B4Ctom1

I picked it up at the machine shop today.

Engine 352 cid super destroked 8.6:1 compression (approx)

400 block:
.030 over (4.155")
1/4 fill block filler
splayed caps


327 crank:
3.25" stroker
rarer large journal
factory forged steel
std/std journals
cut with double keyways for the blower


Rods:
6.00 inch
H-beam
4340
bushed for floating pins

Pistons:
forged
JE
Standard large ring pack
approx 21cc dish (too many years building I forgot)


Heads:
AFR
195cc
Loc-wire machined
68cc chamber


Cam:???????
solid roller
none selected???????
none purchased??????

Blower:
ATI P1sc
3 core intercooler
custom built cogs later?
stock pulleys for now
4" blower/8" crank/4.10 internal ratio 62,000 rpm impeller red line
engine RPM for 60,000 rpm runs = 7,250 to 7,300 engine RPMs!!!!!!!!


some other parts of interest that were not at the machine shop are:

the HSR


Accel 58mm throttle body


coated super comp full length and 4 inch mufflex exhaust with off road y-pipe:


see any of it: http://outlawperformance.com/images/91stuff/

Dr G

Looking good B4Ctom1! When are you planning on fitting the engine? Do you have any dyno numbers, or are you waiting until it's fitted for some rear-wheel figures?

Regarding your AFR 195 cylinder heads:- What does Loc-wire machined refer to? A type of porting/polishing process?

RMK

It means that they have been machined for Fel-Pro Loc Wire gaskets.

Dr G

Thanks Rob!

Damon

Damn, that stuff looks like ARTWORK. Very sweet.

Going for some RPMs, eh?

CRZYTRN-92Z28

Yah what RPM are you trying to get there?

B4Ctom1

I believe in rear wheel (chassis) dyno'ing, when I have a figure, good or bad it willbe posted here just like my 412 figures. It will be "fitted" after I have removed the stock motor and tranny, and swapped the K members and heater boxes.

The AFR 195's were cut with a reciever groove to take a special part # of head gasket from felpro made with a protruding oversized support wire built into the fire ring. This is done to help blow up the motor by not allowing the head gaskets to blow as a safety (just kidding) on high cylinder pressure cars. The AFR heads are fully ported with a CNC machine from the factory.


Im not sure what RPM, I intend to build it to rev to 8000 RPM, but if its only practical to rev to a lower RPM then thats all it will be rev'd to.

I will be spinning a P1sc as well so I have to take that into consideration as well...

OMINOUS_87

Damn dude!

What do you have, a tree in your yard that grows 400 blocks?

What direction are you looking in for the cam? Does comp offer boost cams in solid roller form? Or are you going custom?

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Hum, so you're building a 350 the hard way...

Damon

Tom- I don't trust chassis dynos as far as I can throw them BUT I definitely respect your attitude about staying "real-world" with numbers and actual performance. Go check out my post about running my blown Malibu on the dyno which I just did earlier today. It don't get no more real-world than that.

I could have posted the "mind blowing" numbers, will full legitimacy, backed by a piece of paper BUT....... that just didn't seem "right." Like telling a half-truth to suit my ego's needs.

For anyone who posts performance numbers on a website I would recommend that you POST REAL NUMBERS, NOT MAGAZINE NUMBERS OR "peak" numbers that only happen in a very narrow RPM range!!! You KNOW if you're stretching things or not telling the whole story. Resist the temptation. Internet trolls will ignore you but REAL performance junkies will respect you and flock to you for advice, expereince, tips, etc.

I have built a very nice little weekend business of rebuilding carbs just based on my internet posts. Over the years it's obvious that I do know what I'm talking about, even though it's not what people want to hear sometimes. BE A PERSON LIKE THAT. You will like yourself for it and others will like and respect you, too.

