Probably quite the challenge to build something like that without nitrous.
Interesting power curve from 79-8700... Will be interesting to see what it runs. I talked to a Comp racer who ran a similar combo, but utilized a 383 block instead. He said he quit chasing his tail when he put the small block in, and the car ran way better.
Pretty cool engine. I see that they used some of my parts on there. Motor plate, Jesel belt drive distributor bracket, remote water pump blocks, etc. Always nice to see how engine builders use my stuff.
A bit lean isn't it? It's always been my understanding (and tuning) to shoot for betweem 12.6-13.0 on the AF ratio for optimum power/torque?! But...maybe I'm missing something here?! Nonetheless...nice engine, great powerband!
Pretty cool engine. I see that they used some of my parts on there. Motor plate, Jesel belt drive distributor bracket, remote water pump blocks, etc. Always nice to see how engine builders use my stuff.
As polyspheric already said, you make nice stuff. I have several of your pieces, but the dry sump adapter with the integral -12 fitting is a wow. (By the way, the link to the dry sump page on your website is broken.)
I'm assuming that's a standard 383 OEM forging? Pretty impressive!
We know that short strokes and long rods put a lot less stress on the block, I guess that is amply demonstrated here!
For comparison....In terms of piston speed (5512 feet per minute) this would equate to only about 7800 RPM in a 4.25" stroke motor.
At 409 cubes I'd still rather have a W9 headed R3 48 degree block and probably make the same power but it is still very impressive for a stock 400 block stock 383 stroke crank motor.
Yes, many places that have single cell dyno can sometimes be on the happy side. We have 32 dyno's and all of our have to be S.A.E. calibrated and certified. So, are dyno numbers are true.
Yes, many places that have single cell dyno can sometimes be on the happy side. We have 32 dyno's and all of our have to be S.A.E. calibrated and certified. So, are dyno numbers are true.
That 509 purpleshaft cammed 499" stroker they dyno'd for Engine Professional magazine takes the cake, lol.
Thanks for sharing! Couple of thoughts on my part. I doubt they're using an OEM crank. In the past i have questioned the actual numbers but, I have no doubt a good set of B1 heads and a custom 2x4 intake can make 1000HP.
Forgot to add the thought: "9800 rpm Holy...!!!" AND it sounds like it free-revs from inertia after the data point so it's prob near 10000. I know when we ran Superflow we wouldn't let the absorber 'grab' the engine at the end of a pull. So, like Scott's done here in the vids, the limit is set above the desired peak RPM. It's the way we were taught and to me it's intuitively correct. I cringe when i hear the operator's response lag causing the absorber to 'drag' the engine. I'd have to look again but I wouldn't have run too far past peak power..probably save those extra sweeps for the car. Which incidentally I'll be keeping an eye out for because it'll be 'interesting'.