|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517202
10/22/13 11:15 PM
10/22/13 11:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Terminator on alky. So gas is not going to happen. Too much invested in the alky setup. I have to wonder how much the small dyno headers affected the power curve? Even though restricted, the motor didn't fall off till after 7,100. Note that Hp was over 840 from 6300 to 7100, all within 5 hp.
Cudabin, you run a single terminator, right? It is hard to understand why our motors react so differently. You have 29 more cubes, the same heads, intake, but a whole lotta more cam. The big thing I notice is the higher rpm you turn. Do you have a dyno sheet to share? What are you shifting at?
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517203
10/22/13 11:17 PM
10/22/13 11:17 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Thanks for your input, Brian. On the compression, I have 62 cc chambers, the dome is only about .060 high. I will definitely post results, if I ever get some!
Cudabin, just spotted the 54mm core cam! That really must help. Much less cam flex,Ti valves, better ramp speeds possible. Just a much better deal I assume.
You guys have me thinking of an area that may need a little attention beyond the cam. I am still running the .037 nozzles that I went to a year ago. There was no change going from .038 and adjusting the bypass to compensate. BUT, I switched to M5 and had to add 8 percent more fuel, which will displace even more air as it vaporizes. So I will go back to .038 nozzles, maybe try on more step up to see if there is any change. Carbs have shown that too fine of a fuel atomization can displace enough air to drop power at times. With alky I would think it may be the same or worse. It will be interesting to find out.
Last edited by gregsdart; 10/23/13 07:03 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517204
10/22/13 11:56 PM
10/22/13 11:56 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,449
nc
earthmover
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,449
nc
|
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517206
10/23/13 12:17 AM
10/23/13 12:17 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
cudabin
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
|
557ci, 15.5 to 1 compression on single 2100cfm Terminator.
Here is the Dyno sheet. I shift out of 1st at 7,400 rpm, then into 3rd at 7,800 rpm and trap just over 8,000.
8" convertor stalls to 6,000 rpm.
Cheers,
Arnie
Last edited by cudabin; 10/23/13 12:18 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517207
10/23/13 01:24 AM
10/23/13 01:24 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
|
You don't want HP to level off that early! Look again at the power every 100 rpm from 6000 up. You'll see that it just levels off gaining very little from 6000 to 7000 rpm.
Good luck!
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517208
10/24/13 12:34 AM
10/24/13 12:34 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
cudabin
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
|
Hey Brian, did you mean Greg's motor or mine?? As per my attached dyno sheet my motor gained 71hp from 6,000 to 7,000 rpm.
Cheers,
Arnie
67 Cuda 8.48@ 158.7 mph 1.18 60' 2,600 DA(so far...)
70 Super Bee 440 Six Pack 4-speed. 13.2 @ 104 Stock exhaust/Street tires.
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517210
10/24/13 02:17 AM
10/24/13 02:17 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,899
MYRTLE BEACH SOUTH CAROLINA
ek3
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,899
MYRTLE BEACH SOUTH CAROLINA
|
Quote:
A couple of years back I had 2.300 intake valves put in to increase the flow of my 440-1 heads. These are castings I bought back in 1998. They are cut to 62 CC chambers. I run an almost flat top piston, with a dome of about .060. The flow increase was fairly good for most of the lift numbers, averaging about 6 percent. There was a spot about .300 where the flow barely increased. I run a 283/296/110(edit;112 lobe sep) roller with .775 intake lift, .680 exhaust lift. The exhaust lobe is a mild rate of lift lobe. Induction is a 3X port matched with a Terminator injector running alky. 2 1/8 x 30 x 4 inch headers.
I tried going up in rpm, but going from 7100 to 7300 shifts didn't net me any ET gains.
One thought that came to mind is that the valves may be shrouded by the valve reliefs enough to offset the extra flow?
With 15/1 compression and plenty of exhaust duration, I figure the minor loss of flow on the exhaust shouldn't have hurt as much as the intake flow helped. The valvetrain is Jesel, 7/16 pushrods, Comp 347 springs. That should be getting the job done I would think. Any thoughts on this appreciated.
**** I would think you are loosing out on velocity . if the heads are opened up , the intake [and exhaust to some extent] will need to take on the added " potential " airflow. runner size/shape and direct line of sight paths are first order to add or maintain the manifolds " velocity " to match the new volume "potential " of the heads. the idea of added camshaft / rocker ratio supports this as they will trick the VE of your combo in a more narrow point. in any event ,the modifications to the heads will require all other sections to be adjusted accordingly. just my thoughts...... 
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: ek3]
#1517211
10/24/13 02:27 PM
10/24/13 02:27 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
Monte_Smith
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
|
Many think a BIG cam is hard on valve train parts and that is not the case at all. A small cam will beat out valvetrain parts if the lobes are super aggressive on open and closing rates. A PROPERLY set up valve spring will be within .050 or so of coil bind regardless of lift, so it is not the SIZE of the cam at all. Another problem with BBM with a stock cam core is that many times there are no cores available to get what you really NEED as far as lobes. This is where the 54 or 55mm core is beneficial.
I know there is a budget constraint here, but what this motor NEEDS to make proper power for the parts is a MUCH bigger cam, more rocker ratio, increased installed height and the proper spring for that height. As far as the exhaust, yeah it might need longer collectors, but that will primarily increase torque, which you likely don't need. All the changes listed would probably lose torque, which would overall likely make your combo faster, because you have a somewhat VERY hard to manage SLR with your current gearing setup, which is why this car won't 60ft.........Also, it needs to be on gas. I know you have a lot invested, but you could probably borrow a carb and pump
Best I remember your car is VERY violent at launch. Violent is never fast, as it punishes the tire and upsets the chassis. SMOOTH is fast. When the car FEELS slow to 60ft is when it is usually smooth and fast with power properly applied.
