|
|
#452277 - March 09th 2011 10:55 am
Re: Engines - Triton vs Vortec
[Re: Knightjp]
|
old hand
Registered: June 12th 2009 2:07 pm
Posts: 1170
Loc: CA
|
What part did you not get?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#452286 - March 09th 2011 11:16 am
Re: Engines - Triton vs Vortec
[Re: Knightjp]
|
old hand
Registered: June 12th 2009 2:07 pm
Posts: 1170
Loc: CA
|
Totally agree about overhead/rpm.
I totally disagree about which one is better per the specs given. First, where did the data come from and was it obtained with the same equipment? Second, the numbers are meaning less w/o seeing the chart. Did the one with more tq spike at that rpm and die off? Did the one with less have a nice flat curve? All those numbers are good for is advertising fodder to convince a consumer into one new vehicle over the next.
The OP originally wanted to stuff a V8 in a VW. If that is the true intention, then all of the wrong questions are being asked. If you are doing the work, stick in what will minimize the fab. If you are paying someone to do the work, let them decide which powerplant will fit or be prepared to pay them more making what you decide fit.
In the big scheme of things, quibbling over a bit of power is the wrong direction to go when you are wanting to stuff a non-original powertrain in a VW bus.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#452292 - March 09th 2011 11:23 am
Re: Engines - Triton vs Vortec
[Re: M_S]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: June 26th 2010 7:35 pm
Posts: 6220
Loc: San Diego California
|
In the big scheme of things, quibbling over a bit of power is the wrong direction to go when you are wanting to stuff a non-original powertrain in a VW bus.
This is what I tried to tell him 6 pages ago
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#452303 - March 09th 2011 11:45 am
Re: Engines - Triton vs Vortec
[Re: fatvanman]
|
old hand
Registered: June 12th 2009 2:07 pm
Posts: 1170
Loc: CA
|
If you read what I wrote, then you would know that I said my opinions are based on very limited information, and yes, I did assume the torque fell off after peaking. Wouldn't you? I agree that without a chart there is no way to say for sure, hence my disclaimer about the information. But I have said from the beginning that both are excellent choices and that all this back and forth is really about nothing - it comes down to what you want under the hood. And I also voiced my opinion about fitment and ease of conversion. So before you start blasting the information I provided, maybe you should read all the posts. I did read your posts, but would assume nothing w/o looking at the charts and how the data was collected. Like you said, they are just assumptions. Fairly difficult to make an empirical decision if you "assume the torque fell off after peaking", but I realize you also made that disclaimer. My comments were directed at the absurdity of an engine choice based on a minuscule difference in tq numbers rather than what will actually fit and work.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#452323 - March 09th 2011 12:25 pm
Re: Engines - Triton vs Vortec
[Re: fatvanman]
|
enthusiast
Registered: September 04th 2010 3:04 pm
Posts: 343
Loc: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
|
I wasn't suggesting that one design has inherent advantages over another as there are too many variables that can affect the outcome. However, overhead cam design generally will have the advantage in max RPM due to the reduced reciprocating weight of it's valvetrain, and a large majority of engines employing that design take advantage of that. And since that used to mean a drop in lower RPM torque (prior to variable valve technology) I can see why some have that impression.
Now, back to KnightJP's last comment - yes. A van would be better off with more low end torque, so a high rpm screamer isn't the best idea. In comparing the specs you gave for the Triton and Vortec, the Triton displays a small advantage in maximum torque, but by the listed RPM one can infer that the power falls off rapidly after that. The Vortec has a slight disadvantage in max torque, but by the numbers you gave showing the higher RPM, the Vortec is building torque over a wider RPM which in my mind offsets that difference. Of course either engine can be modified to suit whatever your needs are, but you stated you wanted stock comparisons. And again, I am only offering one opinion based on limited info. Take what you will from it. Both engines are very well designed and will last a long time. And either one should suit your needs. The question at that point becomes simply which one you'd rather see under the hood? Thanks for that... 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
2
Guests and
54
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Registered: December 28th 2007 4:37 pm
Posts: 16
|
|
6620 Members
66 Forums
25971 Topics
420782 Posts
Max Online: 177 @ May 08th 2013 5:58 am
|
|
|