Guest Bob L Posted May 30, 2003 Share Posted May 30, 2003 It's just that I went the "high revving' date=' quick revving, short stroke" route and found I wanted MORE torque from cruise 1500-6500. [snip'] Just my personal opinion, but a high rpm powerband can get tiresome on the street. Well said! I used to worry about piston speed, R/S ratios, and rotating assembly failures, but of the 3 engine failures in my life, ALL of them were due to excessive RPMs and ALL of them were valvetrain related. These days I worry about valvetrains and view high RPMs as a high-stakes gamble. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deMideon Posted May 30, 2003 Share Posted May 30, 2003 Absolutley! I am building mine to be able to handle 6500 rpm for when I miss a shift but I want the peak to be around 5000 - 5500. I just want it to get there really fast! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pparaska Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Absolutley! I am building mine to be able to handle 6500 rpm for when I miss a shift but I want the peak to be around 5000 - 5500. I just want it to get there really fast! Then lots of cubic inches, with the requisite good flowing heads, correct cam, etc. are in your future That or some form of turbo/supercharging! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tt350 Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 TURBOS! Yummmmmmmmm. I have a quick qusetion here. What would work better with turbo's, the 377 or the 383? or the 454? lol For road racing purposes, cant it be advantageous (sometimes) to have fewer gears, and a toquey engine? Just wonderin if anyone here races with 4 speeds, or 383's. Man I cant wait to start on this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Dimidion; Put the engine build specifications you have in mind so far, along with the use it will be put to and see what we have to say.....heh heh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Grumpy; Since when does a Patriarch need an invitation? I just assumed that you were always hovering over us and no one ever convened in here withought your venerable and inimitable presence! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tt350 Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Oh ya, i was gonna ask you grump: Do you think a 406 would be a good choice for road racin. Maybe not turbocharged or anything, just NA. And is it a good motor for TTing. Just some seriously pondered questions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 I don't think you would need more than a 350 with twin turbo's, I've read some of the Ken Dutweiller's test [ I guess that's how you spell his name] , and he has made over 1500 horspower with a 350. Can't really see you road racing that. May two itty bitty turbos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deMideon Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Hehe I'd be glad to hear what everyone thinks! Although I did post this not too long ago: 400 block bored 40 over Scat 9000 crank, 400 mains, internally balanced, 3.5 stroke for 6" rods Scat 6" I beam rods w 7/16" bolts Keith Black 194 pistons 10.7:1 w/ 64 cc heads Canfield heads - 59.2 cc chambers Intake - 2.02 Exhaust - 1.60 .1 - 63.5 .1 - 50.5 .2 - 130 .2 - 94 .3 - 185 .3 - 128 .4 - 237 .4 - 151 .5 - 252 .5 - 165 .6 - 253.5 .6 - 175 .65 - 255 .65 - 179 .7 - 256.5 .7 - 182 CRANE 114681 http://dab7.cranecams.com/SpecCard/DisplayCatalogCard.asp?PN=114681&B1=Display+Card I also have a port matched VicJr intake and will probably go with a Predator carb. and a Hays aluminum flywheel. I also have a T-56 to bolt up!! This will be fun ... well at least for a little while! BTW since grumpy didn't post into this I asked him too, I was not getting what I needed to understand and I knew grumpy would give it! Oh and thanks Grumpy!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 For road racing purposes, cant it be advantageous (sometimes) to have fewer gears, and a toquey engine? Yes, most of us try to reduce shifts, we dont run gears like drag guys do. Most of us drivin the American cars try to say out of 5th, some dont care and run 4:10s with thier T56s and run in 5th, so nobody agrees 100%. Since we have 6 speeds though, we dont have the crazy OD in 5th like the Fords do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Pete; I have studied your cam card. From what little I know I have made the following observations about the numbers and also the card "layout" itself: 1. Why is the "mid-range" performance seemingly dwelled upon more than the upper range in many cases (like this card does)? And then, just what kind of "Performance" are they talking about? It seems to me that the upper range would always be more imprtant because of the waning performance due to wind resistance? Is this statement made just to go hand in hand with the "Moderate Performance Usage" statement also made? And I wonder why they don't offset the statement "rough idle" with a comment on it's indication of a stronger high end? 2. The 0.026 valve lash reminds me of the old flathead fords we set at 0.014. I presume the extra 0.012 is for the additional overhead mechanisim. It also remimds me of the ability to open or close the lash up to 0.008 to get more torque or rpm as the case required on the oval track. 