another camquest post

Posted By: 1Fast340

another camquest post - 01/12/11 07:26 PM

i have seen some post about camquest and i can now oficialy say i doubt it after testing it and not alitle from what i saw i feel that its waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there..

noway my missmatched twinscrewed stockstroke 340 is going to make 700hp@6500rpm and over 700ftlb@2500rpm at 8psi of boost lower the numbers atleast 100 and the torque at a higher rpm and i may believe it..

nice program but would be nice if it was alitle closer to reality..

Posted By: GTX MATT

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 07:33 PM

Quote:

i have seen some post about camquest and i can now oficialy say i doubt it after testing it and not alitle from what i saw i feel that its waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there..

noway my missmatched twinscrewed stockstroke 340 is going to make [Email]700hp@6500rpm[/Email] and over [Email]700ftlb@2500rpm[/Email] at 8psi of boost lower the numbers atleast 100 and the torque at a higher rpm and i may believe it..

nice program but would be nice if it was alitle closer to reality..

Yeah its pretty far fetched but its more for selecting a cam for your engine by giving you a list of cams to fit your needs and then telling you stall speeds and gears you need to run. The intake and header choices are too vague as well. I think it bases too much on flow numbers and there is too great of a difference between the really ague intake and header choices.

Posted By: Baxter61

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 07:38 PM

the other thing with programs like that is their output accuracy greatly depends on your input accuracy. just like a calculator wont give you the right answer if you dont enter the right numbers.

Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 07:47 PM

What is your reasoning that its WAY off... any dyno
data or track numbers...just asking

Posted By: 1Fast340

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 08:17 PM

Quote:

What is your reasoning that its WAY off... any dyno
data or track numbers...just asking

no data on my motor yet i just cant see a engine like what i have making 700hp and 700lbft from the pile of parts i have started assembling especialy since i dont have anything even close to a real blower cam and knowing that a friends 383 that was built as a blower engine with all the right parts and having more cubes made 599 hp at the dyno and that was pretty much all it could make

what kind of power would you guestimate from a stockstroke 340?
edelbrockheads that are wellported
9.7:1compresion on E-85
solidroller made for N/A with 242/248@.050 .570/.576 lift with a 110lobecenterline
with a dominator on top of a lysholm 3.3liter twinscrew (very simmiliar to a 3.3liter whipple)
1 7/8"primary headers
i have my doubts about how long the block will last:(

nevermind the old poor dominator i have a much nicer one to put on the engine when its done

Posted By: emarine01

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 08:28 PM

Hey did ya ever think about cutting the old domminator in half...

..... only kidding

Posted By: 1Fast340

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 09:36 PM

Quote:

Hey did ya ever think about cutting the old domminator in half... ..... only kidding

now that you say it,may need to get another one so i can have homebuilt splitdominators if i ever build another smallblock without a poweradder

who knows what the future has for me LOL

and forgot to add in my last post that i understand that calculators are very dependent on correct userinput,and i put in everything as close to right as i can

Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 09:48 PM

Big thing is that 8 pounds of boost... 8 psi is 8 psi
weather you have junk parts or not... most guys on
the street dont go anywhere near 8 psi... plus your
starting with some pretty high compression then adding
8 psi

Posted By: Stanton

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 10:31 PM

I agree. The results are SO FAR OFF its not funny. I'd hate to even mention what the results are for fear of getting my ass kicked by something with much lower but "true" dyno numbers.

I input the data for my 526 RB stroker with 10.4 cr, Indy EZ1's, 2" headers, SP Indy intake, 900 cfm carb and Lunati roller cam.

CamQuest results are 760 HP @ 6500, 710 Ft/lb tq @ 4500.

All the same data in Desktop Dyno yeilds 515 HP @ 5000, 612 ft/lb @ 4000.

Who ya gonna believe ?!?!?!?

These are toys but they both indicate one thing, in my application the Lunati roller cams outperform the Comps.

Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: another camquest post - 01/12/11 11:37 PM

Quote:

I agree. The results are SO FAR OFF its not funny. I'd hate to even mention what the results are for fear of getting my ass kicked by something with much lower but "true" dyno numbers.

I input the data for my 526 RB stroker with 10.4 cr, Indy EZ1's, 2" headers, SP Indy intake, 900 cfm carb and Lunati roller cam.

CamQuest results are 760 HP @ 6500, 710 Ft/lb tq @ 4500.

All the same data in Desktop Dyno yeilds 515 HP @ 5000, 612 ft/lb @ 4000.

Who ya gonna believe ?!?!?!?

These are toys but they both indicate one thing, in my application the Lunati roller cams outperform the Comps.

I agree that there is a error factor... maybe 10-15
percent.... JMO... but that desk top is WAY off...
anyone could screw up big time and still make 515 hp
out of 526ci

Posted By: 64Post

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 02:32 AM

Quote:

I agree. The results are SO FAR OFF its not funny. I'd hate to even mention what the results are for fear of getting my ass kicked by something with much lower but "true" dyno numbers.

I input the data for my 526 RB stroker with 10.4 cr, Indy EZ1's, 2" headers, SP Indy intake, 900 cfm carb and Lunati roller cam.

CamQuest results are 760 HP @ 6500, 710 Ft/lb tq @ 4500.

All the same data in Desktop Dyno yeilds 515 HP @ 5000, 612 ft/lb @ 4000.

Who ya gonna believe ?!?!?!?

These are toys but they both indicate one thing, in my application the Lunati roller cams outperform the Comps.

I didn't find the results to be that far off HP wise, but then again I'm not looking over your shoulder verifying your input numbers. A 526 RB making only 515 HP should be suspect. Your combination of parts should be worth at least 1.2HP/CI (630 HP). A roller with ported heads should be closer to 1.3HP/CI (680HP).

ETA: RE Cam Quest, did you make the mistake of not changing the valve size when inputting your head flow numbers?

Posted By: Stanton

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 04:12 AM

Well maybe its Desktop Dyno that's out to lunch. Who knows. I was just thinking the CamQuest results were kinda high. Hey, BONUS if they're closer than Desktop Dyno !!!

Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 04:17 AM

Quote:

Well maybe its Desktop Dyno that's out to lunch. Who knows. I was just thinking the CamQuest results were kinda high. Hey, BONUS if they're closer than Desktop Dyno !!!

If you cant make 1 HP per CI there is something MAJOR
wrong... that engine should make 650+ IMO

Posted By: emarine01

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 04:32 AM

I tried inputting the cam specs using sledge's instructions and lost 20 hp from cam quest best cam recommendations

... but it was still 683 @ 6500

Desk top is 647 @ 6800... they are both very good for the ego but not the real deal

Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 04:46 AM

Quote:

I tried inputting the cam specs using sledge's instructions and lost 20 hp from cam quest best cam recommendations ... but it was still 683 @ 6500 Desk top is 647 @ 6800... they are both very good for the ego but not the real deal

I tried doing that and I screwed up (as normal)..
but the one cam they suggest is almost a perfect match
to what I have... if I use a 1.6 intake rocker which
I am planning on

Posted By: 1Fast340

Re: another camquest post - 01/13/11 06:22 PM

Quote:

no data on my motor yet i just cant see a engine like what i have making 700hp and 700lbft from the pile of parts i have started assembling especialy since i dont have anything even close to a real blower cam and knowing that a friends 383 that was built as a blower engine with all the right parts and having more cubes made 599 hp at the dyno and that was pretty much all it could make

what kind of power would you guestimate from a stockstroke 340?
edelbrockheads that are wellported
9.7:1compresion on E-85
solidroller made for N/A with 242/248@.050 .570/.576 lift with a 110lobecenterline
with a dominator on top of a lysholm 3.3liter twinscrew (very simmiliar to a 3.3liter whipple)
1 7/8"primary headers
i have my doubts about how long the block will last:(