CrazyHawaiian

Damn Tom, you got alot of crazy projects! Thanks for sharing them with us!! I'm interested in building a high revving motor too. I'm curious why you went with the 327 crank (to get a 352) instead of the 350 crank (to get a 377)? Does the 327 crank end result bore/stoke end up being better for high rev applications than the 350 crank? I'm not as experienced at motor building as you guys so I would appreciate any input. I know my next motor will be based off a 400 Motown block, but I'm not quite sure where to go from there to reach my goal. For high rev applications, people seem to like de-stroking the motor for a better bore/stroke. But I dont know if I want to give up the displacement. I will also be boosting (vortech instead of ATI though) so guarantee I'll be watching your progress on this motor as well. Any ideas what you'll be using to tune? I think a 749 ECM with $58 chip would be a good DIY route. Then top it off with the Innovative Motorsports $350 WB02 package for the perfect A/F ratio's across the board. Total cost should be around $700, even less if you've already got parts from the DIY in progress on your other motor. Good luck!!

B4Ctom1

My machinist wants me to let him know what I want and he will get it ground. I think this engine could just as well be served with a off the shelf cam. Crane and Comp both offer solid rollor blower grinds. Anyone that has a solid roller cam for sale for consideration can post it here for discussion because I am not above buying a used billet solid roller, especially those with cast distributor gears made for nasty blown motors...

Thats for sure, Im just using what I had.


I couldnt agree more, everyone went nuts over how poorly the GMHTP magazine TPI cars went in the 1/4. The dyno figures were plenty low too. Just like those in my 412 posting.

I hate when people say "if my car don't run xx.x 1/4 mile time my first trip out then there is something wrong..." They are right, its the loose nut behind the wheel. Huge figures and fast times first time out are the exception, not the rule. Just look at my JYD in the vid in my signature. starts out as a 13 second car ran 11.90's when I sold it without even adding parts.

I went with the 327 crank and 6" rods because they fit the set of stroker pistons I got a long time ago and the light at the end of the tunnel (huge oddball stroker forged crang I couldnt afford) never seemed to come on. In desperation I decided to just get this thing going. I got tired of being an arm chair quarter back since I sold the JYD. My friends saying, "you should just put this thing together..." Instead of putting it together with the cast crank and stock rods I just got some cheap H-beams and a forged 327 crank. besides this compression is better for a blower motor anyhow.

as far as all that DIY prom stuff you just said, if I fully understood the definitions of the items you mentions within the questsion, I would be that much closer to having the 412 in my B4C turn better than 286 RW HP and 378 RW FT TQ...

biggtime

I like your engine specs. Big bore short stroke engines are my favorites.
Are you going to be able to build enough boost with the P1SC. 8.5:1, ported 195's? you are going to need a cam with a intake closing around 40 degrees ABDC to build some decent boost. My fear is you will run out of blower rpm before engine rpm......
just some outloud thinking...........

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Here I go opening my big mouth (B4Ctom1, don’t take this as me picking on your stuff, I realize that you’re putting together something to play with out of the parts that you have).

The reason to go with a big bore is that it allows you more area for breathing. You can install bigger valves and no matter what valves you run you can better unshroud them in a bigger bore. The reason to go with a small bore is that you can get better control of the combustion process, quicker burn and better control detonation (for those of you that have owned both a 350 and 305 ever notice how much easier it is to make a 350 rattle?).

NA, big bores make sense because you typically need all the airflow that you can get, and often you need to really spin them to make power, and a bigger bore/shorter stroke lets you get away with cheaper parts at higher rpms. Boosted, well, it’s also all about airflow, but in a different way. Boosted your airflow is whatever the compressor moves. If you spin a supercharger to a certain rpm it will pump a specific amount of air, if the engine doesn’t breath as well you will see higher boost flowing the same amount of air (or with turbos you’ll need to turn up the wastegate setting to flow the same amount) and you’ll pretty much make the same power independent of the engine that it’s on or the boost pressure you see, as long as you can force that amount of air into the chamber without detonation. Suddenly, detonation control (small bore) becomes much more important then the ultimate airflow that you get out of the engine na (large bore)…

CrazyHawaiian

Crossfire, I can see what you mean about the flow on boost possibly not matching the flow of the motor. To get the best bang for the buck its important to make sure your motor can use all that extra flow. My only question is how to calculate the flow data to make the two match? There are so many variables I guess I would have to take some time to figgure it all out. I know what blower I'm using, and I've decided on the block. Now I just need to get the rest of the combo together. Anyone got any websites with some formulas and stuff?

