Sorry, I forgot how to calculate displacement. The correct bore size for a 302 with a 4" stroke would be about 3.46". The interesting thing to note about the 3 engine comparisons, as displacement increased, whether it was stroke or bore, torque increased also. The RPM where peak torque is produced is influenced by a lot of things, intake and exhaust designs, camshaft, compression ratio, cylinder head flow, combustion chamber shape and volume, etc... The application of the 292 was primarily a workhorse, so it is optimized to produce torque at low RPM which it does very well. The smaller V8's primary application was passenger car usage which means more horsepower, so the RPM where peak torque occurs would be higher, by design. All I know is, there have been engine comparisons done where displacement and engine design were held as a constant and the only variable was the bore to stroke ratio. And in the end after lots of dyno time the engines made the same torque and horsepower numbers whether it was a small bore big stroke, or a big bore short stroke combination. I will agree, if the engine design was optimized to take advantage of the longer stroke it would produce torque at a lower more usable engine speed. And if the engine design was optimized for the shorter stroke it's peak torque would occur at a higher rpm. The easiest way to torque though, which I think everyone agrees on, is cubic inches.
John