nevermind the old poor dominator i have a much nicer one to put on the engine when its done

i can see that i gues i may be in for a big surprise then, my only reference is a lower compression 383sbc with much better heads and alot bigger cam that is ground for the aplication making 600hp at 7PSI on pumpgas compared to my cam that wasnt intended for a blown engine with alot less airflow thru the heads at just alitle more boost with a slightly better supercharger

for sure i wont start out at 8pounds of boost will start out alitle lower until i have figured out the whole car when i can make 6pounds of boost work well with my streetcar i will add more boost until the need is satisifed or the block says boom.
ofcourse at the track,realy looking forward to maybe have a chance to play alitle in a local headsup class,not that i will ever win anything but fun to be in the game atleast

Posted By: 440Jim

Re: another camquest post - 01/14/11 09:26 PM

Quote:

I agree. The results are SO FAR OFF its not funny. I'd hate to even mention what the results are for fear of getting my ass kicked by something with much lower but "true" dyno numbers.

I input the data for my 526 RB stroker with 10.4 cr, Indy EZ1's, 2" headers, SP Indy intake, 900 cfm carb and Lunati roller cam.

CamQuest results are 760 HP @ 6500, 710 Ft/lb tq @ 4500.

All the same data in Desktop Dyno yeilds 515 HP @ 5000, 612 ft/lb @ 4000.

Who ya gonna believe ?!?!?!?

These are toys but they both indicate one thing, in my application the Lunati roller cams outperform the Comps.

Post your inputs and outputs. Head flow screen, output screen. I changed mine almost 200 hp by selecting the correct inputs (small tube headers for 2" on 528, std flow intake not high flow, etc.).

Posted By: Stanton

Re: another camquest post - 01/14/11 09:39 PM

Quote:

Post your inputs and outputs. Head flow screen, output screen. I changed mine almost 200 hp by selecting the correct inputs (small tube headers for 2" on 528, std flow intake not high flow, etc.).

??? I kinda thought that an Indy single plane MW port intake would be a "high flow" and likewise a 2" would be a "large tube" header !!

I'll try it you way.

Posted By: emarine01

Re: another camquest post - 01/14/11 10:15 PM

2 inch headers are for small blocks

Posted By: 1Fast340

Re: another camquest post - 01/15/11 01:02 AM

Quote:

2 inch headers are for small blocks

2 inch headers are for small blocks in abodys with powersteering

anyone think 700hp is doable from 340cubes at 8pounds of boost at only 6500rpms?

Posted By: radar

Re: another camquest post - 01/15/11 01:29 AM

I have the desktop dyno 2003 version. I don't put much stock in it but the results I got plugging in my combo seemed pretty right on. I have a mild 408 smallblock with eddy 60779 heads and a comp 275hl cam. The curves it shows seem pretty right on compared to driving the car.

I definitely used the program when I was picking out components, not as a for sure dead on simulation but as a fun way to see how different factors might work together. Here's the graph it spit out for 10.5:1CR headers and 750 holley with my cam and heads:

Maybe the more exotic builds don't compute as well?

Posted By: 440Jim

Re: another camquest post - 01/15/11 02:08 AM

I agree, there is not a lot of guidance on what inputs to choose. It doesn't let you put the header dia and length in, so what is the right choice? But once you get the model set to reflect your actual dyno numbers, you can use it to see what a change would do.

I was going crazy with nutty outputs until somebody pointed out an input mistake I was making in the head flow screen (valve dia).

Posted By: emarine01

Re: another camquest post - 01/15/11 03:40 AM

I was just playing around with cam quest and the average hp and torque #s with my cam are way better than the cams, cam quest recommended but the peek hp is lower by 20 hp, whats better average or peek for moving weight