Tom, the 749 ECM is from the turbo 6 Syclone or Typhoon. The ECM is very close to the 730 originally found in your 91 Z (Speed Density TPI). The main differences aside from the wiring and chip is that the 749 has a 2 bar map sensor (meaning it can account for up to 14.5psi or 1 bar of boost), and an extra injector driver (meaning you can run both high and low impedence injectors). This would be the best choice if you wanted to do DIY tuning with the GM equipment. The 58$ is the code for the Tunercat (tuning program) defintion file for burning chips for the 749 ECM. So you would put the 749 ECM in your 91Z (or convert your 730 to a 749, it can be done), and use Tunercat (or Tunercat R_T for the real time one) to burn a custom chip with 58$ code for your 352 engine. Then you could make a good tune for your motor, and account for the boost. If you plan to run more than 14 psi, its also possible to upgrade the 749 map sensor to a 3 bar (meaning it can handle 22psi, or 2 bar boost) and mod the software accordingly (with a hack). The downside being that the tuning program looses resolution meaning it can be harder to tune. The Innovative Motorsports WB02 is the cheapest aftermarket wideband O2 package on the market right now at $350. It includes the sensor and the reader. You can use that in conjunction with tuning the car to get the perfect A/F ratio's, even on boost. There is also a DIY WB02 possibility, and not a bad deal considering the sensor is around $200 and the DIY reader is $10-$20 in parts. But I want a nicer reading unit (nicer than I could build) that I can trust (I soddered something once like 5 years ago) so I'm going with the aftermarket piece.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I’m not sure that you are getting my point but let me throw out some #’s and it should make things more clear (for everything assume 100% VE, 70% adiabatic efficiency and 70% intercooler efficiency, all very possible numbers).

A 305 at 5000rpm will flow 441cfm, a 350 at 6000rpm will flow 608cfm, and this is true no matter how you get that 305 or 350ci, no matter what the bore or stroke. If you find yourself a compressor which will be moving 800cfm at some rpm (set your pullies/wastegate accordingly on both engines at both rpm’s), then you will need a density ratio of 1.81:1 to force that 800cfm into the 305 and 1.32:1 for the 350 at the higher rpm. Assuming the above efficiencies (assuming that your compressor is at the same efficiency at both points), that works out to be a pressure ratio of about 1.95:1 for the 305 and 1.4:1 for the 350, or about 14 and 6psig at sea level.

In both cases the compressor will be moving the same amount of air and you’ll be making about the same power assuming that neither engine is detonation limited at that point.

To throw in some real world factors, most centrifugal compressors are more efficient at 14psi then they are at 6, so real world you’ll probably get slightly more power at the 14psi, again, assuming that you’re not detonation limited there. OTOH, the way most people build engines, detonation will be a factor and is more likely to be a factor on the smaller, higher boost engine and they’ll need to retard the timing or add fuel to keep from rattling. The end result is that even if the compressor is more efficient at that point you loose some power trying to keep control of the combustion process and you about break even.

Now back to the engine at hand… this roughly 350ci engine will flow exactly the same as a standard bore/stroke 350, assuming that the heads, cam… are equally well matched and they are matched for the same, reasonable rpm (most good heads on a 4” bore 350 flow more then what the engine really needs, so a larger bore will not help), but the larger bore will be more detonation sensitive, so obviously the smaller bore will be capable of making more power by simply running more boost.

OK, so the next logical response is that the short stroke would be more reliable at a higher rpm. Lets assume that we limit the normal 350 to about 6000rpm (I picked that number because that’s about the rpm that a set of box stock vortecs will work to without being a restriction, real world, slightly higher). Lets say your short stroke built with similar quality parts will reliably turn to 7000rpm. That will require a head that flows about 25 more cfm/port to keep everything else equal. You can make the same power on the longer stroke version by turning up the boost roughly 2psi…, and 2psi boost is almost always cheaper to find then 25cfm port flow.

CrazyHawaiian

I really do understand what you are saying, but my question is how do I find out how much a certain setup will flow if I haven't bought it yet? Is there a list somewhere or a formula involving the CI and RPM? If you know of any tricks to calculate the numbers I'll need to choose a good combo, I'd really appreciate it. I'm also wondering how to find out how much cfm my blower is pushing at X psi? The manufacturer will only give me max raings (Maximum airflow: 1,000 CFM, Maximum boost pressure: 20 PSI, Maximum impeller speed: 50,000 RPM, Adiabatic efficiency: 72%). But I have no idea what it flows @ 6 psi, or even how much more boost I'll make at higher RPM's (and after the pulley/cogs change). Thanks for the help!

Damon

Hawaiian- to figure that out you need the compressor maps. They map airflow vs. pressure vs. compressor RPM. Good luck getting a hold of those from a blower company.

Some designs are efficient at lower RPMs, some at higer RPMs, depending on how they cut and angle the little vanes.

Old centrifugal blowers used straight-cut vanes and they would more air more efficiently at modest compressor RPMs/boost levels, but they didn't do so well at higher RPMs/boost levels.

At this point I am now officially way over my head on this subject.

B4Ctom1

not me Im just going to do it the old fashioned way. Im just going to crank the blower as fast as it will go without blowing up.

Dustin Mustangs

iTrader: (1)

I assume you fellas already found the article on afr's website about the exact combo B4C talks about minus the blower. If you haven't check it out <A HREF="http://www.airflowresearch.com/articles/article03/A3-P1.htm">here</A>.

askulte

The big bore will have significantly less valve shrouding, so add some points to that column. Assuming 100% VE, the CID is the CID, but once you have factors like big valves close to cylinder walls, shrouding valves will limit your VE. I'd expect to see hp numbers a bit higher on a large bore short stroke engine, than an equal CID engine with small bore long stroke. RPMs are an effective weapon against detonation, since it limits the time the unburned air:fuel mix can get pre-heated by the advancing flame front. The little bitty TransAm 310's (NA, limited to 8200 redline, SB2 short decks) are over 700 hp and close to 500 ft-lbs of torque these days (just a random unconnected point of reference...)

Andris

unknown_host

iTrader: (1)

I have always thought destroked motors are cool :hail: You need to let us know what kind of power that motor puts out. What are you thinking in terms of cam size right now (lift and @.050)?

Cronic3rd

Have you all read the post about westsilvia's (sp? i dunno) 352? With the short stroke you also get to run longer rods wich keep the piston at TDC longer and help fight detonation in that way. You also have lower piston speeds at high rpm wich makes the motor more relaible when spinning that high. And like it has been said before bigger bore = larger valves. Crossfire83 makes a very good point about smaller bores bieing more detonation resistant though but the longer rods of the destroker can also help the large bore motor resist detonation too. Kinda of a moot point since tom is only running 6in rods (most 352 destrokers feature 6.15 or 6.25 rods) but his rod to stroke ratio is very good.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Most of that effect is really getting the engine rpm’s past the torque peak which lowers ve and peak cylinder pressure and results in less detonation sensitivity.

Quote:

The little bitty TransAm 310's (NA, limited to 8200 redline, SB2 short decks) are over 700 hp and close to 500 ft-lbs of torque these days (just a random unconnected point of reference...)

huh, and you don’t think that they’d make more with pretty much the same setup and 350 cubes? Off hand, do you know what bore/stroke they use?

