MG Sports Cars

It seems to me that it is the fringe elements of any group that give the whole group a bad image. Race engines in street cars is that sort of fringe behavior that gets the rest of us in trouble. Most of us can tune an engine to make good torque without resorting to race cams and rich carburetors. But the 'cool' factor of a lumpy cam that shakes the car at idle has a lot of appeal.

What's ironic about this is that modern engines make more torque over a wider RPM band than any comparable engine from the 60's. I'm in love with the roller cam pushrod engines from the 80's; Ford 5.0, Dodge 5.2 and 5.8, Chevy 5.7 roller, Ford 460 roller, Ford 351w roller, etc. All of them came with decent EFI systems and make very satisfying torque. But it takes a lot of studying to build up a hot roller/EFI engine from scratch.

I've got a Ford 5.0 roller engine for a project, and I'm eyeballing a Ford 5.8 roller for sale in the local craigslist. I drive an 86 Mustang with a 5.0 and my wife drives a 95 Jeep with the roller 5.2. My Mustang can get well above 25 mpg on the highway.

I haven't made it into the 21st century yet, and that's too bad because overhead cams are now the norm. Used to be that OHC engines were very exotic voodoo. Now trucks come with them.

I agree that most 'emissions control' systems are only poorly understood by us gearheads. But they do get in the way and mess up an otherwise tidy engine compartment. I'll use them as much as is practical, but there's a limit; I won't spend big money to buy a new catalytic converter for example.

Paul, you have made it to the 21st century. Let’s not forget that GM (2010) still uses the OHV pushrod engines that put out ground shaking horsepower capable of competing with world class super cars and do it with very appreciable MPG.