Was watching a bitta One HD before and the classic car auction show came on. One of the cars was an Oldmobile with a MASSIVE 7.5 litre V8. Ive never heard about (petrol) V8's being much over 6.2 litres. I beleive the engine was known as the Olds 455 V8.

**Heres** a bit of an article on the car.

Simply astonishing

We are probably a bit sheltered in Australia as we grew up with the Holden 4.2-litre (253 ci) and 5.0 (308 ci) V8s, which were both on the small side by US standards. The Ford 302 and 351 (4.9 and 5.8-litre) were a little bigger, but still small, as was the Chev 350 (5.7-litre) fitted to some Monaros. The Leyland P76 V8 was very small at just 4.4 litres. Today's V8s are also small - the Ford FPV V8 is 5.4 litres, and the Holden Gen3 LS1 is 5.7 litres, and the LS2 is 6.0 litres.

The Americans however have a long history of 'big block' V8s, whether from GM, Ford or Chrysler. Ford actually didn't use the 'big block' name on its engines as preferred to use 'family' instead, such as FE, MEL, Super Duty and the modern 385 series. Ford used to make Super Duty engines for their trucks as big as 534 ci (8.7 litres). Chrysler's RB series ('wedge') was made in 383, 413, 426 and 440 ci versions (6.2, 6.8, 6.9 and 7.2 litres), and their famous original 'hemi' was 426 ci (7.0 litres) - today's modern Chrysler hemi is only 5.7 or 6.1 litres, but a 6.4-litre versions is available for the Ram trucks.

GM was the biggest maker of 'big block' V8s. Their original Chevrolet 1958 'W1' series was made in 348, 409 and 427 ci (5.7, 6.7 and 7.0 litre) versions, up to 1965. The Beach Boys immortalised the origial Chevy Impala SS 409 in their song - "she's real fine, my 409". The next generation big block, first known as the 'mystery motor', appeared in 1965 and was made in a number of versions - 366, 396, 402, 427, 454 and 502 ci (6.0, 6.5, 6.6, 7.0, 7.4 and 8.2 litres). All of these engines are still very common and very popular for street and muscle cars in the US. Cadillac had their own independent range of big block V8s, including the 472 and 500 ci V8s of 1968-70.

Today you can buy brand new Mopar (Chrysler) 'crate' big block engines, in 528 and 540 ci (8.7 and 8.8-litres), as well as a range of brand new GM big block crate engines up to 572 ci (9.4 litres!)

Volkswagen's V8, fitted to the Touareg SUV and the Phaeton limo, is only 4.2 litres.

Ah, the 572ci crate motor, i know of one being twin turbocharged at the moment!

You can also get "Warhawk" blocks, and "BowTie" blocks, these are basically LSx motors, but cast and not alloy, and can be bored out to big inches too... THERE'S NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!

Yeah i know a guy with a 57 or 67 monaro with a 9 lite in it, Also know a guy with a turbo charged torana with a big block i think all i know bout it is it is damn cool

A mate up here has just ordered a 604ci (that's 9897cc) Aluminium hemi for his dodge challenger. Friggin nuts!

isnt that what they put in busses?

All back in the days of course when fuel was cheaper than water God how I'd love to go and live back in those "big block" days

I once owned a 71 Pontiac transam firebird. It was the last of the American hand built muscle cars, before the EPA restrictions came out. Genuine 400hp car out of the box
During a rebuild I had it bored out to 469 which is nearly 7.7litres. The previous owner (my mate) crossed the nullabor in it!! Awesome. No substitute for cubes....

I also have got a mate on his red ps with a transam, reckons its the fastest thing something like 170 in 4th.

That is a very good point, would love to be able to see some of the powerful and fast dubs showing a american muscle car up.

Na im sure it was kms, but yeah

Ive heard of 800 cubic inch v8s. They use a Merlin Superblock, which is based on a big block chev. Thats like a 13.1 liter!!

No connection! It looks like the Merlin Superblock is made by a US company called World Products. It's actually 705 cubic inches, which is 11.55 litres. Hot Rod magazine did a report on it, where a completed engine produced 961 hp on 92-ocatne petrol.

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/705ci_chevy_big_block/index.html 

As for the wonderful 1,650 ci (27-litre) Rolls Royce Merlin aircraft engine, a lot of bull has been written about them over the years. There was an Australian-built '55 Chevy a while ago with a Merlin fitted, and painted up to look like a P51 Mustang. I remember seeing it at the Hot Rod show in Sydney, when it was promoted as having a '3,000-hp engine from a fighter plane'. In fact, Merlins didn't produce anywhere near 3,000 hp. The first 'Merlin II' variants at the start of the war produced 1,310 hp on 100-octane fuel with a single-stage, single speed supercharger. By the end of the war, the Mk66 was up to 1,720 hp with a two-stage, two-speed supercharger (used on the Spitfire Mk9). The ultimate Merlin was the Merlin 130/131, fitted to the DH Hornet, which produced 2,060 hp.

The bigger and more powerful Rolls Royce Griffon was 2,240 ci, or 37 litres. It was a different 'big block' V12 design, and was ultimately taken out to 2,420 hp. The Griffon was used in later Spitfires, the Hawker Fury and Tempest, and the Avro Shackleton among others.

The Daimler-Benz DB605 V12 used in Messerschmitt Bf109 and Bf110s was a lot bigger than the Merlin, at 35.7 litres but with a similar power output of 2,000 hp in the top version - it only had a single-stage supercharger. The US GM-designed Allison V-1710 used in the P40 and early Mustangs was 1,710 ci (28 litres) but because it was only made with a single stage supercharger, it 'only' made 1,475 hp. V-1710s were fitted to P-38 Lightnings with turbo-superchargers and water-injection. The Allison was a popular engine for hot rods, salt speed racers and unlimited hydroplane boat racing after the war.

The later air-cooled radial engines made by Pratt & Whitney dwarf these wartime liquid-cooled V12 engines. The 14-cylinder Twin Wasp (DC4, Caribou) was 2,000 ci (32.8 litres) and made 1,350 hp. The 18-cylinder Double Wasp (Corsair, Hellcat, P-47 Thunderbolt, DC-6) was 2,804 ci (45.9 litres) and made up to 2,800 hp. The ultimate - the Wasp Major - was called the 'corncob engine' because that's what it looked like with 28 cylinders in four staggered rows. It powered the B-36 and B-50 bombers, Boeing Stratocruiser and the Spruce Goose. It was 4,362 ci - 71.5 litres - and made 4,300 hp in the last versions with a supercharger and two turbochargers. This engine only weighed 1,800 kg which gave a superb power/weight ratio. It was the last big piston engine before jets took over in the late 1950s.

One of the best V8's I've ever driven (useable power) was the Merc 6.9l SEL of the mid 70's.. Not an outrageous HP output but she had performance to burn..

Gene Fulton race engines do a billiet block 5.5 inch bore spacing BBC based engine pretty much 850 cubic inches 3000ish hp on nitrous and 3.90 at 200 plus for the 1/8!GOD BLESS THE BOGAN/REDNECKS!

And here`s the 55 Chevy - Final Objective - built & owned by hot rod supremo,Rod Hadfield.3000HP V12 Merlin.

cheers gordon

V8s don't need to be huge...my brother inlaw had a 71 GTHO phase 3...i drove it once...back in the day...did 80 MPH in 1st gear...the horn worked by squeezing the steering wheel...geez i was blowing the horn the whole time i was driving the thing:rolleyes

Rod Hatfield's Merlin Chevy - that's the one. Amazing piece of engineering, but like I said, factory Merlins don't produce 3,000 hp - actually around half that. Their two-stage, two-speed superchargers were designed for high altitude power and did not give full boost at sea level. They did have an 'emergency power' setting for a few hundred more hp, but that was only for short periods. It may be possible that Rod Hatfield has extensively modified the Merlin to double its designed output - certainly Allison V12 engines have been souped up considerably for boat and truck racing - but if so it couldn't run for hours at full power like the stock Merlins did.

No V8s don't need to be huge for normal road use - probably why big blocks were never sold in mainstream Australian cars. In fact nowadays you don't even need a V8. The Mk6 Golf GTI (155 kW) is only half a second slower to 100 km/h than an XY GTHO (6.4 sec GTHO, 6.9 Golf DSG), but the Golf has a higher top speed (225 km/h GTHO, 240 km/h Golf). The coming 200 kW 4Motion Golf R will be even quicker.

It's true the GTHO was once the world's fastest 4-door car. Today, it's a VW Group vehicle that has that distinction, the Bentley Continental Flying Spur Speed. 6.0-litre twin turbo V12, 449 kW, 0-100 in 4.8 sec, 322 km/h.

If you havn't seen it, here's the link to a video of Rod Hatfields Merlin Chevy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIj2GVfua84 

Wow what an incredible machine, it's a true work of art. I am still skeptical of '3000 hp', as Merlins produced 1400-2000 in reality, perhaps it's a number that has more basis in promotion and marketing than reality. In any case, a 1500-hp Merlin is more than enough for anyone.

The sound of a Spitfire is enough to give you goosebumps all over:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSnEBoYWKIE&feature=related 

I dig big cubes, what I don't dig is the lack of efficiency that most big blocks suffer. Most the smaller engines can produce 100hp per litre, even atmo VW engines can manage this if revved enough, but large V8s are not so good. Sure i know a turbo or some nitrous fixes the issue, but the amount of weight these engines carry is also an issue. It's the same reason Jap race supras use the 3SGTE turbo 4 instead of the 2J turbo 6 which produces a lot more power and torque. All the hp in the world is no use if the weight of the powerplant actually holds the car back.


....but what am I doing hammering pushrod V8s, I like aircooled VWs....

C'mon Pete, you like aircooled VWs so much you have a Subaru in yours and try to convince everyone of their merits

Don't forget though pete wood, usually torque is more important on bigger engines as opposed to HP per litre.

Cheers

Ryan

The idea that big blocks are inefficient is a myth. Big blocks actually provided the size, stength and flexibility for just about any application. Their output was a function of whatever purpose they were designed for - they could be slow and torquey (for large motorhomes and trucks), or very high performance (Corvette, Shelby Cobra), or anything in between.

The famous Chev 327 'small block' range produced from 186 kW in the base models up to 280 kW in the 1964 L-84 Corvette motor - the most powerful small block until the Gen3 in 2001. Output was dependent on the choice of carb or fuel injection, cam, pistons, heads and manifold. This works out at between 34.7 and 52.2 kW per litre - pretty good. If a 1600 Beetle was in the same state of tune as an L-84 327 Corvette, it would be producing 83.6 kW (112 hp), while a 1916 would produce 99.5 kW (133 hp). Torquewise, the best 327 was the fuel-injection model's 477 Nm - 89.0 Nm per litre. You'd agree that that's pretty impressive.

By comparison, the equally famous Chev 427 'big block' produced from 290 kW in the 1966 4-barrel, up to 321 kW in the Corvette L71 and L89. The L89 used aluminium heads and 11.0:1 compression, and was 35 kg lighter than the usual iron 427. That works out at 41.4 to 45.8 kW per litre. Better than the 327 per litre at base levels but not quite as highly tuned at the top. Chevrolet rated all 427s except for the racing LZ1 at 620 Nm, which is 88.5 Nm per litre - almost the same as the small block.

So on a per-litre basis, the 327 small block and the 427 big block are very similar.

The big block had more flexibiliy for additional purposes. For heavy trucks, Chevrolet increased the size to 454 ci and detuned the output to 190 kW and 550 Nm. Not as much as the high performance Corvette 427, but at much lower revs and cost, and a much longer life.

For greater performance you could choose the modern 572 ci crate motor - 527 kW and 929 Nm. Let's see - that works out at 56.2 kW per litre and 99.1 Nm per litre. That's more performance per litre than either the 327 or 427 - or any air-cooled VW motor. Your 1916 would produce 107.7 kW (144 hp ) in that state of tune. It's on par with most modern small non-turbo engines.

Big blocks are NOT inefficient - they are designed for a purpose.

Wow. Can't argue with that.

Thanks for all your very informative posts Phil.

It wouldn't be possible without Google and Wikipedia...

...or lots of freetime on your hands