Yup, Sean nailed it.

Take a very small hammer and tap your hand 100 times. It prolly doesn't hurt. Now take a big hammer and hit your hand 1 time, only 100 times harder than before. Hurts like heck. Same energy released, just all at once instead of spread out. Way oversimplified but same principle.

Usually a 901 can handle a 3.0 liter 6 (as long as mikey isn't doing first gear burnouts) just fine, but when you mount a 275 hp 3.6 liter onto a 901 you can figure it won't last long. Ask Steve Iverson ;)
I had a 350 chebby that had at least 325 hp, prolly much more and I never had any problem with the 901.

Horsepower is only torque times rpm. 901 transmissions usually don't break from rpm, they brake from too much twisting motion (torque).

The problem with your theory is that a 8 cylinder engine does not have 8 pulses. In a 4 stroke motor the most you can have in a V or opposed configuration is 4, if you have your journals on two offsets. A v-8 small block does not fire 8 individual times, it fires 4 times 2 cylinders at a time.

Nope. Please do your homework before making these claims. Check the firing order of a small block. It is sequencial. ONE AT A TIME! 18436572 or something like that. it's been a long time and I'm goin from memory and I gots CRS.
A V8 only has 4 pulses per revolution due to being a 4 stroke, but if you ever get two cylinders to fire at once on a chebby V8 you have some serious problems.
A six has three power pulses per revolution.

It's ok, when I was 24 I knew everything. I just got way dumber over the years :)

is Silver2.0 24? can I be 24?

What made you think a v8 fires 2cyl at a time?
Although it probably could be done with a special cam and a custom
ignition system, no chevy v8 that I know of works this way.

Works for me Sammy! I am running a good 400 hp, I know that one day it is going to split in half - 4 years of abuse hasn't done it yet!

I once read that Ducaitis do so well in world superbike because their twin design gave the tire two "pulses" of rest to regain grip. Bang, Bang, Rest, Rest. The fours can't regain grip as well. I'm not sure what this has to do with 901's, but there you go.

First off, I was wrong about two pistons firing at the same time, there are two "up" at the same time, but one is on a compression stroke when the other is on a combustion. I was forgetting that each journal is 90 degrees from the next. But don't give me that your just 24 year old sh$t. I am not a dumbass so don't treat me like one. If you have a logical response, then that is great, I love a good discussion, but not an arguement.

Torque = 5252 x HP
rpm

The problem with this whole arguement is that a v-8 by nature tends to have far more torque than a 911 motor.

A 3.6L has a horsepower rating of 315@6800 and a torque rating of 273@4250. A 2004 Corvette Coupe comes standard with a a 5.7L V8, with a horsepower rating of 350@5200 and a torque rating of 360@4000

The reason as I see it this way is because even a new vette makes it's most power around 5200 rpm, instead of at 6800 for the porsche. It's just in it's design for a 911 to be more high strung than a larger displacement V8.

So, even taking your pulses into account, you pretty much end up where you started when you factor in the higher redline for the porsche motor. And I undestand that you can get a v8 to rev with roller cams and what-not, but most people are better off with an engine set up more like the corvette in my example, becuase of cost and driveablility.

Great explanation on this 8 vs. 6 torque discussion. The flywheel and balancer must do a lot to average-out these pulses but with the right instruments I suppose you'd still see the individual power strokes. So, assuming there's a lot of torque, what's worse on the 901 - popping the clutch at high rpms in low gear with big fat tires? (seems obvious). Or, with the clutch already engaged, putting pedal-to-the-metal? Is 'shock-loading' the transaxle what does the damage? I assume a bigger clutch will make it worse too. Can I safely leave the rice-burner kids behind when the situation arises, without tearing out my tranny?

I have never gone past 11 or 12 hundred rpm while engaging first, the best way to launch is to almost stall, then get as much as your tires will grab (about 1/2 throttle) - shift and roll on second to the floor if you can. Third is where you can get into it hard. Never use the real first, mine is locked out.

Watch out for some of the "rice burrners". I once got spanked by a turboed / nitrous supra. I was pulling away when he squatted down and left like he gained another 200hp. Met him months later at a dino jet shop, 100k$ car that looks near stock. No rear wing or anything. ;)

Oh my, Silver! did we touch the Nitro button? As you become more familiar with this BBS you will see that we RAZZ eachother around here. Especially when we catch someone making statements that did not do their homework. so be a man, pull your pants back up, wipe your chin and smile. You learned something, dint' ya?

Porsche 3.6 would be 45.5 and teh Vette is 45 per pulse so I guess they are equally tetremental to the longevity of a 901 (unless Mr I invented the Internet is driving) Rod's ratty 350 broke 1st and the bearing in teh intermediate plate. we did not have the guys at Pelican to tell us not to use 1st

What's the easiest way to 'lock out' first? Is this done under the shift lever or back at the trans? Or inside the trans?

Re: the rice burners - maybe I'll play it safe and look/listen for the kids with the 'fart cans'. Just the sound of my V8 should be enough to intimidate them. I can't believe that they think their cars sound cool. But I guess when that's all you can afford it must sound ok.

