I'd like to see that setup, bigsnag. That is if it's really possible.

 

Robert Yates builds and sells 500 hp 4.6L engines that have 11:1 compression. While it is doubtful that this engine would run on pump gas (although it might on 93 octane being all aluminum and having large cams to help bleed some of that cylinder pressure), a 10:1 version would definitely run on pump gas. That would give you approximately 485 hp out of a 4.6!!!! Given a 5.4, or escpecially one of the new 5.4 aluminum blocks that you can bore and stroke to over 6.0, it would be way easy to make a 500 hp NA mod motor that would run on pump gas.

 

Forgot to mention, Yates says he gets more airflow out of the 4V heads than he does out of his current Winston (Nextel) Cup heads. WOW!!!

 

I'd like to see that cj with 6+ marines and a 50 cal, cruise over unknown terrain at 45 mph + and not roll, or drop a axel.

I'd rather walk.

 

Not really a "real world" comparison, is it?

I think he was talking civilian life... and the civilian H1 is not really a military version anyway...

 

Either of the orignal Hummer's, military or civilian, both have indepedent suspension. It's not a "real world" comparison, which even proves the point further. A CJ couldn't handle that non-"real world" situation.

 

What size are the tires on the H1?

I do like how the differentials are tucked way up, leaving a heck of a lot of ground clearance... needs some good CV joints for that, I assume...

 

I think they are 37's, but I'm not sure. They are defintely BIG!

 

don't forget the 03 cobra when talking about 4 wheel ind. suspension. the older ones suffered from bad wheel hop. they got it figured out for 03, they handle pretty freakin' good.

 

Maybe that's why someone said they were breaking - the wheel hop.

Let me tell you, on the MN12 ('89-'97 t-bird/cougar), the wheel hop with a stock 4.6L and 3.73 w/Auburn LS was enough that I could brake an axle real easy.

It takes tightening up the diff mounts with poly and on the Cobra (and aftermarket for the MN12's), bracing the differential unit. I put bolts through the rear rubber V-mount and poly in front of the diff in my '96 t-bird and it easily did two-wheel burnouts with no problems after that... people with the SC's and 5-speeds still have problems and need to go to more drastic things like braces. Someone recently designed one for the MN12 that was inspired by the Cobra brace.

 

WXboy it's not the over-all weight they are talking about, it's the mass that the valve spring has to return. OHC means the spring has to return the valve and that's it. Pushrods mean the springs have to return the valve, rocker, pushrod, and lifter. HUGE--HUGE weight difference.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself - apparently I didn't

For grins, spin a camshaft in a standard V8 with your hands without the pushrods and lifters in it. See how much it takes to spin it up just by feel.

Then, take all the lifters and pushrods, put them into a box, pack them in there, and then take the box and move it back and forth 1/2" 2000 times a minute (4000RPM in a four-stroke) ... the extra weight of another cam is nothing when you think about all the metal that's not moving back and forth a .5" at high speed.

 

according to this link:
http://www.histomobile.com/histomob/tech/2/131.htm

"Double overhead camshaft are good at reducing valvetrain deflection, yet their drive leaves the designer with the choice of intricate timing gears trains, long chains or toothed belt with tensionners. In addition more rotating shafts mean more friction"

OHC has some disadvantages too. [see above]

 

I have to say that real trucks and SUV's are not meant to have 4 wheel independent suspension IMO. Solid axles are more durable, period. They can handle the wait of a snowplow in the front, and can articulate way better than any factory IFS out there. The H1 has tons of ground clearance and uses A-arms as their IFS/IRS which is a strong set-up. However, no truck or SUV manufacturer will take the time to make a durable truck IFS/IRS that will provide decent suspension travel. I'll be one of those Jeep loyalists, crying over the Grand Cherokee's IFS, but at least it will still maintain SRA. From my experience, push-rod engines are better for trucks and OHC engines are better for cars. OHV are easier and cheaper to build, have been proven for over 40-50 years and generally have fewer problems (Ford 302, GM 350, Mopar 318 and 360, are just a few of the great OHV engines) The emissions is what has hurt them, as it's been stated that OHC engines provide a cleaner burn in many cases. However, having two Jeeps, a Grand Cherokee (318 engine, OHV) and Liberty (3.7, SOHC), the 318 feels like it will pull a mountain when it's under 2,000RPM's. The Liberty has adequate power, but it really starts to get going over 3500RPM's, which is not really where I tend to drive it at. Had an F-150 with the 4.2. It had decent power, but didn't have extreme low-end grunt, just adequate. I'm not sure whether it was OHV or OHC, so I'll reserve judgment. Just my $0.02.

 

"OHC has some disadvantages too"

Of course it does. You can throw cost into that disadvantage pile as well, but when the overall advantages significantly outweigh the disadvantages, the net result is an advantage. Therefore OHC design WINS!!