|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517223
11/04/13 12:10 AM
11/04/13 12:10 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:
Quote:
Hi Greg. Unless you went to a custom and well executed manifold, I don't see the reason to change to a TR over what you have now. Thereis as much or more 'wrong' with the INDY TR (I.e. Runner length and plenum volume) as there is with your current set-up. I would consider that blue Cuda in Canada as a good example. And then consider the expense in relation to the returns. 
(I.e. Runner length and plenum volume)
With those two items about all that is in favor of the TR over the 3x running injection, I think I will save my money. Thanks for the input. Untill more info comes along on a better intake, I'll stay with the 3x.
I have posted similar inquaries in the past, but didn't get much feed back. This is great, and thank you all. It won't be till may or June that I get the car out, but hope to post some positive results. 
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: HardcoreB]
#1517225
11/05/13 10:10 PM
11/05/13 10:10 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,504
So. Burlington, Vt.
fast68plymouth
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,504
So. Burlington, Vt.
|
Quote:
Hi Greg. Unless you went to a custom and well executed manifold, I don't see the reason to change to a TR over what you have now. Thereis as much or more 'wrong' with the INDY TR (I.e. Runner length and plenum volume) as there is with your current set-up. I would consider that blue Cuda in Canada as a good example. And then consider the expense in relation to the returns.
perhaps the Indy TR does have its share of issues......but in two seperate back to back tests(a 540 and a 572), i found it to make 40+hp over an Indy single plane/1150 combo.
68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: fast68plymouth]
#1517226
11/06/13 12:37 AM
11/06/13 12:37 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
cudabin
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
|
Hi Greg,
I am actually using the standard 4150 flanged 400 (low deck) Indy manifold with an adapter out to 4500 dominator size for the 2100cfm single terminator.
Manifold was port matched, but not really ported...
With Alky injection only air flows through the manifold anyways so I don't know how much a tunnel ram will help you, especially if you are not going to buzz it over 8,000rpm.
I have not even sealed off my scoop with this combo yet.
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: cudabin]
#1517227
11/06/13 02:02 AM
11/06/13 02:02 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...
|
I am surprised that you have the smaller intake on there. It is working well! I figure the swap to a TR manifold would be worth something, based on the better tuned length. There wouldn't be much if any gain from increased airflow, with 2100 cfm for a single. The gain in hp might be half of what a carbed setup would see? That is the big question.
Another suggestion was to modify the intake valve pockets to allow better flow at overlap. My heads have been cut to 62 cc, which put the valves way down into the pistons. Anybody done this with the motor assembled, heads off?
8..603 156 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1517229
11/07/13 09:04 AM
11/07/13 09:04 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...
|
Well, the TR manifold is out of the picture. I have too much engine setback and too much height to get it all in there without a lot of work. So with both intake and exhaust 1.7 rockers safely in my possession, I have some testing to do, and also the first time the heads come off, lay back the lip on the intake valve pocket to help flow at overlap. I also would like to try a different converter setup, and as OU812 said, it is (in my mind also) better to keep the one I have as it is, and compare it to another converter.
Last edited by gregsdart; 11/07/13 09:05 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: gregsdart]
#1517230
11/07/13 11:33 AM
11/07/13 11:33 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
cudabin
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 903
Saskatchewan, Canada
|
Greg, I think the 1.7 rockers will be a good move for you, but perhaps you should consider selling one or 2 of the cams you have now, and having a new cam designed for your combination? Most race cars have a few compromises built into the motor, and even with the chassis... Alky injection also produces more torque down low so a cam designed for "gas" might not optimize the combo? Also most of the older grinds for Mopars did not factor in the increased displacement we use these days or even the unique bore/stroke combos available now. In my case, my chassis/tires could not handle anymore torque, so I tried to optomize the upper rpm hp. Also my heads at 345cc flowing 382cfm might have peaked a little lower on 557ci, which my 4.56 gears and 31" tall tires would not want... I wanted a cam that would hang on above peak power and produce the most HP I could with the limited head flow the Indy -1's provided. LSM came through with a grind that dyno'd where i wanted,doesn't kill the valve springs, and gets the car down the track with all the limitations of my chassis. I think a custom cam might be the best investment you could make at this point in your cars evolution...  Good luck with it! 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: Brian Hafliger]
#1517231
11/07/13 10:21 PM
11/07/13 10:21 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,504
So. Burlington, Vt.
fast68plymouth
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,504
So. Burlington, Vt.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hi Greg. Unless you went to a custom and well executed manifold, I don't see the reason to change to a TR over what you have now. Thereis as much or more 'wrong' with the INDY TR (I.e. Runner length and plenum volume) as there is with your current set-up. I would consider that blue Cuda in Canada as a good example. And then consider the expense in relation to the returns.
perhaps the Indy TR does have its share of issues......but in two seperate back to back tests(a 540 and a 572), i found it to make 40+hp over an Indy single plane/1150 combo.
It could be that the 1150 was the problem? I know some guys hate that carb. I don't have much data on them, usually use 1050's or 1250's.
Brian, not to bust your chops......but....when i read this i kinda went  to myself.
why would i bother posting the info if i didnt know the test was valid?
i guess i would have expected you to give me the benefit of the doubt about the validity of the test.
its not like i'm new to dyno testing......ive been running one since 1990.
in any case, the 1150 is a known good carb that i modified years ago that we use on the dyno regularly.
as a reference, on a 900hp 572, it was 18hp better than a known good working HP1050/8896.
the 572 with that 1050 on it run's 8.30's @ 164-165 @ 2700lbs.
68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
|
|
|
Re: Help solve the mystry, better flow numbers, same power?
[Re: fast68plymouth]
#1517232
11/08/13 01:40 AM
11/08/13 01:40 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,486
SoCal
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hi Greg. Unless you went to a custom and well executed manifold, I don't see the reason to change to a TR over what you have now. Thereis as much or more 'wrong' with the INDY TR (I.e. Runner length and plenum volume) as there is with your current set-up. I would consider that blue Cuda in Canada as a good example. And then consider the expense in relation to the returns.
perhaps the Indy TR does have its share of issues......but in two seperate back to back tests(a 540 and a 572), i found it to make 40+hp over an Indy single plane/1150 combo.
It could be that the 1150 was the problem? I know some guys hate that carb. I don't have much data on them, usually use 1050's or 1250's.
Brian, not to bust your chops......but....when i read this i kinda went to myself.
why would i bother posting the info if i didnt know the test was valid?
i guess i would have expected you to give me the benefit of the doubt about the validity of the test.
its not like i'm new to dyno testing......ive been running one since 1990.
in any case, the 1150 is a known good carb that i modified years ago that we use on the dyno regularly.
as a reference, on a 900hp 572, it was 18hp better than a known good working HP1050/8896.
the 572 with that 1050 on it run's 8.30's @ 164-165 @ 2700lbs.
Wow! I see your still touchy as ever. I was only mentioning that I've heard 1150's tend to have some inherent issues...I wasn't in any way trying to discredit you or your experience.
I can't believe I offended you with my statement. So sad.
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
|
|