I always thought the short deck, sort rod setups that dominate many true race engine setups were really cute considering what the aftermarket seems to sell most ‘performance’ buyers long rod setups… FWIW, I’ve never seen an accurately documented test that showed a long rod gaining anything in the performance department (though you see claims of it all the time), and it’s very common to find stock class racers running short rod setups on purpose and I know that transam and the truck series run short rod, short deck setups…

biggtime

Anytime you can keep the piston dwell time longer you will make more power. short rods have to much piston speed and create ring issues. They also push on the cyl. wall and cause skirt scuffing. You really need to keep your rod ratio above 1.64 to make good power. The aftermarket is selling long rods only to clear the counterweights of the long strokes. Its also cheaper for the aftermarket to sell long stroke, Rod combos than to try to sell the customer the forged rotating assembly and a $2200.00 block that will still need to be machined. Unfortunately the aftermarket is more concerned with making money than high power engines. I use a 4.625 bore x 4 inch stroke in my race car that makes more power than a bunch of the 4.75 stroke guys......It still goes back to you can cheat torque with gear ratio but you can only make horspower thru your combination. And on that detonation subject, there is allot more to detonation than bore and stroke, how about rod length, piston dome shape, quench, cam design, a/f , iat, cyl. head temp, chamber design. i will stop there. Also formula 1 engines are all about large bore short stroke.
Ok I know I'm rambling

askulte

The main reason for the short deck setup in the race engines is to reduce weight (both recip/rotating and also total engine weight) and lower the center of gravity, since heads/intake/carb all sit lower. If you analyze nearly all competition engines out there, they will all have a peak piston speed (or is it mean?) in the same ballpark. Whether you've got an V12 F1 engine with tiny cubes spinning to 19,000 rpms, or a 4.5" stroke big block, the piston speeds will be very similar.

TransAm engines would make more with more cubes, but the rules say ya can't The GT1 club guys are allowed to run in TransAm for a few races with their regular 358's, but take a weight penalty, are forced to run lower compression, or run a smaller carb (the finer points slip my memory...). Rocketsports ran a new 4.5 (or 4.2?) liter Jag AJ V8 with the 4V dohc setup, which gives them a total car weight break and also a 9k redline. Rumors have it still down on HP compared to the 2V Ford and Chevy 310's, but a few hundred lbs goes a long way to making that up. They're also supposed have a longer life before rebuilds (1500 instead of 500 miles)... Anyways, B4CTom, that looks like it's gonna be an awesome setup! I don't think there's any HP advantage in this case to run the short stroke (limited by the AFR195's for now), but it will lower the stress on all the rotating parts so the engine gets to last a real long time I was debating building a 372, but decided to go with the longer stroke 400 since I wanted to keep a hydraulic roller cam, which would limit top rpms anyways, and take the HP from the few extra cubes. Besides, the turbos will make up for it all anyways

A.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

You know, we’ve been here before… and I’ll tell you what I did last time, you just need to spend a little time reading any of the more serious engine/turbocharging/supercharging books, any of them will have the basic info you’re looking for, and to be honest, no one is going to take the time to write a book for you to read it all here.

Nutshell answers… you know how many ci the engine displaces and you know how fast the engine is turning… convert ci to cfm:
Cf = ci*12^3
Cfm= cf * (rpm/2) * ve

Then you need to learn about reading compressor maps (they all have surge and choke points on them showing you the entire range that they work well over) and just fit the engine on the compressor map and see what you’ve got.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Bull****.

You need to keep r/s over around 1.45 to have reasonable engine life. Any differences dwell and piston speed makes (tiny as they are, I think JE or one of the parts sites have a chart up, but it’s not hard math, you’ll see that the differences fall under the .2% range comparing stock rods to 6.125” rods) can be compensated for (in both directions, more or less) by changing your cam timing. The stock class drag racers run short rods specifically because of the short dwell allowing them to make better power with a camshaft ‘legal’ timing numbers.

Quote:

The aftermarket is selling long rods only to clear the counterweights of the long strokes. Its also cheaper for the aftermarket to sell long stroke, Rod combos than to try to sell the customer the forged rotating assembly and a $2200.00 block that will still need to be machined. Unfortunately the aftermarket is more concerned with making money than high power engines.

Right

Quote:

I use a 4.625 bore x 4 inch stroke in my race car that makes more power than a bunch of the 4.75 stroke guys......It still goes back to you can cheat torque with gear ratio but you can only make horspower thru your combination.

Torque is just displacement * VE (which is how good your combination is). HP is all about how fast you can turn that combination and remain in a reasonable VE range. Nothing more, nothing less.

Quote:

And on that detonation subject, there is allot more to detonation than bore and stroke,

yes

Quote:

how about rod length

Almost nothing

Quote:

piston dome shape, quench, cam design, a/f , iat, cyl. head temp, chamber design.

yes, those all have at least as big an effect as anything else mentioned in this thread.

Quote:

i will stop there. Also formula 1 engines are all about large bore short stroke.
Ok I know I'm rambling

Um, formula 1 engines are all about airflow and not at all about detonation control… they have almost always run fuels that take the detonation side out of the equation (ranging from methanol at 101octane and much less heat to toluline at 117…), making them significantly different then what we’re discussing here.

If you’re going to run those as fuels then run all the bore you can find.

biggtime

Yes a short rod will make power but RPM is the limiting factor. The *stock* car engine does not rev. I have tried allot of different combinations when I used to race little blocks, and still found the longer rod will make more power when you start 'rpming' (is that a word?) I also believe if you are after max power you should throw whatever fuel it needs. I am currently making 3 maps for my cutlass. 1)NA, 1)92 boosted, 1)C16 boosted

Damon

A quick observation about race motors....... DON'T COMPARE THEM TO A STREET COMBO. There are bezillions of subtle and not-so-subtle differences between a race and a street application. 99 times out of 100 they do things inside race motors that are either beyond a novice's comprehension or they are doing them for reasons that are about exactly opposite the reason you think they are doing them.

Right from the get-go such a simple thing as the difference between a street car's exhaust system and a race car's exhaust system (which is a BIG difference) you can take about 90% of what they do in that race motor and throw it out the window for a street application. There's just no comparison. It's apples and oranges.

Do you want to know how they make that huge power- 2 HP/ci kinda power? Is it cam profile? A little. Is it high-flowing heads? For sure, some. Is it super-special intakes? A little. What a BIG part of it is is that they use highly tuned exhaust systems that scavenge out all the exhaust and start drawing in the intake charge even before the piston begins to descend. ON YOUR STREET CAR YOU AIN'T GETTING NONE OF THAT!!! Right there, everything goes right out the window when you translate it over to the street. Race engines LIVE on exhaust scavenging.

And, of course, most race motors have to both make power and live a long life at extremely high RPMs. Your street motor doesn't.

DON'T COPY RACE ENGINES FOR A STREET APPLICATION. I've spent years building street engines and they have exactly squat in common with a race application.

biggtime

Were so far off topic... I believe he will have a great running engine for the street. I just go back to my origional thought, Will he have enough blower to support it. I am worried about camshaft intake closing, for the dynamic boost compression ratio.

I will use as many of the same priciples on my street cars that I use on my 2+HP/cid race car engine.

B4Ctom1

I loved that article, I remember reading it having big discussions with my friends about the longer rod thing mentioned there, but I had forgotten the specifics, maybe it subconsiously planted a seed in me brain.

