Anyone watching Hot Rods Engine Masters series?
02-22-2021, 08:12 PM
#11
Registered
Some of it is pretty good and makes you think.
Basically 3 really smart engine guys, spending someone else’s money, w/access to free dyno time.
I tape all of them to catch what I may have missed.
Recent episodes include testing rod length ratio (different result than expected) and just watched one on oil pans.
This one blew me away.
Their mule was a single plane, single 4 carb’d, all alum GM based, 478 in (I think) making 814 HPs at 7400.
They started w/a traditional baffled sump, windage trayed Pan keeping the oil away from the crank and switched to an $1100 fab’d alum pan w/side valleys, trapped doors etc and gained 24 HP’s!
It also gained torque and HPs from 0 -7500!
As they said, a car would feel that.
In same episode they also referred to a dry sump episode that gained zero!
Though some of you guys building your own motors might enjoy this.
I like stories that make me think, and to question common wisdom, especially from some of the keyboard warriors and even the industry experts which all 3 of these guys are.
Steve Dulcich and the dyno operator Steve Brule’ (you guys may know him as he builds offshore motors) are especially sharp and like to experiment.
Basically 3 really smart engine guys, spending someone else’s money, w/access to free dyno time.
I tape all of them to catch what I may have missed.
Recent episodes include testing rod length ratio (different result than expected) and just watched one on oil pans.
This one blew me away.
Their mule was a single plane, single 4 carb’d, all alum GM based, 478 in (I think) making 814 HPs at 7400.
They started w/a traditional baffled sump, windage trayed Pan keeping the oil away from the crank and switched to an $1100 fab’d alum pan w/side valleys, trapped doors etc and gained 24 HP’s!
It also gained torque and HPs from 0 -7500!
As they said, a car would feel that.
In same episode they also referred to a dry sump episode that gained zero!
Though some of you guys building your own motors might enjoy this.
I like stories that make me think, and to question common wisdom, especially from some of the keyboard warriors and even the industry experts which all 3 of these guys are.
Steve Dulcich and the dyno operator Steve Brule’ (you guys may know him as he builds offshore motors) are especially sharp and like to experiment.
The following users liked this post:
Twin O/B Sonic (02-23-2021)
The following 7 users liked this post by RSWORDS:
Gimme Fuel (02-23-2021), Knot 4 Me (02-23-2021), Nothing personel 353 (02-23-2021), Sonic30ss (04-06-2021), ThisIsLivin (03-01-2021), Twin O/B Sonic (02-23-2021), Wally (02-23-2021)
02-23-2021, 08:08 AM
#13
Charter Member
Its funny how Myths get passed down and seem to keep going just by word of mouth......when i was first getting into engines some 30yrs ago (jeez im gettin old) i remember all the engine shops telling me that my small block 350 should not be using a carb bigger then a 650...showed me some tables of CFM vs Cubic Inch etc and i just took it as gospel and never bothered to follow up on anything....have gone most of my life sizing carbs for the CI of the engine......then a while back i was watching Power Nation online and they did a SBC 305 dyno and started with a 400cfm carb...then moved to a 500cfm and motor picked up hp....then they moved to a 650 and motor picked up hp.......then up to a 750cfm carb and motor again picked up more hp.....even with a carb in the 900cfm range (not sure the exact size) it still picked up 1-2 more hp!!! The only thing that really suffered was the vacuum...it kept dropping......so if you had the motor in a street vehicle you wouldnt have any power brakes...and obviously the off the line performance would suffer if you stabbed the gas.....but none the less it surprised me to see!
__________________
-Wally
Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy horsepower. And I've never seen a sad person hauling a$$!
-Wally
Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy horsepower. And I've never seen a sad person hauling a$$!
The following users liked this post:
Gimme Fuel (02-25-2021)
02-23-2021, 08:09 AM
#14
Registered
Thread Starter
Not sure as I have it set up to take all episodes, 1/2 of which being repeats.
Another informative episode was cam timing.
As in, altering its timing in relation to crank rotation.
It worked but opposite of expected.
Yrs ago I built a 440 Chrysler for a muscle car I had and I retarded the cam 4* to try and raise RPM range of that 440.
