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.
Ok, I am looking for the combo with the flattest and longest torque curve. Let me know what you got and see the real world dyno graphs if you have them too.
The intake is really throwing some iffy's into my calculation and I want to know what some of you guys running the superram are getting.
The 219 cam and SR combo is a proven design for huge torq numbers. The only other cam that makes similar low end and mid range torq is the 211 cam. Another choice would be something in the 224 numbers but not much larger as then the numbers go higher in the RPM range.
So... How does the 383 cube/219 cam/SRI setup look on the dyno? What is better for that setup, a 5.7" rod or a 6" rod?
I dyno'd Corvette0096's car earlier this year. He has a 383 with 6" rods, AFR 195s and a SR with a 219 cam. He made over 360 RWHP and a flat torque curve. I can't remember the torq numbers as I am home now. But I can tell you it ramped up quickly from the starting test RPM and peaked around 5000 RPM. In my opinon a 6" rod engine will make more power than a 5.7". The reason is because the piston will have a longer dwell period at TDC with 6" rod than a shorter 5.7" rod.
Now, I see that rod/stroke ratio has to do with everything if I would put some money down to build a 383? I hear people saying they'd like the longer rod for higher rpm revving capability as it doesn't put as much pressure on the cylinder wall like a shorter rod does. Same goes with Hondas as a DOHC 1.6L B16A from a 99-00 Si can withstand 10,000 rpms on the stock bottom end, if the valvesprings on the head allow. A rod/ratio of 1.75 is considered a perfect compromise without sacrificing power and revabilty. I see some motor builders would like a longer rod for hp/top end as would a builder preferring a shorter rod for the street or torque/bottom end power.
Looks like a 383 with a 6" rod has a rod ratio of 1.6 so that sounds a lot better than I have originally thought.
The cylinder head size plays a large part in the equation as well. I like the velocity of a 195 runner for a 383 SR combo, as Tom mentioned with corvette0096's car.....that thing is a beast! I wish there had been a larger choice for my engine with it's greater displacement, but I wanted to stay EO compliant
Vader, cool I had forgotten about that I will go grab my copy. I do however want to see it with different cylinder heads too, especially AFR 195 comps and streets since they are similar to my heads, but also all heads, just for the sake of how cabo mentioned the variability of heads and others.
a 5.850 rod keeps the piston a bit taller and a groove lock spacer isn't necessary in the oil ring groove. some people like that, others don't have any issue with it. a "6 inch rod 350" piston has a 1.260 compression height (Pro Tru), which would be zero deck at 8.985 with the 5.850 rod. It also keeps the lands pretty thick if you wanted to go with nitrous.
I will tell you right now how I feel about dyno numbers.. Take them with a grain of salt. The track numbers don't lie. Best times in my sig.. I pass emissions with flying colors. Load limit is 220PPM and I get 34 PPM at idle the limit is 150 and I am at 23PPM. This is just with a cat on. Now the new cam that i will put in over the winter will be a little more aggresive. I want this thing to be in the 11.5 range in the heat of the summer and 11.1-2 range in the good air.
Corvette0096, I agree, the dyno numbers don't mean anything, however I do pay attention to the shape of the torqye curve and I can definitly feel the shape of that curve with my current set-up (not flat) thats all I want the dyno graphs for.