyalty was weaker, Japanese multi-valve engines of 3 and 4 valves per cylinder were objectively miles ahead of US domestic engines at the time - cheap powerful economical and reliable.
I have found that the Ford small block 289/302/5.0L to be quite condusive to minor hotrodding with great results.
351's have a good hotrodding scene too
@@benson4u215
The Windsor does. The Cleveland was a way more advanced design but prone to cracking blocks. Sweet when they are right.
You forgot V8 Tatra 87. One of the most underpowered V8 engines.
but it's aircooled and from the 30's??
Tatra 87 3.0L V8 power output seems low (75hp), but it was very comparable to mainstream engines of its 1930's era (Ford Flathead V8 3.6L had 65-85hp). Tatra 603 with its 2.5L V8 (105hp) was fine in 1955, but aged quickly and end of production (1975) belongs here. And Tatra 613 with 3.5L V8 (167hp) made since 1975 definitely shall be listed, as it felt like lowest torque V8 on the world.
@@bluefalcon7782 exactly! People have rebuilt them with modern parts to over 285hp! On a conservative tune, mind you
I had a 1984 4.1 liter digital fuel injection Cadillac Sedan deville. That was 1 bad engine.... bad horsepower and tork....
But the sound was great!
Thnx voor the video. See you on the next 1!
Wasn’t that gms first attempt at cylinder deactivation? I know they had a v8 that would go into 4 cylinder mode back then to save fuel. It was a complete failure.
@@gregrowe1168 no it was the fist with the aluminium heads, cast iron block and iron head bolts. That was no succes.... Had the power of a Zippo and a nightmare to work on...
You confused dual exhaust for two exhaust valves on the Chrysler 400.
Aaaa, I think you are right 🙈 Sorry
@@VisioRacer no problem, I assume some language barrier issues whenever I watch your videos.
oh how I love, love , love those "Big, Old Cadillacs", thanks for the show
As soon as I read the title of the video, it reminded me of a GENIUS man who said, "7 litre V8 Modurrr"
I might have an interesting request:
European Hillclimb Cars.
As an example, there's an Opel Kadett C in the 2 liter naturally aspirated class, using an Opel Diesel Block, and a Hayabusa Head, producing 320hp! (160hp per liter)
I guess Gremlin's V8 option fares out measle 30hp/l.
But that's a fairly light car, isn't it? If so, I think it would be plenty power for it?
Gremlin's engine has 150 hp and 5.0L engine. Weighing about 1288 kg.
@@mateuszpaszkiewicz3831 HP/L wise it's pretty gutless. But power to weight is okay (Euro standard atleast)
The US HP numbers are SEA ratings, the European DIN rating. You can't compare them one to one. The 6.9 Mercedes S class was one of the fastest sedans of its time.
DIN is net rated as are the lower numbers of those US engines.
Love your videos
There's a great line in the book, Cosworth: The Search For Power, which recounts Mike Costin's assessment of the 427ci big block Chevy motor - ".. it should have arrows in the ports to tell the gases which way they should be going."
This is very funny to see that. Back then, 5L V8 140HP and now 1L iL3 150HP
Nice video. The Rochester Quadra Jet was used in the 60's and the last application was in the 1990 Oldsmobile
As Jeremy once said: 7 Litre V8 motur
What about the 90s Ford 302ci 5.0l at 210 hp what a sad situation that is, I managed to get 300hp out of mine with some serious internal work and bolt ons.
Even sadder is that I cannot hear about a 90s Ford 5.0 without thinking of Vanilla Ice. 🤣
That generation of Mustang wasn't officially sold outside the US (most of those you see outside the US were personal imports from US servicemen stationed overseas, and a small number of cars were exported for motorsport), so outside of the US it is heavily associated with the song "Ice Ice Baby".
The 210 rating is at the crank. If you got 300 at the wheels that’s very decent from that 302.
@@srcobra50 it seems pretty decent and fun with a limited slip diff,2wd.
Had a 96 F150 4x4 with the 5.0. Bad part is it still got horrible fuel economy, 10-12 mpg was the norm and no lift either just stock tires. I can imagine you’d go down into the mid single digits with a lift and 35s.
The MERCEDES 6.9 was one of the fastest sedans of the time, it’s famous for being a torque monster.
Should never be on this list.
GM has always been known for the biggest & most powerful V8's, but never gave it a 2nd thought, of the least powerful V8 engines. Makes me wonder now, how much power, the GMC 637 V8 from the early 60's made. Cool video!
The fuel crisis in the 70s and a long with the EPA emission control crap, killed American muscle and horsepower.
Ohh Madon, that's not all it killed my friend, don't forget those 16 Czechoslovakians.
After watching a 6 min vid I noticed it actually was 12 min long. Seems it was more fascinating than I expected lol
7:23 Suomi perkele
A1. Pretty cool vid. Figured a russian would be on the list but was superrised by the euros. The 70s was the worst time for horsepower.
The funny thing about the american v8's from the 70's is that they're literally ALL just a straight pipe away from 350+hp
Regulations, man.
My 305 had to need a cam as well, it had something like 160hp when new (at least one cylinder had no compression by then). Wasn't interested in more power as the wagon suspension was barely capable of keeping it on the road with 160hp (not to mention the horrors of gas mileage). Still powerful enough to force itself onto the DC beltway during the doublenickle era (rt1 on ramp had almost no on ramp at the time).
Not really.. tiny cams, low compression, lousy flowing cylinder heads, retarded timing and other minor things were the real offenders. Straight pipe just makes you go slowly louder...
my auto teacher has a 6.9 450 those things have some get up and go, it cooked both tires going up hill in the dry it was a riot to ride in and if you wherent hammering it cruised super well
It's almost like the Americans took it upon themselves to compete against each other to create the least powerful largest displacement engine possible.
The thing is most of them were low revving engines with more torque than horsepower. That's the thing, the easiest way to increase horsepower is to increase rpm, which for large old engines makes them exceedingly unreliable. So the answer for large, heavy American cars, they opted for large displacement, high torque engines
A big engine running at low rpm is more reliable and lasts longer then a small engine that rev’s extremely high to make its power
Hoped that you wouldn't forget the caddy 500 engines! Had the joy to drive a 1971 eldorado and a 1975 eldorado too, and the difference is REALLY big. Mostly the same car, but man, the '71 bites much better.... Also, i had the honor to be part of restoring the '71 engine when it got rod knock.
It's redline is over 9000 Dragonball z lol 😂
IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!
😂 lol
IT'S... one thousand and six
Great video, small correction though. Cadillac was 190 hp for 1975 & 1976 due to the catalyst. Late 1975 & 1976, throttle body electronic fuel injection was available, hp was 215. I learned to drive on my dad's '75 EFI Coupe deVille. (And my mom's '75 Buick Regal). 5.7 liter, 2-bbl, 145hp.
7.3L IDI. 7.3L but only 185hp
Diesels tend to produce less HP than gasoline engines per liter.
All about the RPM
Diesel has incredible torque vs hp. That's the tradeoff. The 7.3 IDI in my 88 F350 dumptruck can haul quite a load with out really straining the engine, sure it's not winning any races or any beauty contests for that matter.😄
@@evi1dav3 That is true but it has nothing to do with it being a "diesel".
Because of the higher compression ratio's, diesels are "clearance limited". That means piston to valve clearance is tight. Therefore the much milder valve event timing so valves don't hit pistons moves the peak torque RPM down in the range. That is the factor in the good low speed torque characteristics. If you look at the old big truck and industrial gasoline engines specifications, you'll see torque peak RPM's from 900 to 1600 RPMs on many of them. Diesels have nothing on gasoline engines in that regard.
The low horsepower comes from the fact diesel fuel burns at a slower flame speed than gasoline. You just can't burn it fast enough at high engine speeds, so less is injected to prevent black smoke (unburned fuel). The torque is lower so the horsepower is lower. HP is a calculated number based on torque and RPM.
One other point. When comparing a 4 cycle OHV gasoline engine to a 4 cycle diesel (all are OHV) engine of the same displacement and manifold pressure, the gasoline engine out torques and way out horse powers the diesel engine (see my explanation on combustion speed of the two fuels). The "diesel has more torque than a gasoline engine" is an old myth with no basis in realiity (or specifications).
Oh man this video is pure ear candy.
I don't care if the power is low - that can be remedied - that sound, man. It excites the nerves like no 4-cylinder (or 5, 6, 10, or 12) can.
*All American cars
Russian viewer here :)
ZiL had own V8 lineup and it's diffent :) also what's shown on the screen is custom swapped GAZ truck V8 which is even more pathetic 135 horse power 4,25 liter version. Original 23, 24-24 and 24-34 Volgas are extremely rare, most of the cases destroyed after decommissioning, sometimes (as an exclusion) being sold to the public but with regular engine)
Hope that wasn't rude by me to mention)
the entire country of the united states belongs here
The real reason why the Mercedes 6.9 is an underperforming car is the gearing, as you mentioned. Not the engine itself. The final drive ratio is 2.65 and 1st is 2.31 - imagine a C5 z06 corvette, starting in 2nd gear.
I was expecting the rover V8 (Buick 215). My disco is way under powered even with the V8 but that’s what makes it fun to drive
I'd love to see a series of videos about the Chevy 350, and other iconic engines, that are just various builds of one, upping the horsepower each time. There are some amazing ones out there.
I love it when you give us info on some of the Com-Bloc cars. please keep them coming.
The 8.2L Cadillacs got really good mileage especially on the freeway
Very nice video! I'm glad i have 170hp in my 1,6 liter turbo. :D
as a reference, the 3.5L v6 Honda uses in it's minivans, pickup, SUV's, and some sedans makes 78.6 hp/L, though this varies by the tune and applications.
great video, as always! congrats. Maybe a "most reliable air-cooled engines put in passenger car"? Regards
That was just awesome. 23 Horse to the liter - now that's a slug.