![]() |
Who is Bob? Do you have a number?
Originally Posted by RunninHotRacing163.1
(Post 3303260)
Ken give Bob a call i think you'll like what ya hear, no need for a SOLID and the Xtra work that goes along with it ..He just dynoed a 1430 Hp motor with a Hydraulic .good luck
|
Originally Posted by Coolerman
(Post 3307200)
Hey RunninHot, what intercoolers are you using? Who's making the manifold? Sounds like a cool build (both you and Ken).
The water/alky will still be there. We are buying an off the shelf cooler to put after the turbos. We are making the manifold inhouse . |
Originally Posted by ken sampson
(Post 3308089)
Who is Bob? Do you have a number?
|
1 Attachment(s)
Thanks. I just wanted to be sure I am ordering the correct cam. My engine builder came up with the below spec. This seems a little small to me.
|
Originally Posted by ken sampson
(Post 3308816)
Thanks. I just wanted to be sure I am ordering the correct cam. My engine builder came up with the below spec. This seems a little small to me.
|
Originally Posted by ken sampson
(Post 3308816)
Thanks. I just wanted to be sure I am ordering the correct cam. My engine builder came up with the below spec. This seems a little small to me.
|
I did get to talk with Bob. However he was running out the door to catch a plane. I have decided to call Crane cam and based on my build this is what they came up with.
690 Lift 262/274 @ 50 LS 114 with 1.8 rockers. I wish I knew enough to say go ahead. Bob will be back in town early next week so I guess I should wait. Thanks |
My recommendation was on the conservative side based on your rpm limitations. I use that combo as the maximum size hydraulic roller in a 572 application and have alot of good experience with it. The cam your builder proposed is very small in my opinion, it will make a ton of torque but I don't think it will carry up the rpm range. I consider 248/252 @ .050 the smallest duration I would use for your application. The 1.8 rockers are a great recommendation. They will put extra lift on the valve and allow a less aggressive camshaft ramp profile, keep in mind they have a net effect of slightly adding duration to the camshaft. Good Luck.
|
Originally Posted by ken sampson
(Post 3309038)
I did get to talk with Bob. However he was running out the door to catch a plane. I have decided to call Crane cam and based on my build this is what they came up with.
690 Lift 262/274 @ 50 LS 114 with 1.8 rockers. I wish I knew enough to say go ahead. Bob will be back in town early next week so I guess I should wait. Thanks |
Originally Posted by Boat1
(Post 3309060)
My recommendation was on the conservative side based on your rpm limitations. I use that combo as the maximum size hydraulic roller in a 572 application and have alot of good experience with it. The cam your builder proposed is very small in my opinion, it will make a ton of torque but I don't think it will carry up the rpm range. I consider 248/252 @ .050 the smallest duration I would use for your application. The 1.8 rockers are a great recommendation. They will put extra lift on the valve and allow a less aggressive camshaft ramp profile, keep in mind they have a net effect of slightly adding duration to the camshaft. Good Luck.
for some reason i just like Radical/agressive cams and adjusting Valve lash all the time .:party-smiley-004: |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:41 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.