3. LIFT: I am not critisizing when I say; why would they carry out a lift number into .0004 (4 ten thousandths)? The total lift does look moderate but I have another question when it comes to the exaust figure being larger than the intake as shown here. I have read that the Ford heads have poorer exaust porting than the chevy and thus require more lift there. I wonder how much greater this lift would be for a ford in this instance? 4. CAM TIMING: .002, .006. .050 and now .020? This is a new one to me. Why not the good old .050? Is this .020 pequliar to the manufacturer? Ya, that duration is something else! I would expect a "MODERATE" lope....LOL. These numbers indicate a strong "upper range" to me. 5. TAPPET: Now we're talkin', this looks better to me as we move along!.... In fact, very nice! It looks to me like Grumpy has put a "Baby Giant" firecracker in your hands! 6. SEAT PRESSURE/RPM'S: 120 on the intake @ 6800 max. and no float until 7400? (with mechanical roller tappets I would hope) With that seat pressure, how can they pull this off? Do you beleive these figures? Do they supply the "Feather weight"/helium filled valves to go with this cam?.....LOL! 7. CAM TIMING/TAPPET AGAIN: Ok, here is what I expected with the other entry. The question remains...Why @ .020 in the first entry? Is this so the "Ramp" can be verified by comparing both entries? Can you explain? Basically a VERY nice cam for the street I would say. IMHO. ---------------------- I didn't check your optional cam yet, I'll have a look but I won't do a legnthy comment if any. Re. Your last comment about tiresome: As I see it, there are two forms of modifieds running the streets; One likes the stick and a lot of gears so they can enjoy hearing the windup, feel the shift thrusts and seem more a part of the "whole" (It' an esthetic thing) and that's fine! The other is when the mind is drawn more to the specifics of what is happening power-wise and that things can be done here to further satisfy that inner desire to become "ONE" with the machine. Horses are like that. What sort of rides would you expect from; A plug, a quarter horse, an arabian stallion? You bet...You would be prepared quite differently in each case! Heh, we all want the Stallion (but many don't care or recognize it exists). You my friend, have that recognition now (the recognition that Torque rules) and your stallion is in the wings waiting ($$$$$).....LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 Joe; You've got to be running dished pistons right? (-64cc). And I checked your cam card and noticed it was the same as Pete's so join in my post to him. Lastly: What does that list of numbers represent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deMideon Posted May 31, 2003 Share Posted May 31, 2003 I am pretty certain they are dished... haven't seen them for a long while since it's still at the machine shop. As far as the cam goes I was planning on going with a different one and Pete and Grumpy talked me out of that. Due to the quench height and the cam I was going to use would have made it difficult to run pump gas. Grumpy recommended this one! Sorry about the list... that's the flow numbers of my heads! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpyvette Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 first IM assuming your looking at the 114681 cam? 1. Why is the "mid-range" performance seemingly dwelled upon more than the upper range in many cases (like this card does)? the engine spends more time in the 4000-6000 rpm range than in the 5500-7000 rpm range so thats where you must concentrate your effort for the engine highest efficiency And then, just what kind of "Performance" are they talking about? max efficiency filling the cylinders resulting in peak tq It seems to me that the upper range would always be more imprtant because of the waning performance due to wind resistance? wind resistance is the result of car speed not where the engine is in the rpm range, for peak performance you want the engines rpm range durring gear shifts to fall very close to peak TQ and not exceed peak HP by a great deal on the upper rpm rangeIs this statement made just to go hand in hand with the "Moderate Performance Usage" statement also made? And I wonder why they don't offset the statement "rough idle" with a comment on it's indication of a stronger high end? "rough idle" refers to the use of the cam in the mythical average 350 engine,as the displacement increases the effect on idle caused by overlap and reversion DECREASES . 