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.

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?

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

"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 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

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.

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.

*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.

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

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…

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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?

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)

Stock engine internals?

@@Creeperboy099 Can't remember, probably was.

So peugeot diesel 505grd ?

What do you mean? People say weber when it's not? Low power output wouldn't be a weber normally right?

*Carburettor :)

The malaise era took its toll on us all

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.

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

@@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.

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.

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 😉

...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.

And they all contributed to the character of the cars they were in. Slow is not bad, it's just not fast.

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.

@@DickTruth 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

oh, found an american

@@funkygreenjean4734 Lol nope:)

Do you peugeot petrol 604sl ?

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.

@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.

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

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)

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.

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...

Ohh Madon, that's not all it killed my friend, don't forget those 16 Czechoslovakians.

Aaaa, I think you are right 🙈 Sorry

@@VisioRacer no problem, I assume some language barrier issues whenever I watch your videos.

IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!

😂 lol

IT'S... one thousand and six

DIN is net rated as are the lower numbers of those US engines.

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

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).

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...

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.