It's an interesting side by side comparison within their tests, but with the bump in compression ratio and mild port work, I'm surprised at how low their numbers are across the board. Like DadTruck mentioned, they're not actually testing SAE Net horsepower. I don't know exactly how SAE Gross is defined, but I'd have to assume they're a lot closer to Gross than Net with no accessories being driven off the crank. (Granted, I have no idea how much compression they actually gained, because their stated numbers don't really match up with how much they claim to have shaved off the deck.)

Maybe this just illustrates what happens when you slap a bunch of "upgrades" together without a cohesive plan.

_________________
Somehow I ended up owning three 1964 slant six A-bodies. I race one of them.
Escape Velocity Racing

It's nice to see a feature on the slant,that's a good thing. Not real sure about a slant stealing the show over a Hemi Cuda but to each their own. I know John Kaase or Rousch aren't about to embark on a development program for a slant,but looking at the condition of that shop I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the dyno as far as actual numbers go. Who really knows the accuracy of their equipment. Call me old fashioned but at least tidy up the shop and put a clean shirt on for the feature,all the junk hanging around in their dyno area looks pretty sloppy,but I'm still thankful it was featured. For a rough comparison,a Hemi six head flows vastly better than a slant,stock 245/265 Hemis make around 200, give or take. If a slant was well ported and made 180 with a mild cam and had a stock type idle I think that would be a pretty decent outcome for amild build.

IMO, if we beat the crap out of this engine build/test long enough, and nit pick it to death, I pretty sure we will make sure nobody ever again will enter this slant six circus, proper manners or not.

I guess that is how we can claim superiority, or something.

I am always very happy to see attention given to a slant six. What bothers me is when someone doing testing makes claims that are not supported by the facts presented in their argument or makes obvious simple mistakes. I would love to see someone do this same kind of back to back testing on a garden variety 225. Start with a bone stock one barrel motor with stock exhaust. Then upgrade to 2 1/4 inch single exhaust. Then to dual 2 inch exhaust. Then raise compression. Then port it. Then add a two barrel carb. Then a four barrel. Then switch to a long runner intake. Then do a cam swap. etc... Methodical, well documented, and not designed to flog a sponsor's wares. But if a sponsor wasn't paying for the flogging, I guess the tester would have to buy the dyno time.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

This article is kinda pointless. I've been on plenty of other Mopar forums from a-body to 4x4 truck forums and every time someone has a slant six question, they are directed to this forum. It just makes since that any slant six enthusiast would come here for info/advice.

That being said, some good dyno numbers would be great. I would suggest that anyone building a slant in a way that would be a popular build have it dynoed. If funding is a problem, I think we could get it group funded. $10-$20 donations would not be unreasonable for most of us the get solid dyno numbers. What do y'all think?

_________________
1976 Feather Duster /6 4sp
1984 W100 318 727 np241
1972 'Cuda 340 4sp
1985 D250 360 46RH

There was plenty of information but mostly useless. Theoretically someone could build a budget engine by replacing valves, cam, doing head milling and the result is 130 hp compared to stock 100 hp. However someone does not open the good used engine but replaces manifolds and carb to get the same end result.

It was also possible to figure from numbers that 200hp from slant is not easy task. Together with valves, milling, cam, carb, manifold, open exhaust it is needed to do a $emi-profe$$ional head porting.

A slant otherwise stock but added turbo would be the cost effective way to get 200 hp (for short while). Even a stock BBS/1920 could be enough for that upgrade.

_________________
1966 Dart. 170 cu.in. 200 rwhp. 101.6 MPH @ 1/4 mile.

Quantitative data is always exciting for me.

Talk and theories are cheap, while real work to do testing, tuning, and refining (with numbers to back it up) is seriously not cheap.

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

I have done similar tests on a Mustang Chassis Dyno with my classes every year since 2013. This is a link to one of many discussions about parts changes and their impact upon performance.

http://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic ... highlight=

I don't want to knock anybodies hard work.

The interesting part of the whole thing was the difference between the 1 barrel and the Super 6, That's useful data for many slanters.

I'm pretty sure they did not want to blow it up....and decided to publish their findings anyways.

I say : Use the data you get.....and encourage the production of more.

And here's another link that some of you might find interesting. It's also written by Steve M. and includes more background - and exposure - on the /6 motors. It's a question I submitted to Steve's Car Craft column "Ask Anything". A very thorough discussion.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/car-craf ... sk-answer/

Scroll past the "Big Block Camaro" part for the Slant Six portion.

+10 hp for Super 6, + 10 hp for 318 BBD (on Super 6 manifold), + 10 hp for Dutra's. And probably +10 hp for the cam.

_________________
1966 Dart. 170 cu.in. 200 rwhp. 101.6 MPH @ 1/4 mile.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/13718356@ ... ed-public/

and I had posted this on .org some time ago,,

the slant in the 83 D150,, on a chassis dyno,,

with the slant in the 83 D150 powering:
water pump,
alternator,
power steering pump,
running power through an OD a833
and a 8.25 axle,

made 134 peak HP at 4000 RPM,, that is within 18 HP of the MT slant that was not powering any accessories that reported as 151 HP at 4700 RPM
and it made 210 TQ at 2610 RPM,,, matches the MT torque of 204 at 3300,, but my motor has peak torque 700 RPMs lower

similar build, I have:
.030 over stock style pistons, bowl clean-up with mild porting, stock style 2 BBL manifold, I am running a 2280 with Dual Dutra's. I do have OS valves. The cam is hydraulic with duration of 212 / 206 @ .050 with .447 / .442 lift. I had spent a lot of time researching cam profiles and setting to move the torque and power curve down in the RPM range. Compared to the MT slant, I was successful.

This particular chassis dyno run was done probably 3 years ago, when I had around 5000 miles on the motor. I currently have 23K miles,, I have re-curved the distributor and re jetted the carb a couple of times. The set up on the D150 currently feels much stronger than what was on the motor at the time of the dyno run.. From 1800 to 2200 rpm the motor was a little soft, you can see that on the chart. With the current timing and carb set up, the leading side of the peak torque and HP curves has been pulled up.

I don't remember the exact cost of the dyno time,, but it was not outrageous,, < 100.00 for a couple runs,,

The lines on the chart that are labeled as Stock TQ and Stock HP are copied over from a Dyno Sim that I had ran using the OE stock engine configuration including cam data.

Thanks!

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

Now you're giving me bad ideas - I'll need to find a machine shop if I need to rebuild my turbo slant six project, and Kaase's only about 15 miles down the road. Not sure I could afford his shop rates, though...

_________________
"Mad Scientist" Matt Cramer
'66 Dart - turbocharged 225
My blog - Mad Scientist Matt's Lair

so you know, I picked up a used MS2 (previously owned by TurboRam) that is intended for the 83 D150, plans are to do that install the winter season this year.

The MS3 is happily running the fuel side on the slant in the 68 Barracuda,,
some significant weather issues that affected the house here interfered with strip time in 2016 and the move for the MS3 to also control the ignition side,, planning for a better 2017