Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: justinp61]
#1361940
12/31/12 06:33 PM
12/31/12 06:33 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 170 renton , washington
perfmachst
member
|
member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 170
renton , washington
|
theres a guy with a 1972 340, cuda, FS/A, 3325#,stock intake, , carb, small valve heads, 9.0 cr, hydcam, ran 10.97 @ 120MPH. looking at charts, etc, this motor made 445 HP. according to same charts, 587 HP, @ 3200#, should run 9.97 @ 133 MPH. we have a friend with a 340 duster, full stock car, weighs 3345 with driver- 200# =3145.dyno must be very generous?????
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: perfmachst]
#1361941
12/31/12 07:08 PM
12/31/12 07:08 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,273 PA.
pittsburghracer
"Little"John
|
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,273
PA.
|
Quote:
theres a guy with a 1972 340, cuda, FS/A, 3325#,stock intake, , carb, small valve heads, 9.0 cr, hydcam, ran 10.97 @ 120MPH. looking at charts, etc, this motor made 445 HP. according to same charts, 587 HP, @ 3200#, should run 9.97 @ 133 MPH. we have a friend with a 340 duster, full stock car, weighs 3345 with driver- 200# =3145.dyno must be very generous?????
Aren't they all. How many times on this site alone see GREAT dyno numbers and very disappointing track numbers.
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: dodgeboy11]
#1361943
12/31/12 10:33 PM
12/31/12 10:33 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432 Washington
skrews
OP
mopar
|
OP
mopar
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432
Washington
|
Quote:
Is anyone else worried about the cast eagle crankshaft at those power levels? I know it's stock stroke and stronger than a 4" arm but still, my 4" eagle broke at under 480 hp. Didn't dyno that one but the 440 in the truck now made 485 and it's faster than the 408 was. Just concerned for you, would hate to see your testing cut short because of a crap crankshaft.
Bought the crank years ago before the Eagle cast crank reputation was well known. 4" steel crank, and some 13.7 Wiseco pistons are in the works for the season after next.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: skrews]
#1361944
01/01/13 10:15 AM
01/01/13 10:15 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 226 lino lakes,MN
onebaddakota
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 226
lino lakes,MN
|
My 410 magnum made 581HP@ 6100. With a race weight of 3475lbs it ran 10.50s@125 with 3.91 gears,28" tire and a 4800 stall. So I think you're leaving something on the table. Tom
10.56 at 125.6, with a 1.43 60 ft.
E85, Hyd. Roller 410 magnum,full exhaust, 3500 race weight.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1361946
01/02/13 12:14 PM
01/02/13 12:14 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,969 Chandler, AZ
Duner
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,969
Chandler, AZ
|
Quote:
How many times on this site alone see GREAT dyno numbers and very disappointing track numbers.
Only the timeslips matter.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: Duner]
#1361948
01/02/13 02:11 PM
01/02/13 02:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,487 SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,487
SoCal
|
Quote:
Only the timeslips matter.
Well yes and no...if you have a certain amount of power from dyno testing, you have data! Now you take that, and then compare to the track data....yes it can be a dyno that is generous, but if you start looking at the WHY this and that you may discover problems or areas that need attention.
I agree if mph is low, there's a power issue possibly but WHAT is the issue? Not enough fuel delivery, spark, what changed from the dyno??? Type of fuel, timing, jetting, spacers?
Is the converter garbage allowing 500 or more rpm through the traps than should be? There should be alot of data to look through and compare with other racers to maybe find the problems if there are any. Just my observation I guess...
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#1361949
01/02/13 02:19 PM
01/02/13 02:19 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,969 Chandler, AZ
Duner
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,969
Chandler, AZ
|
Quote:
Quote:
Only the timeslips matter.
Well yes and no...if you have a certain amount of power from dyno testing, you have data! Just my observation I guess...
That's true.
The dyno is very good at providing data, but sometimes it doesn't translate directly to a perfectly matching result at the track is all I meant. Especially since some dyno's are stingy and some are generous. I use the dyno to figure out what's wrong with my heap when I can't figure it out on the track. It IS VERY helpful there. My last trip to the dyno showed me that I needed to try something else that I couldn't tell from the timeslip. So yes, they are a benefit and provide data.. but I still want that timeslip!
