My post was not negative but to prove a rational point, we've all been doing this for awhile and it's interesting to see what we're gaining or losing by running a certain engine combination. There is no replacement for displacement other than an engine of slightly less displacement making slightly less torque at a higher RPM; all being equal. If torque wins races, diesels would be king, but we know that isn't the case as HP (acceleration) is only a figure based from the amount of torque applied over a period of time (which torque needs to be positioned to peak during the engines desired performance range).
You make 50-75 more ft/lbs at an identical operating range from increased displacement alone, that's why you ran 6/10's faster than your 446 (if everything was equal). Unless you could have spun your 446 to 7,000 it would have not matched your 511. My bench racing engines are purely static/representative and had nothing to do with anyone's combo, we could easily say both engines could run at a theoretically higher RPM, the limit and values were just for this bench racing purpose. In reality, there are far more factors involved and I only chose a smaller displacement (in my build) due to the increased compression height, decreased piston speed due to shorter stroke (theoretically allowing the engine to spin to higher RPM's), and improved rod-ratio. That's what I'm trying to get at, don't take it personal and only at face value. Every combo is unique, and there are multitudes of ways to obtain the desired end result.
