You missed mentioning that with a longer rod, the pistons are often lighter.
I think this guy is a little too focused on the mechanical effects and missing the airflow interaction aspect. Maybe he's never raced 2 strokes where rod length is an important criteria on how air is inducted when the port is uncovered. Similar is true on a four stroke. It's not how long the rod is it's where the piston is when the valve opens and closes. Rod length effects the position of the piston during valve events. I always say the correct rod length is the one that allows the correct piston to attach to the crank stroke and fit the deck height.
Translation: Engine designers don't start with rod length.
I do agree that changing rod length is not going to be like nitrous.
Having the optimum bore/stroke and rod ratio is impressive....
Like a Morrocan sword fighter. Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a revolver.
I'm going to bake a cake for a friend with whom I've had many good hearted discussions about cyl wall loading with a short rod 400. The top of the cake wil have " .81% " on it in big numbers, not a real big difference, as I have often thought , but never had the proof till now, thx.
In a "intake restricted" street engine the short rod may feel crisper due to the faster piston speed leaving TDC on the intake stroke.Causing a greater depression / vacummn on the intakes restriction point at "street speeds".
Yes, stock 5.565'' rods. Made 460 hp with a knockoff dual plane, and 480 with a Victor Jr., but went with the dual plane because it had 18 numbers above 450 tq, and the single plane had 15. The car is a streeter, and torque down lower in the rpm range is more fun. 780 vac Holley, mild solid flat CompCam, and 200 cc Top Proline heads. Feels real good, but haven't run it yet, when it gets warm I'll get it out and see how it does.