Respectable horses from 6 cyls

>6 cyls
>wheezy burger V6's and not nipponese I6 engines
every time

Chevy 4.3 200hp 260tq. same specs for over 20 years 1996-2017

only on the weekends

i bet you're white

Buick Supercharged 3800 V-6
250-270hp 280-300tq buick made 30 million 3.8 liter V-6's 1962-2008

Respectable numbers for a built naturally aspirated engine are 1.6 horsepower per cubic inch and 1.25 lb ft of torque per cubic inch.

That's machinist's blue used for scribing (porting) you dumb nigger

Do old 'rod engines need any special maintenance (swapping the rods) or can they go forever?

>port matching

If it's a solid lifter cam you'll need to adjust valve lash. Other than that is pretty much just normal wear and tear items

That's not a 300 in the pic. He was referencing the horsepower

please remember nobody on Veeky Forums has been working on cars for more than a year and most haven't even been driving that long

You're right. I'm sorry

I'm retarded. I thought he mean my he built a 30p

Hyundai 3.8 liter GDi engine can make a stock 348 hp V6.
Korea #1

Naw, port matching is what you want. Gasket matching is the bad one.

Certain BMW I6s make nearly 400hp stock.

youtube.com/watch?v=akOiuCZcDUQ

Before the V6 everyone was using I6.

You can let them go, it's not advised but they won't destroy themselves.
They may make clattering noises and start smoking.

You can ignore valve clearance for a long time, it's no good and your engine may run like shit but it's not harming it.

youtu.be/_C6EA-hWPlI

498ci v6. 2500hp.

naturally aspirated 405hp inline 6

>All of these weebs comparing a typical Ford pushrod engine to Japanese racing engines

Yes OP, 300 built would be respectable NA.

Are you blind? There is paint there too

BMW was doing it in the 80's

GM gets just shy of 300hp out of their newest pushrod V6. Outdated tech doing 300 is pretty good.

I guess you should try adding BOOST to get some modern numbers out of that pig. Never underestimate the headflow of a 2v head with a good cam and high pressure on the intake side.

The 3800 is junk as far as pushrod V6's go.
The best pushrod V6's are GM's 60* engines. The 2.8, 3.1, 3.4, 3100, 3400, 3500, and 3900.
There's also a 3.4L DOHC variant but we don't talk about that.

Advantages over the 3800:
>splayed valves
>60* V angle
>no balance shaft
>capable of revs
>better head airflow
>aluminum heads (second gen+. First gens all had iron heads)
>more power at the same displacement/higher HP p/L
>same transmission bolt pattern so can make use of the same transmissions.

stock (swapped into a Cavalier):
youtube.com/watch?v=xNxETy9j-7s

Modified:
youtube.com/watch?v=Ot2ENZK1X90
youtube.com/watch?v=HTNmldKdn6o

It's about as good a pushrod V6 as we're gonna get

>GM gets just shy of 300hp out of their newest pushrod V6.
They also needed 4.3L to do it.
Granted it's much better than the original 4.3's, but still terrible

The 5th gen small block-derived 4.3 is even better. Factory aluminum block and heads, way more power, way better headflow, and direct injection - although that might become a bottleneck eventually if you pump enough boost into it.

I have the 3500 in my dd, it's about as decent as an ohv v6 is going to get without FI.
>if only they didn't kill the performance with a 4 speedo auto.

>90* V angle and balance shafts
pls no

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_RCZ#Engines

1.6-litre THP270 2014–
270 PS (199 kW; 266 hp) @6000 rpm
330 N·m (243 lbf·ft) @1900 rpm

Any modern turbocharged inline four is superior to american v6 and most american v8s.

>turbocharged
and into the trash your opinion goes.

thats actually alrite from a 6

what engine?

my shitty old v8 ls1 barely makes that but has 600nm/440ftlb of torque

they also have a 3.6 making 335hp but the powerband would be totally unsuited to trucc stuff

The 3.6 also has DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder, and a 60* V angle.

Machinist here. That's not dykem.

Hemi 265
300hp from factory back in the 70s
Drinks fuel like nothing else though

Well known to pump out four digits with forced induction

>Drinks fuel like nothing else though
yeah my i6's drink more fuel than my fucking 5.7l v8

love them to death though the sound is amazing

ford falcon barra 6 turbo
>stock internals 200-300
>stock with upgrades 600
>fully built up to 1200

>Respectable horses from 6 cyls.

stock: 300
built NA: 400
built turbo: 1500

>when you design an engine that's even more of a boat anchor than the 2JZ

It's a shame that it's not actually a Hemi head.

>300hp from factory
False
>Drinks fuel like nothing else though
Because you need to put the throttle to the floor to get any speed.

>built turbo: 1500
no.600 is more than impressive. 1500 is just dyno queen tier.

This
1500 is only useful for the drag strip.
The car will spend 90% of its time on the back of a trailer or in a garage.

>stock, normal car: 175
>stock, performance car: 500
>built: 800

304hp :^)

>1500 is just dyno queen tier.

nah

not when there are 6 second GTRs and Supras with 2000+

The 3800 is a boat anchor. That is not "respectable power" for an engine that weighs as much as some american V8s.

If you want a decent american V6 try the aluminum 60 degree engines. They're pretty light and are good for boost. Still garbage NA

Dyno queen, muh ETs, same shit.

>304hp :^)
false 302.

With two turbo's and a package that's physically bigger and heavier than a LS V8.

its just another form of racing I dont see the problem

theyre not really dyno queens when theyre race cars

>I dont see the problem
Op said respectable horses.
1200 is not respectable. You use no more than 40% of that on the street, any given street.

but we're not talking race cars user. You could take the 2.2L pushrod I4 from a 1995 base model Cavalier, throw the aftermarket at it and make a fire breathing 1300 HP turbo.
But that's not practical.
By respectable, we mean the car is still fucking streetable and still capable of, you know, passing emissions.

Stock 3.5 270 crank 240 wheel