It pulled hard to 7k but was soft down low.
All as expected but more loss down low than I wanted.
Their tests showed retarding the cam added torque down low w/little effect higher up.
4* advanced showed net zero.
Their theory was that retarding the cam gave the cylinders more time to fill at lower RPMs and at higher RPM they didn’t have time to improve cylinder filling.
An interesting part of this series to me, the thinker, is, so much of what they conclude is based on theory Vs documentation.
As in, heres where and how much it changed and why “we think” it did.
I assume many results are based on that exact parts package and probably would change for us if we altered anything within.
My dad (retired engineer) told me when I started playing w/motors that if I change any part in the system, it effects everything else.
Engine wizard, Smokey Yunick used to agree w/that and said you can’t just change a cam, slap the motor on the dyno and make a determination.
You have to adapt existing tune to that cam.
If I was given a box of parts, a mule motor and all the free dyno time I wanted, I wouldn’t come out for days!
Im also a sucker for dyno sheets.
Ill buy all the snake oil you have if it shows on a dyno 🤓
Chrome air cleaners, valve covers, etc, etc..
Another informative episode was cam timing.
As in, altering its timing in relation to crank rotation.
It worked but opposite of expected.
Yrs ago I built a 440 Chrysler for a muscle car I had and I retarded the cam 4* to try and raise RPM range of that 440.
It pulled hard to 7k but was soft down low.
All as expected but more loss down low than I wanted.
Their tests showed retarding the cam added torque down low w/little effect higher up.
4* advanced showed net zero.
Their theory was that retarding the cam gave the cylinders more time to fill at lower RPMs and at higher RPM they didn’t have time to improve cylinder filling.
An interesting part of this series to me, the thinker, is, so much of what they conclude is based on theory Vs documentation.
As in, heres where and how much it changed and why “we think” it did.
I assume many results are based on that exact parts package and probably would change for us if we altered anything within.
My dad (retired engineer) told me when I started playing w/motors that if I change any part in the system, it effects everything else.
Engine wizard, Smokey Yunick used to agree w/that and said you can’t just change a cam, slap the motor on the dyno and make a determination.
You have to adapt existing tune to that cam.
If I was given a box of parts, a mule motor and all the free dyno time I wanted, I wouldn’t come out for days!
Im also a sucker for dyno sheets.
Ill buy all the snake oil you have if it shows on a dyno 🤓
Chrome air cleaners, valve covers, etc, etc..
The following 3 users liked this post by Twin O/B Sonic:
02-23-2021, 10:32 AM
#15
Not sure as I have it set up to take all episodes, 1/2 of which being repeats.
Another informative episode was cam timing.
As in, altering its timing in relation to crank rotation.
It worked but opposite of expected.
Yrs ago I built a 440 Chrysler for a muscle car I had and I retarded the cam 4* to try and raise RPM range of that 440.
It pulled hard to 7k but was soft down low.
All as expected but more loss down low than I wanted.
Their tests showed retarding the cam added torque down low w/little effect higher up.
4* advanced showed net zero.
Their theory was that retarding the cam gave the cylinders more time to fill at lower RPMs and at higher RPM they didn’t have time to improve cylinder filling.
An interesting part of this series to me, the thinker, is, so much of what they conclude is based on theory Vs documentation.
As in, heres where and how much it changed and why “we think” it did.
I assume many results are based on that exact parts package and probably would change for us if we altered anything within.
My dad (retired engineer) told me when I started playing w/motors that if I change any part in the system, it effects everything else.
Engine wizard, Smokey Yunick used to agree w/that and said you can’t just change a cam, slap the motor on the dyno and make a determination.
You have to adapt existing tune to that cam.
If I was given a box of parts, a mule motor and all the free dyno time I wanted, I wouldn’t come out for days!
Im also a sucker for dyno sheets.
Ill buy all the snake oil you have if it shows on a dyno 🤓
Chrome air cleaners, valve covers, etc, etc..
Another informative episode was cam timing.
As in, altering its timing in relation to crank rotation.
It worked but opposite of expected.
Yrs ago I built a 440 Chrysler for a muscle car I had and I retarded the cam 4* to try and raise RPM range of that 440.
