Originally posted by JerseyRodder
and shoot down years of hype about short stroke / high horsepower and long stroke / torque monster as well as rod length ratios.
Well, I disagree...

...in the end, it seemed to say that their testing DIDN'T really prove much of anything as they didn't control as many variables as they should have, leading to possibly MORE questions to investigate in the future.

What I think it should be refined to, and the article/test really didn't conclude though is that a big bore/short stroke will make it's peak torque values higher on average vs a small bore/long stroke which will make it's peak torque values at a lower rpm (and imo, be more street friendly)

As far as rod/stroke ratio, they failed to answer the question miserably though, and admit to as much several times. I thought it was a little disinginious how when they talked to the NASCAR engine builder, they imply that the difference in rod/stroke ratio was ~ 3hp...even though he never said such a thing. He only said and will spend considerable time and effort searching for 3hp, and that the rod.stroke relationship was "significant"...and he didn't neccessarily say this in the same sentence so, imo, it's taken completely out of context and words are used as HR would want them used, to suit their purpose. I was a little dissapointed in them for that....

...but I love seeing articles like that. I hope they go back and correct many of the variables they admitted to getting wrong and then some. Maybe do a max effort of each motor as well to show the true pluses and negatives of each, and expound on the various characteristics from idle, ease of tune, vacuum, etc to give the whole picture of what's happening...