914 GT, on my car I didn't lock out first but kept it functional. I just didn't use it under power. the only reason to lock it out is if you don't trust the driver IMO.
1st gear on my car was very useful when I was putting it in the garage or on a trailer before a race or something. I was happy I kept it functional.

Silver, any time there's a smiley face next to a post it means the poster intends it to be funny, a joke of some sort usually indicating he is yanking you chain, again in fun.

BUT... after your last post I need to set something straight:
Lets take this thread for example. You posted that simply by changing to aluminum heads you saved 200#. I knew better from my own personal experience and laughed out loud when I read that, but kept it to myself.
After someone else corrected you, you said oh yeah.

You then posted that you imagine a 901 would not hold up to 200 hp or more.
I replied that torque is what kills them, not horsepower. This was based on my personal experience and also my education and 23 years of experience first as a millwright, later as a mechanical engineer, and it is an opinion that is shared with several experts on 914 V8 conversions. In fact I believe it is explained on Renegade's web site.

You posted matter of factly that I was wrong. You even used capital letters to emphasise that I was wrong. Kinda ticked me off, but I got over it and tried to explain the reason I believe what I do.

Your come back was that V8 engines fire two cylinders at a time. Total BS, I didn't mind that you were incorrect, I did mind that you posted it in a way that indicated you were absolutely positive about it.

Again, you were corrected, with a smiley face, in an attempt to try and lighten things up before they get ugly. It didn't work.

I tried to offer an explanation in very simple terms to explain the reasoning.

You came back on the attack, and tried to argue your reasoning with a comparison of a corvette and a Porsche six engine, frankly I didn't get your point. BTW a V8 does not have two cylinders at TDC at the same time, ever. Unless the crank is broken even if one is on the exhaust stroke.

OK, One last attempt. Here's an example of what I'm trying to explain about torque vs. horsepower:

A machine in my plant has a 10,000 hp 3600 rpm electric motor running a gear box (speed increasing) which spins a compressor at 6700 rpm.

The coupling between the motor and gearbox is massive, at least three times the size, weight, and strength of the coupling between the gearbox and the compressor.
Why? It is necessary.
Both couplings see exactly the same horsepower (minus some very small frictional losses in the gearbox).
The coupling on the motor sees full torque, the one on the compressor sees full horsepower but reduced torque due to the increased speed and the ratio of the gearbox.
If you have a certain level of power and gear it down, you have more torque. if you gear it up, you have less torque. the horsepower stays the same.

Another example:
Back in the muscle car days I occasionally broke drive shafts and or U joints or transmissions or differentials or axles in cars. Always in 1st gear, not always due to dropping the clutch too hard. I never broke one of those in 4th gear. Why? torque, not horsepower.
same thing that makes horsepower important. torque makes the wheels turn. Horsepower is important because it means you can make torque at higher rpm. that means you accelerate to a higher speed before shifting, which results in your torque level reduced by gearing when you shift.
Same reason a lower geared differential helps acceleration. it is torque that breaks stuff. it is torque that distorts the intermediate plate in a 901 transmission and damages the bearings. it is torque that makes the pinion gear climb the ring gear and interfere with proper gear mesh, resulting in damage in a 901, it is torque that twists the 1st gear imput shaft which is catalevered off the rear of the 901. Have you ever had a 901 aparts? I have. Lots of folks here have.

I could throw out all kinds of complicated formulas and crap but it isn't necessary. I figure it was obvious, maybe I'm wrong. Anyone else here dissagree with this stuff besides silver?

The difference between a V8 and a six on a 901 is well understood, well documented, and accepted by those who hotrod v8 914s.
go to the Renegade site. it's there in black and white. At least it used to be, haven't checked in a couple years.

Call scott Mann of renegade and ask him. I did. He is one of the top three experts on the subject in the world. In fact we talked about V8 914s in my garage as we checked out my V8 car.

Call Rod simpson and ask him. I did.

Contace Brad Roberts and ask him. I did. He's built a whole bunch of V8 914s as well as big six 914s. Brad's been to the house too.

You need to lighten up and think about stuff before you post it as fact.
it wasn't confrontational until you made it that way. There are plenty of folks here who have BTDT. I've learned a great deal from them, much faster and cheaper than if I tried to learn it on my own.
I find that if there's something on this board I don't understand or am not sure of, I ask politely for an explanation. I explain what i don't understand and or disagree with but post it as a question asking for further explanation. I don't post that the person's statement IS WRONG!

I also try not to post things as fact if I'm not sure of them or if I don't know a darned thing about what I'm posting. I'm usually patient with a FNG but not when he knows everything until they are corrected, three times in one thread, then get defensive and aggressive.
Good luck in the future. You just made my ignore list.

Sam, you went to a lot of time/trouble to type that all out. It was highly educational for me and I hope it was for others too. Thanks much.

There are plenty of folks here who have BTDT.

what does "BTDT" mean?
here's Rod Simpson's new page http://porchev.com/914_faq.html
check out the tranny offset on teh rear mount. I also have teh Renegade 1.5 spacer mount. how did yous guys do yours?

I'd say 'been there done that' but we could get creative and think of some new ones.

My rear mounts are spacer mounts like Renegades.

...cut and welded shift bar too?

How'd you know what I worked on yesterday?

the psychic 914 v8 friends network

Suspension Removed. Otto
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1078784091.jpg