2. The 0.026 valve lash reminds me of the old flathead fords we set at 0.014. I presume the extra 0.012 is for the additional overhead mechanisim. It also remimds me of the ability to open or close the lash up to 0.008 to get more torque or rpm as the case required on the oval track. always follow the manufactures suggested clearances (PLUS OR MINUS A FEW THOUSANDS) they spend thousands of hours testing and they KNOW what works best in most applications 3. LIFT: I am not critisizing when I say; why would they carry out a lift number into .0004 (4 ten thousandths)? The total lift does look moderate but I have another question when it comes to the exaust figure being larger than the intake as shown here. I have read that the Ford heads have poorer exaust porting than the chevy and thus require more lift there. I wonder how much greater this lift would be for a ford in this instance? the exhaust valve is smaller and tends to like slightly longer durration and higher lift at some rpm ranges if the exhaust system is restricted 4. CAM TIMING: .002, .006. .050 and now .020? This is a new one to me. Why not the good old .050? Is this .020 pequliar to the manufacturer? Ya, that duration is something else! I would expect a "MODERATE" lope....LOL. These numbers indicate a strong "upper range" to me. 5. TAPPET: Now we're talkin', this looks better to me as we move along!.... In fact, very nice! It looks to me like Grumpy has put a "Baby Giant" firecracker in your hands! 6. SEAT PRESSURE/RPM'S: 120 on the intake @ 6800 max. and no float until 7400? (with mechanical roller tappets I would hope) With that seat pressure, how can they pull this off? Do you beleive these figures? Do they supply the "Feather weight"/helium filled valves to go with this cam?.....LOL! the cam has exceptionally SMOOTH ramps that work very efficeintly, no I dont think youll get 7400rpm with that seat pressure but 6900rpm is very likely, yet KEEP FIRMLY IN MIND THAT A 406 or 383 HAS A RPM LIMIT OF ABOUT 6400rpm DUE TO PISTON SPEED AND VOLUMETRIC EFFICIENCY falling off at rpms above that 6400rpm so youll almost always shift at or under 6400rpm with those engines 7. CAM TIMING/TAPPET AGAIN: Ok, here is what I expected with the other entry. The question remains...Why @ .020 in the first entry? Is this so the "Ramp" can be verified by comparing both entries? Can you explain? Basically a VERY nice cam for the street I would say. IMHO. ---------------------- I didn't check your optional cam yet, I'll have a look but I won't do a legnthy comment if any. Re. Your last comment about tiresome: As I see it, there are two forms of modifieds running the streets; One likes the stick and a lot of gears so they can enjoy hearing the windup, feel the shift thrusts and seem more a part of the "whole" (It' an esthetic thing) and that's fine! The other is when the mind is drawn more to the specifics of what is happening power-wise and that things can be done here to further satisfy that inner desire to become "ONE" with the machine. Horses are like that. What sort of rides would you expect from; A plug, a quarter horse, an arabian stallion? You bet...You would be prepared quite differently in each case! Heh, we all want the Stallion (but many don't care or recognize it exists). You my friend, have that recognition now (the recognition that Torque rules) and your stallion is in the wings waiting ($$$$$).....LOL. _________________ wide torque curves with wide and reasonably high hp peaks are what I try for, ILL always sacrifice 20hp at the peak, for an extra thousand rpm of very clost to peak TQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 Thank you Grumpy! And would you really sacrifice 20hp for a flatter 1000rpm in the torque curve or are you just putting us on so's you can win?.....LOL Just kidding..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpyvette Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 heres a 350 that makes 517hp heres a 383 that only makes 503 hp! now figure your cars gearing and trans keep you in the 4000rpm-6500rpm range at all times, is there any doubt as to which engine will push the car faster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 Grumpy; Now that's a damn good lesson for everyone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 Might be a close race if the 350 has a 5500 stall converter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpyvette Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 "Might be a close race if the 350 has a 5500 stall converter" yeah that will make for a really nice to drive street combo! (5500rpm stall) stall speeds above about 3500rpm or rear gear ratios much above 4.11 even with an overdrive trans tends to make for a less than ideal street combo! I can just see you explaining to the local cop that your tires just naturally break loose at every stop light, and that its natural for your engine to hit 7000rpm at 30mph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 A thousand bucks says I will have no problem taking off from a light with a 5500 converter. If its in a light car and is just drove around the street for fun it will have no problems. If you are going on trips in the thing I wouldn't recommend you doing it in a 500 horsepower 383 either. It's must be a nightmare for all those drag cars to manuever thru the pits with their tires spinning like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.