Are you kidding me? That poor thread looked like it hit a guardrail at a buck-twenty 
If I wanted to see pissing matches about pushrod vs. DOHC, I’d go to the Car & Driver forums. They’ve got at least 5 running concurrently.
-Rav
Ok small nit-pick, IIRC top fuelers are torn apart after every run, no?
But I see your point…
Funny, when I read the thread title, the first thing I thought of was the Mopar slant-6. And there it is in the OP.
Hey who said a dirty word!!! This is not the pit please refrain from making such offensive statements
Tony: yeah T/F engines are gone through after every run and they often have a piston or two that have started to melt away - but it is worth it just for the sound that they make doing a 4.5 second 0 to 320 MPH blast, hell most would be happy with a 4.5 0 to 60. lots of fun!
Raven: [agent 86 accent on] sorry about that [accent off] But, I was going to get around, in that thread by Fuel, to making some of the comments here - basically that if one pumps every ounce of potential from an engine, you wind up with what the Top Fuel guys have.
whuckfistle: Is a NASCAR engine really $100K? Maybe if they count all the R&D time??? A 6,000 HP Top Fuel engine is only about $30K.
As for the OP:
Slant 6 was a good one.
I remember reading in the Car Craft Magazine tech talk section about a guy asking about a fancy crank shaft, mains, and other bottom end stuff for a 500HP Chevy 350 build up. The Car Craft people said for only 500 HP don’t worry about the small block adding when have you ever seen a small block break a crank anyway?
Although I do not care for diesel engines, I believe many of them would qualify as “bullet proof.”
Are diesel engines inherently more durable than gasoline engines? Or is it simply because nobody (or very few people) makes high-performance racing diesel engines?
You are probably more right than I am . It says the parts alone are $30,000. Not including testing, R+D, and assembly, and all the bolt on stuff to keep the engine alive.
I read this
" There are two yardsticks to measure an engine's output: horsepower per cubic inch and horsepower per dollar. In a heads-up class like Pro Stock Truck, power per cubic inch is everything. That's why a 358ci small-block Pro Stock Truck motor that is capable of producing 900+ horsepower costs between $75,000 and $110,000. If you aren't concerned about running on a class weight break, you can buy three or four big-inch big-blocks that produce 1200+ hp for the same amount of money. The price of power in a 358ci Pro Stock Truck engine is roughly $111 per horsepower; in one of our Super Series 565ci big-blocks, each horsepower costs less than $24. The bottom line: You get a lot more bang for your buck with a big motor!"
and got crossed up. According to this you would think a 6,000hp top fuel would cost more than $30,000. The heads alone are $6,000.
Haha. That thread did crash and burn. And it did so with the dumbest debate. But who cares? Don’t just not post because those car maniacs want to have their discussion, just ignore it.
Indeed, the pushrod vs. DOHC debate is quite a red herring if truth be known. It pits the “horsepower per given volume” arguement against the “horsepower per dollar” mindset.
In my opinion, the single biggest breakthrough in the last 20 years in internal combustion design is the electronic engine management system which has crystal solenoids to check for engine pinging. Any engine, from a daily commuter, thru to a NASCAR or Formula One engine benefits from this technology. It allows the on board CPU to variably move ignition spark as close as possible at all times to Top Dead Centre without inducing engine ping or “pre detonation”.
Certainly, said technology has allowed the venerable push-rod design to live on far longer than I ever predicted 20 years ago. Quantitatively assessing how “stressed” and engine is is a bit of “black art” - granted - but the consensus is that a push-rod large capacity engine producing xxxHP with a modern engine management system is the current “reliability king”.
However, the moment you start introducing motor racing into “street cars” as a means of assessing the varying technologies at play - well you open up a hornet’s nest actually - and here’s why… almost every class of motor racing has restrictions of SOME sort on it… whether it be fuel limits, or engine capacity, or rev limiters etc.
As Max Mosely pointed out a few years ago after introducing yet more regulations to slow F1 cars down… “If we were to allow every bit of technology which has ever been invented be placed into a Formula One car - we’d have cars doing 700km/h lap times - way too dangerous obviously…”
I am no diesel expert but I have read about diesels having much stronger, than gasoline engines, parts such as the block, crank, rods, pistons, and heads. All very heavy stuff but then those engines do not turn fast.
There are some diesel racing classes, but even the un-modified diesels seem to placed under great stress in the usual and customary heavy hauling they are called upon to carry out every day - and for hours on end.
Come on Fuel, your OP was already answered and I apologized to you and the mods for getting off the OP. Actually I did not start it- just posted some observations
No sweat man. I definately wasn’t talking about you. There was probably only 1 or 2 guys who started having their own discussion. And i didn’t even mind it, i could care less, i actually enjoy listening to you guys talk, because i don’t know as much. But I was just confirming what The Raven said. However, i never considered that thread done with. The question still stands for anyone to come along and contribute with their won unique information.
Is fuel/air mixture more important than intake flow? I’d be inclined to think variable valve timing systems are pretty important. F1 uses them to great effect with pneumatic valvetrains.
-Rav
P.S. I apologize if I offended anyone. 
I enjoyed the back-and-forth on DOHC vs. pushrod… More informative than the usual C&D flamefest… I was just being a bit, how you say, “snarky”?
P.P.S. B&I is right on. Diesels have ridiculously high compression ratios, so the tolerances are tighter and the engines are generally more robust than a gasoline engine. I worked for a company that did courier work, and our Toyota diesel pickups were averaging around 300-350K miles. Maintenance was done well, these trucks would run 80-90 all day (when I was drivin’ em )
In my opinion, the slow-turning American V-*s are just about bulletproof. They usually operated at just a fraction of their rated HP output, so the stress on the components was minimal. Chrysler V-8s of the 1960’s were especially rugged-my uncle had one that went 358,000 miles(with minimal care).
I also remember seeing a steam water pump at a water works in England…the engine was installed in 1845-and the thing was still working, 160 yeras later! The secret-extremely slow piston speeds, huge bearings. I think this engine woul last 100’s of years!
Not just in engines anymore, either - GM is about to start importing the Holden Monaro into the US, renamed as the Chevrolet Camaro. Apparently Australia now makes a better American muscle car than America does.
Do you have a link? I doubt it’s “better” than the current Cobra Mustang…
Lots of 'em if you Google “Camaro Monaro”. Like this one.
But my info was out of date, sorry - GM will call it the Pontiac GTO, not the Chevrolet Camaro, although that was the earlier plan.
Europe’s getting it too. I guess they’re trying to make up for the poor sales of the Camaro and the Corvette.
i agree with you, but a lot of american v8s are not slow turning… a lot of LS1s make peak power up to 7,000 rpm and although i dont know anyone with a z06 vette, im sure they can make power up high as well as down low…
well, i guess if you own a little honda and your hp peak is at the rev limiter 9,000rpm, then 7,000rpm is slow…
i would say slow turning would probably be an adjective used for big blocks… most big blocks do not turn very high rpm…
Maybe he was trying to get at how the engines are typically used, rather than their potential usage.
Most drivers with a traditional American full-sized sedan run/ran around with RPMs under 2500… once their RPMs hit 2500, it’d be time for the next gear. I know this was certainly the case for the Mercury Grand Marquis I used to drive.
That “Camero Monaro Bandalero” or whatever looks somewhat like a ford probe.