Hi Jerry,
Remember that my friend is building racing engines. A stock engine leaves a lot on the table. So, he is basically stating
after everything else has been exhausted you hit a ceiling of the torque you get out of a specific displacement. This is also related to currently available equipment and build concepts at any given point in time. Obviously future development has the potential for increase.
Since HP is factored around torque and RPM to get the HP number higher (at the torque ceiling) the torque has to be shifted to the higher RPM.
He is not some "want to be" engine builder. He did development work for Shelby, built the engine for a record holding Bonneville car and has been in magazine engine building shoot outs.
http://www.mitechengines.com/history.htmMy main point to 1oldtimer is that his search for total HP to overcome the 2.0 deficiency with a T-5 was not the solution. The solution was to get maximum torque (or at least an acceptable amount) in the "driving" range that the T-5 would typically be used in. My apology if I caused any confusion.
I also don't mean to contest Pintony who has obviously tried the T-5 with a 2.0. But, in his case we do not know the tire size, the rear ratio, the final ratio in 5th gear (could be anywhere from .78 to .85). If (and I do mean IF because we don't know) he had 15"-16" tires, 3.00 rear gears, the .78 trans and a motor modified that had the torque curve moved higher that might account for the issues. On the other hand if he had 13" tires, 3.55 gears, .85 trans and a basically stock motor (decent torque in the driving range) - and then the car still couldn't handle the overdrive then for sure I would not advise the T-5 either.