When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yes, it is just like the base GM 350 crate engine except a few small differences like about 1.5 higher compression. Heads flow about 50 cfm more, cam has .142 more lift and 24 degrees more duration @ .050 on the intake side and .124 more lift and 26 more degrees duration on the exhaust side. Are you just trying to be a dick?
No, you made half the HP you thought you would make and I told you what I thought was the problem.
As for your buddy, you should know that you can't compare Gen 1 small block cams to new Lxxx whatever that can make 600hp with a 220 duration cam, at least I know that and I don't spec in cams for a living except for myself and unlike the dyno result in this thread mine HP and Tq numbers are exactly what I build the engine to.
Unless this motor makes more power than a base GM crate motor I'll stand by my 40 yrs experience.
I'm a relative rookie and I really don't sense Motorheads estimate was intended as a a dig at the build by 63mako - BUT I but have put a few motors together myself. I think the combined 50 cfm, .142 extra lift and 26 more degrees will noticeably improve upon a base gm crate engine - IMO should be around 400 or so ponies. I don't see this as the same animal as s stock GM crate motor. I'm betting close enough to a square 400 to call it a day, once it's tuned correctly.
I don't get the digs at his "buddy". Honestly, that stuff gets old.
Last edited by cooper9811; 05-04-2015 at 10:21 PM.
Reason: reread the post right above and realized I may have been generous...
It probably will break 400hp, but if it doesn't then it'll be really close.
Where is this LS engine that makes 600hp with a 220* duration cam???? The 6.2L LS engines can hit a little over 500hp with 220* on the intake, but they have 230* or more on the exhaust side.
Last edited by lionelhutz; 05-04-2015 at 08:13 PM.
No, you made half the HP you thought you would make and I told you what I thought was the problem.
It made 272 HP not 1/2 the HP I thought it would make. I have no delusion it would make 544 HP. Look at the SCFM on the dyno sheet. Maxed at 401. Carb is a 680. That is what I think the problem is. It ran with no secondarys. Will get it back on in a couple weeks.
That calc won't really work because the dyno loads the engine, way more than it sees on the car. heavy loading at full throttle requires more CFM even down low. Will know more when I get it back on the dyno. Can only guess till then. Gains should be somewhat pyramidical.
That calc won't really work because the dyno loads the engine, way more than it sees on the car. heavy loading at full throttle requires more CFM even down low. Will know more when I get it back on the dyno. Can only guess till then. Gains should be somewhat pyramidical.
Don't know much about dyno's, just thought it would be a comparison of air volume. Either way,good luck, I've stated in earlier post I enjoy the whole theme of your thread. Besides the 384 number looked real good next to my initial guesstimate of 385.
You may want to start listening to some of us, you may make more power. Below is post by Mike Jones, Jones Cams.
First off, "Dynamic Compression Ratio" is as useless as **** on a boar. It has nothing to do with the actual cylinder pressure of a running engine.
What people call "Dynamic Compression Ratio" is calculated like you would calculate mechanical compression, but for the stroke input, you use the stroke length from the point the intake valve closes, to TDC. This is a major flaw in the assumption of how an engine works, because in a running engine, the pressure in the cylinder when the intake valve closes is well above atmospheric. The pressure in the cylinder is actually building long after BDC.
And to answer your question, yes, if you change the mechanical compression, you change the "Dynamic Compression"
__________________
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC 28037 704-489-2449 http://jonescams.com jonescams@bellsouth.net
Ed Curtis Flowtech Induction
DCR = Developed to Create Retards
Some of think a little bit differently then the rest of the herd.
Last edited by StraubTech; 05-14-2015 at 03:50 PM.
You may want to start listening to some of us, you may make more power.
First off, "Dynamic Compression Ratio" is as useless as **** on a boar. It has nothing to do with the actual cylinder pressure of a running engine.
What people call "Dynamic Compression Ratio" is calculated like you would calculate mechanical compression, but for the stroke input, you use the stroke length from the point the intake valve closes, to TDC. This is a major flaw in the assumption of how an engine works, because in a running engine, the pressure in the cylinder when the intake valve closes is well above atmospheric. The pressure in the cylinder is actually building long after BDC.
And to answer your question, yes, if you change the mechanical compression, you change the "Dynamic Compression"
__________________
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC 28037 704-489-2449 http://jonescams.com jonescams@bellsouth.net
Ed Curtis Flowtech Induction
DCR = Developed to Create Retards
Some of think a little bit differently then the rest of the herd.
Yada yada yada, If you are not paying attention to DCR now I know why you are building mainly motorhome engines.
Anyone can build low power, low RPM engines and don't need a third party to spec in a cam.
Yada yada yada, If you are not paying attention to DCR now I know why you are building mainly motorhome engines.
Anyone can build low power, low RPM engines and don't need a third party to spec in a cam.
I don't build any engines. I do design combinations. The cam I just got done with is a 502CID BBF that will make power at 8100 rpms. If that is what you call motorhome rpm then yes you are correct.
Mike Jones and Ed Curtis are both highly respected cam guys. Whether you respect me or not you might want to put some thought into how an engine works. I learn everyday. I feel everyone should.
Yada yada yada, If you are not paying attention to DCR now I know why you are building mainly motorhome engines.
Anyone can build low power, low RPM engines and don't need a third party to spec in a cam.
You really need to stop.
You probably know I work for Chris. I discuss combinations with customers almost daily and flow heads all year long for many customers that have hardcore, winning race engines...all running well over 7000rpm. I've built several of them myself. I'd say Chris has cammed as many engines that run well over 7000 as below. The one he mentioned above turns 9600 with a single 4150 carb. I understand it's beyond your scope of understanding but try to not let your emotions cloud your judgement.
Does this look like a motorhome engine?
Last edited by scott foxwell; 05-14-2015 at 03:01 PM.
You really need to stop.
You probably know I work for Chris. I discuss combinations with customers almost daily and flow heads all year long for many customers that have hardcore, winning race engines...all running well over 7000rpm. I've built several of them myself. I'd say Chris has cammed as many engines that run well over 7000 as below. The one he mentioned above turns 9600 with a single 4150 carb. I understand it's beyond your scope of understanding but try to not let your emotions cloud your judgement.
05-04-2015, 11:10 AM
