Hemi 6 245 & 265 Crates
Thanks Dan. I haven't talked to Oz in a while but I may drop him a line. It doesnt sound like there really was that much different in them tho. Seems like a big power difference for not much engineering difference.
I don't know much about that engine family, but I'd bet that the head off a "Hemi" six flows a ton better than a /6 head. Because of its extra 40 cubic inches (over a 225 /6) and its "Hemi" performance heritage, I'd imagine that it has a lot more potential as a normally-aspirated powerplant that would be appropriate in an A-bodied car.
But, having said that, I also wonder about its ability to absorb the brutal stresses of extreme boost that the /6 seems designed for. The very fact that the /6 was originally designed to be an aluminum engine, and when they cast it in iron, they didn't weaken the design parameters, makes the /6 seem to be a "built-for-boost" design that looks to have no equal in that realm. I know of guys who routinely run boost values in the high 20's with little or no deleterious effects on the engine. They might be able to run boost levels As high as 40-45 pounds with no ill effects, which would produce horsepower figures in the 600+ range, if they can keep away from detonation. This is pure speculation, I realize, but seems do-able as they're making over 500 at the present with around 25 pounds of boost.
The 245/265 Australian Hemi 6 was designed as a lightweight engine, which probably means thinwall casting techniques. I just wonder if it's anywhere near as boost-friendly in terms of engine longivity at high rates of boost as the /6 is.
Maybe someone with experience these engines using forcced induction could enlighten us about this area of their performance.
Thanks for any information!