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: Duner]
#1361950
01/02/13 03:52 PM
01/02/13 03:52 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 21,066 in a cattle trailer down by th...
Guitar Jones
Paddle faster! I hear banjo music!
|
Paddle faster! I hear banjo music!
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 21,066
in a cattle trailer down by th...
|
I'm sure 590 or 600 HP is very doable from a 360. We'll see, since I've scattered the 408 I may just freshen the old 360 and go back at it. But I'm thinking a 4.86 or 5.13 gear at that weight and that short of a tire. I doubt the converter is holding it back unless it has a lot of slip on the top end. The stall speed is fine IMO. I run a 4200 in my car and it works fine. The 360 makes more torque down low than a shorter stroke 340 would.
"Come get your wife"
'92 D250 Club Cab CTD, 47RH conversion, pump tweaks, injectors, rear disc and hydroboost conversion. '74 W200 Crew Cab 360, NV4500, D44, D60 and NP205 divorced transfer case. Front and rear disc and hydroboost conversion. 2019 1500 Long Horn Crew Cab 4WD, 5.7 Hemi.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: Guitar Jones]
#1361951
01/02/13 05:24 PM
01/02/13 05:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,924 Weddington, N.C.
Streetwize
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,924
Weddington, N.C.
|
Just looking at your Dyno shot that long "bundle of Snakes" of headers might be too long of a primary length to be optimum for the rest of the combo....maybe
Last edited by Streetwize; 01/02/13 08:57 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: patrick]
#1361955
01/03/13 05:26 AM
01/03/13 05:26 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432 Washington
skrews
OP
mopar
|
OP
mopar
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432
Washington
|
Quote:
Quote:
Is anyone else worried about the cast eagle crankshaft at those power levels? I know it's stock stroke and stronger than a 4" arm but still, my 4" eagle broke at under 480 hp. Didn't dyno that one but the 440 in the truck now made 485 and it's faster than the 408 was. Just concerned for you, would hate to see your testing cut short because of a crap crankshaft.
I was thinking the same...for stock stroke, why go with a suspect chinese eagle cast crank over a stocker?
At the time the Eagle crank was cheaper than having a stocker sent out for crack check, stroke equalizing, and indexing. As I said earlier this was before the Eagle cast crank reputation was well known. Would not buy a cast Eagle crank again. Thinking I might just tear this thing down and do the 4" steel crank. Don't want to ventilate the pan.
|
|
|
Re: 587 HP 360
[Re: Streetwize]
#1361956
01/03/13 05:52 AM
01/03/13 05:52 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432 Washington
skrews
OP
mopar
|
OP
mopar
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432
Washington
|
Quote:
I agree the vert seems to be holding that great combo back quite a bit, you need more stall/flash....so long as you don't loose too much top end efficiency in the process.
The cam has a lot of lift for the .050 duration, are you running higher than a 1.6:1 rocker to get there?
Your thread is also very telling about the Eddie airgap, I can see that the cross section becomes a restriction to the torque peak which in turn lowers the hp trajectory in a predicable manner....great stuff and very telling info. you can sometimes only discover this on dyno tests where you have plenty of head flow and cam (i.e., proportional to the motor size) to get there to find the bottleneck.
I'd be tempted to run the Victor 340 on it to get another good side by side, the SV will help a 360 more so than a 408 I think since the SV runners are longer and the stroke of the 360 is shorter. The opposite tends to be true when the stroke is long the motor doesn't need additional runner length (for a given X-section) to make adequate mid range torque and the longer runner will then tend to be a gradual restriction above the VE/torque Peak.
1.6 rockers intake/exhaust. I wish I had a few other intakes to try when it was on the dyno. M1, Victor, Xcelerator would all have been interesting to try. Keep us posted on the AirWolf 220 headed beast. Wish those had been around when I bought the IndyBrocks.
|
|
|
|
|