Monte
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Monte_Smith]
#1517212
10/25/13 12:25 AM
10/25/13 12:25 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Monte, thanks for the input. The car settled down a whole lot when I shifted weight forward like you recommended. It was a very big move, from 50/50 to 53 front, 47 back. But it did what you said it would.
60 foots are more consistent, the car doesn't unload the rear tires on the launch now when it hits the bars. As far as why the 60 fts are soft, I bet it has something to do with the converter flashing to 6600. Too inefficient? Other guys are doing better with similar combos, so I hope to see an improvement when I tighten it up some. It was on the loose side before M5, and I bet that added 30 ft lbs of torque down low. The ET and 60 ft sure show it.
I changed plans on what to do with the motor. I am working with someone on a much better cam and 1.7 intake rockers, will post the specs after I order it. It will be somewhere next May or later before I get this thing back to a track, so results will be a ways off.
Last edited by gregsdart; 10/25/13 09:43 AM.
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: AndyF]
#1517214
10/26/13 11:06 AM
10/26/13 11:06 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Quote:
You are going to have a hard time getting the necessary lift with just 1.55 rocker arms. Rather than a new cam, can you run 1.70 intake rocker arms with your existing cam? That gets you to .850 gross lift on the intake side, speeds up the valve action and gets you a bunch more area under the curve. You would need to check with the cam grinder to see if the lobe works with the higher ratio.
I'm a bit slow, but finally looked at Andys comment and it appears to be a good move. The 1.7 rockers would change the lifts to .852 and .748 respectively, with .200 durations of 202 and 205 on a 112 lsa. I am thinking this looks pretty good, should the lobes work with the 1.7 rockers.
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517215
10/26/13 02:08 PM
10/26/13 02:08 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,046
Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,046
Oregon
|
Here are what the rocker arms look like. These should bolt right on to your existing shafts. 440-1 intakes and exhausts.
Last edited by AndyF; 10/26/13 02:11 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Twostick]
#1517216
10/28/13 09:55 AM
10/28/13 09:55 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Quote:
Can a Terminator not be calibrated to run gas?
Kevin
They can be, but pump size requirement may be very different, along with nozzle size. also, you have a 10 percent window to get the tuneup into on Alky and be close enough. Gas is much tighter, 3 percent and doesn't like to be off the mark near as much as alky. The fuel curve of a constant flow system is linear, double the rpm, double the fuel volume. The air ingested by most motors is shaped with a bow in it, poor at low rpm, good at peak torque, poor again at peak hp rpm. It takes a lot of fiddling with extra bypass systems to alter the fuel curve, and then the bypass requirements change with the pill change, which would be more of a problem with gas. A constant flow system runs a VERY fat idle to cover up for no accelerator pumps. Alky obviously will work better here, and I believe plug fouling might be a bigger potential problem with gas.
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517217
11/01/13 10:15 AM
11/01/13 10:15 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Update; I bought 1.7 rockers, will first try the cam that is in the motor based on input from many sources. Dwayne at PRH was very helpful in pointing out strengths and weaknesses in some of my choices. The 1.7 rockers will help the exhaust, but there might be something in a faster exhaust lobe than what I have. Probably the best move at this point is a better tuned intake system, which would be a tunnelram. So I will be looking for an Indy TR manifold for an RB and another Terminater throttle body to put this together. At this level of power, it can be hard to see improvements because the motor is already using most of the airflow that the heads allow. So I am hoping for some decent improvements, but they may or may not show up.
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517218
11/01/13 01:33 PM
11/01/13 01:33 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
|
You can't be using all the airflow the heads have to offer if valve lift and events are wrong!
If you lift that valve over .800 lift, and get the valve out of the way, your going to notice a big difference, especially on alky.
Do you have a belt drive Greg?
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517219
11/02/13 02:06 AM
11/02/13 02:06 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,010
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
Milodon gear drive. I have three cams, the first two the stats are in this thread, the last one I haven't talked about. When I ordered the pistons, I had that cam on the shelf, so that is the specs I gave for valve reliefs, so it ought to fit. It has a lot of duration, at 290/294/110 (206/208 at .200 lobe lift) with .486 Mopar special lobes on both intake and exhaust from Comp Cams. Comp says those lobes will work with 1.7 rockers. So that cam may eventually go in, maybe after the switch to the tunnelram if I go down that road. That combo would only have about .826 lift, but a lot more duration. The thing that concerns me is that it also has more overlap. It might not be a better cam till after 6500 rpm? Considering that a motor spends over half its time in the first half of each gear, that might be a bit much.
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517220
11/02/13 12:47 PM
11/02/13 12:47 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
|
Quote:
Milodon gear drive. I have three cams, the first two the stats are in this thread, the last one I haven't talked about. When I ordered the pistons, I had that cam on the shelf, so that is the specs I gave for valve reliefs, so it ought to fit. It has a lot of duration, at 290/294/110 (206/208 at .200 lobe lift) with .486 Mopar special lobes on both intake and exhaust from Comp Cams. Comp says those lobes will work with 1.7 rockers. So that cam may eventually go in, maybe after the switch to the tunnelram if I go down that road. That combo would only have about .826 lift, but a lot more duration. The thing that concerns me is that it also has more overlap. It might not be a better cam till after 6500 rpm? Considering that a motor spends over half its time in the first half of each gear, that might be a bit much.
I agree, you need a cam picked out for your application, not whatever you have laying around!
One thing you'll need to understand, the correct cam may require you to rev the engine higher which will also make or should make more power if you shift it higher and all other components will support the rpm. If you look at really fast cars out there, they usually rpm well...there's a reason for that!
|
|
|
|
|
.JPG){kind=link}