I didnt build it like this for most of those fancy reason all of you are mentioning. I built it because I had some stuff and I knew I could build some other stuff into it and make it strong. My engine is small, my blower is small, my heads are small, and the HSR is smallish in its as delivered state. Hopefully my output and performance wont be small. I wanted something better than a cast crank. Im getting kinda lazy these days I dont wanna hafta be duct taping this motor back together a couple times a year.


In case any of you were curious these pistons do not use an abbreviated ring pack of any sort. regular sized 400 rings fit here because of the short stroke.

how come is it all my posts these days end up in huge debates, I wanna see some debates on the cam you think I should use?

1bad91Z

iTrader: (1)

B4CTOM - what combo did you have in the 85 to make that 12.0 pass?

B4Ctom1

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...&highlight=JYD

B4Ctom1

sorry I forgot the link

PETE

iTrader: (1)

Tom, Any work been done to that crank or is it pure stock? Can't see it perfectly, but it seems the throws were knifed, they look pretty thin. Don't know if that is a product of GM engineering to offset the weight since the mains are larger than every other factory sbc crank made.

What kinda intake will be on it. With that small of a stroke and enough head to injest the air it needs you may want to look into a mid length/long runner intake to help build tourqe down low before the sc starts spinning to it's efficiency range.
Can't remember what mag built it(maybe hot rod or one of those), but they had a blown 302 motor that made 600 hp.

May wanna do a search for small CI chevy's with SC's, if I'm not mistaken it was a very mild cam around 220 on 110*. What about a noisy gear drive for that revver, that would turn some heads. Good luck!

B4Ctom1

the crank is as stockas they get

for the intake, its getting a holley steath ram port matched to a 1205 gasket to match the AFR 195's. I have been thinking a smallish solid cam. Im stillopen tosome suggestions there but you are one of the first to even make much mention of it.

I think that 302 was Steve Cole from TTS or Mark Mcphail from GM performance parts, they both built LT1's like that.

biggtime

If you want a hyd. roller grind email me for my specs.

Kingtal0n

Hey tom, why did you choose the 660gram Hbeams over the lighter cheaper I-beam eagles if you knew you were going to want to rev the thing out?

I noticed yesterday how light my dad's I-beam were compared to my heavy crap H-beam eagles... what a difference.

And if you plan on making power up top are you going to have good gears / stall on that motor? then you could just throw a largish cam ontop of it and not worry about torque too much

B4Ctom1

mainly because I like to do big no-no's but mostly because at the machine shop we have a cheap H-beam like mine that is tied in a knot from a broken cam but the rod never brokse and never windowed the block. yet hot rod or car craft for example (not that mags are the best example) they had the MIDDLE! of a I beam fly out. If I was goinh to go I beam it would be a "detroit billet I beam" and they are heavy too. you may have recognized the rod I speak of summit sold them as the prolines a few years back (beefy). Also the pistons (although JE) arent that light. the name of this game wasnt filet minion, it was london broil, good beef without breaking the bank. the low stroke will reduce internal speeds therefore internal inertias as well my gears will be the 4.10's in the currie 9" and tires will be sized according to what feels the best. the converter is only a 10" 3800 or so that stalled on my friends near stock but cammed up 468 at 4500

B4Ctom1

looking through the comp cam catalog only nets me a single solid roller blower cam, I guess I will have to get another crane.

biggtime

Call comp and get one made for your app. its not that much more money. If you don't know how to design it they will help. Also they have more cams than they have listed in the catalog.



http://www.turbotime.us/gallery/bigtime01

B4Ctom1

yeah a few more bucks than the suggested retail price you mean?

biggtime

I pay less than 3



http://www.turbotime.us/gallery/bigtime01

B4Ctom1

biggtime

3 hundred

http://www.turbotime.us/gallery/bigtime01

B4Ctom1

$300

biggtime

Even solid rollers off the shelf cost 250.00

B4Ctom1

yes but there are a variety of places and qualities of solid rollers available for a huge variety of price.

biggtime

Your camshaft is not the place you pick to save money.