Quote: Although I can only understand about 10% of the 20 different simulations going on here....I am shocked now after reading this that anyones engines even make it safely down the track three times.....I think we are being " theorized" to death on this one. In my world....there is idealology....and reality.....I often choose only one.....please carry on....
and for the record, I do realize what the OP was trying to do, unfortunately the presentation fell short. He was addressing an issue that can be a problem for sure. Now how you handle it, thats a different cat to skin.
My question would be, what is the IMMEDIATE catastrophic result of setting up a valvetrain with well known principles that work, with a realistic degree of engineering and geometry, that would be considered adequate?
agreed especially the last paragraph and was my basic point when i commented on another thread. does it make a difference, yes but unless something is out in left field there are bigger concerns. i've said it before personally i think people get carried away with the whole valve train geometry thing. unless it's completely wacked i would focus more effort on other aspects of the engine but that's just me
Ok guys, give me a number. How far off does it have to be before it is considered "wacked"? .010" .050" .100"? Where is left field?
when i look at the valvetrain during mockup and say to myself "that is unacceptable".
i bracket race i do not run comp, prostock or nascar. if an engine produces the horsepower i need/expect and does not experience failures or abnormal wear i am satisfied. i am not ashamed of the longevity or performance of the engines i've had my hands in. i'm no smokey yunick but i've either been very lucky or the things i do work for me.
i don't mean to disrespect you or your efforts but i've said it before and i'll say it again. unless i see something i don't like i'm not going to get all in a lather about valvetrain geometry. personally i think this subject gets beat to death and by far the vast majority of engine failures or poor performance i've seen are not a result of imperfect valvetrain geometry. i'm not saying it doesn't matter i'm saying when it comes to the bulk of the common engine builds there is a point when (for me) efforts are better spent elsewhere.
i currently have a 622" all aluminum 600-13 in the shop that was gone through by a builder that has (and i can assure you of this) built more and faster engines than you and i combined ever will. i'm not going to post the name or the things i found wrong but i will say that there are many other things people overlook or do poorly that cause more problems then imperfect valvetrain geometry
you do what works for you and i'll continue doing what has worked for me