It pulled hard to 7k but was soft down low.
All as expected but more loss down low than I wanted.
Their tests showed retarding the cam added torque down low w/little effect higher up.
4* advanced showed net zero.
Their theory was that retarding the cam gave the cylinders more time to fill at lower RPMs and at higher RPM they didn’t have time to improve cylinder filling.
An interesting part of this series to me, the thinker, is, so much of what they conclude is based on theory Vs documentation.
As in, heres where and how much it changed and why “we think” it did.
I assume many results are based on that exact parts package and probably would change for us if we altered anything within.
My dad (retired engineer) told me when I started playing w/motors that if I change any part in the system, it effects everything else.
Engine wizard, Smokey Yunick used to agree w/that and said you can’t just change a cam, slap the motor on the dyno and make a determination.
You have to adapt existing tune to that cam.
If I was given a box of parts, a mule motor and all the free dyno time I wanted, I wouldn’t come out for days!
Im also a sucker for dyno sheets.
Ill buy all the snake oil you have if it shows on a dyno 🤓
Chrome air cleaners, valve covers, etc, etc..
The following 2 users liked this post by RSWORDS:
Gimme Fuel (02-25-2021), Twin O/B Sonic (02-23-2021)
The following 2 users liked this post by ICDEDPPL:
Gimme Fuel (02-25-2021), Twin O/B Sonic (02-25-2021)
02-25-2021, 07:56 AM
#17
Registered
Seeing this episode and the NIL difference rod ratio made, makes me want to do a standard length rod 4.25" stroke 540 when I redo my 502's. Can keep external balance flywheels and crap I have, but get extra stroke. I have found reasonably priced forged Scat crank and forged full-skirt pistons to do this combo. Plus the oil ring of piston would be fully above the pin, never cared for the short hockey puck pistons with oil ring through the pin like conventional strokers use.
I also am very intrigued about running solid rollers on hydraulic cam profiles. After dealing with Morel lifter issues on last built motor, and total crapshoot the market and expense is with good hydraulic rollers, I'd love to just put mid-grade pin oiling solids in and be done. Only question I have is do you run solid roller spring pressures or more that of a hydraulic roller?
I also am very intrigued about running solid rollers on hydraulic cam profiles. After dealing with Morel lifter issues on last built motor, and total crapshoot the market and expense is with good hydraulic rollers, I'd love to just put mid-grade pin oiling solids in and be done. Only question I have is do you run solid roller spring pressures or more that of a hydraulic roller?
The following users liked this post:
Twin O/B Sonic (02-25-2021)
02-25-2021, 08:37 AM
#18
Registered
Seeing this episode and the NIL difference rod ratio made, makes me want to do a standard length rod 4.25" stroke 540 when I redo my 502's. Can keep external balance flywheels and crap I have, but get extra stroke. I have found reasonably priced forged Scat crank and forged full-skirt pistons to do this combo. Plus the oil ring of piston would be fully above the pin, never cared for the short hockey puck pistons with oil ring through the pin like conventional strokers use.
I also am very intrigued about running solid rollers on hydraulic cam profiles. After dealing with Morel lifter issues on last built motor, and total crapshoot the market and expense is with good hydraulic rollers, I'd love to just put mid-grade pin oiling solids in and be done. Only question I have is do you run solid roller spring pressures or more that of a hydraulic roller?
I also am very intrigued about running solid rollers on hydraulic cam profiles. After dealing with Morel lifter issues on last built motor, and total crapshoot the market and expense is with good hydraulic rollers, I'd love to just put mid-grade pin oiling solids in and be done. Only question I have is do you run solid roller spring pressures or more that of a hydraulic roller?
The following users liked this post:
Gimme Fuel (02-25-2021)
02-25-2021, 12:58 PM
#20
Registered
Wouldn't that be awesome to build stuff that you've always wondered about, but didn't want to trash good parts for the giggles! These guys are awesome! Dulcich and Frieburger are funny together. Watch "Roadkill" where they get all excited about some POS they pull out of a field, get running, then take it on a road trip somewhere, and the carnage that follows. Greatness!
The following 3 users liked this post by CDShack:
