which is my point, if your considering one for an offroad rig, you have to factor in cost of the cam change to patch up the problem of having a shorter stroke. whereas a straight 6 conversion gives you the low down torque off the bat. if you want to start playing with cams etc before you put the motor in, then you can build even more torque from the 6.jessie928 wrote:
there is a valid reason for your " experience" with SBC's
99% of them that are installed in 4x4's are origionally built for a car, they are not cammed and rammed for low down torque.
change the cam, add some mass to the flywheel and you have all the torque in the world.
Everyone gets excited when they hear a " stage 2 or 3 cam" is going into their 4wd motor, they dont realise how weak it becomes offroad and on the freeway trying to lug 2.5 to 3.5 tonnes of brick around at 110km/s @2000
pull a mercruiser small block out of a boat and slot it into a car and you will hear and see all about torque
Jes
Jes
Also with the t700, i wouldn't use fitment in trucks in the US as justification. most US manufacturers (ok probably all) are renoun for using components that are near their limit, as can be seen by the number of their big utes that constantly suffer transmission failure, whereas nissan and toyota tend to use components that are a little overbuilt for their application.
cloughy, i'm not debating if the 4L is a better motor than a 250, simply that the 250 is a better motor than a 2f. if cost was no object, then go a 4l. my arguments center around the 250 being more bang for your buck.
conversion kits aren't priced the same. i have yet to see a 4l conversion kit on ebay, but there have been plenty of 250 kits. then factor in the cost of the motor, the cost of the ECU, disabling smartlock, and wiring it up, the 250 is more financially viable. hell if money was no object i'd take the BA motor in my 40.