310 cc heads
11-20-2015 | 01:04 AM
#342
Charter Member # 55
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 20,249
Likes: 2,497
From: Omaha/LOTO
Zone you are wasting your time going back and forth with any of these guy's. straub and foxwell got kick off the site when this site meant something, the owners knew what was going on and the mods did their jobs. Those days are long gone and its threads like these that bring in the traffic that pay the bills. I am tired of fighting with these idiots, how about you start a thread over on BF about the chosen few that get to carry on over here and invite them there with mods to control the BS.
All I've seen you do is bash those that you do not agree with. You do not even post any facts about why you disagree.
As far as doing my "job," I just got home from 9 hrs of doing that.
If you want the mods to control the BS, we can start with you. You have chosen to be an outspoken participant in the BS.
11-20-2015 | 01:28 AM
#343
Charter Member # 55
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 20,249
Likes: 2,497
From: Omaha/LOTO
IMO, its a long list but some stand out more than others.
11-20-2015 | 03:56 AM
#344
Registered
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 14,105
Likes: 3,692
From: On A Dirt Floor
Members are allowed to have one account; registering multiple screen names is prohibited and may result in all of a member's accounts being banned permanently.
Last edited by SB; 11-20-2015 at 04:00 AM.
11-20-2015 | 06:52 AM
#345
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,103
Likes: 3
From: michigan
I have not seen you give one bit of technical advice in this thread or for the matter any other threads.
All I've seen you do is bash those that you do not agree with. You do not even post any facts about why you disagree.
As far as doing my "job," I just got home from 9 hrs of doing that.
If you want the mods to control the BS, we can start with you. You have chosen to be an outspoken participant in the BS.
All I've seen you do is bash those that you do not agree with. You do not even post any facts about why you disagree.
As far as doing my "job," I just got home from 9 hrs of doing that.
If you want the mods to control the BS, we can start with you. You have chosen to be an outspoken participant in the BS.
Without keeping score on this thread I would bet I have about 90% less posts on this thread than any of the other "participants" yet again I get picked out of the crowd by YOU and as soon as I spoke up for a friend. Another member openly bashed Articfriends and you do nothing about that but come after me for having a friends back.......... makes me wonder what your agenda is or what I ever did to you.
11-20-2015 | 07:11 AM
#346
Banned
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 277
Likes: 1
I'd look at the Callies Compstar line, as I know you are on a budget dale. More than enough crank for what you're doing. I believe you'll tear up that Gen V production block long before the crank would be an issue.
As far as cam durations go, just for conversation. A couple recent roots blower builds we dynoed.
First one. 540ci, 7.5:1 static compression, Dart 345 Iron eagles, Crane shelf 244/256 114 LSA camshaft 8lbs boost. 10-71 blower. Peak horsepower was at 6400-6500RPM, torque peaked at 4500RPM.
Second one. 522ci (4.00x4.560), 8.25ish static compression, AFR 315 heads. 10-71 blower. Buddy ordered a custom cam from Bob M. Cam was 245/253 114 LSA. We did not see a peak. At 6700RPM, it was still climbing, but just about done. Torque peaked at 4500RPM also.
Another buddy of mine, had some 540ci N/A engines. Dart 320 heads (race series not pro 1s). Static was somewhere in the 9.25 range, flat top piston. He originally had some 250/260ish cams in them, dominator carb...they were not the best around the docks, but ran good. When freshening the engines, he wanted to focus on a more user friendly rpm range, he called bob for cams. new cams were around 240ish 248ish. Its been a while, and dont remember the exact numbers. Engines made 680-690hp at 6000. Now, his boat, didnt gain any top speed with the smaller cams (30ft vee straight bottom coupled to SSM drives running 90ish mph), however, what he did gain, was a better idle, and acceleration thru the rpm range, with less camshaft.
Something to remember, our boats aren't dynos. You want to look at the full picture. Losing 10HP at peak, might not be worth losing 30-40 ft lbs of average torque. I agree with what KVogt said earlier, about things being a compromise. In marine offshore, when it comes to cams and heads, usually erroring to the smaller side of things, is a better bet, than erroring to the large side of things.
Speed wise, a very rough rule of thumb, is it takes around 25HP, to gain 100RPM with your props. The average offshore boat, that might be 1, maybe 2 mph. The difference between a 675hp engine, and a 700HP engine, might not net you the speed gains you might expect. Most of the time, there's more to throwing HP at your boat, to increasing speed.
Dale, bigboat28, I would focus on reliability, after all the BS you've been thru the past year with engines. A mild camshaft setup, may cost you a little power, but it can pay off in the long run. How many hours would you be happy with, before replacing valvetrain components?
As far as cam durations go, just for conversation. A couple recent roots blower builds we dynoed.
First one. 540ci, 7.5:1 static compression, Dart 345 Iron eagles, Crane shelf 244/256 114 LSA camshaft 8lbs boost. 10-71 blower. Peak horsepower was at 6400-6500RPM, torque peaked at 4500RPM.
Second one. 522ci (4.00x4.560), 8.25ish static compression, AFR 315 heads. 10-71 blower. Buddy ordered a custom cam from Bob M. Cam was 245/253 114 LSA. We did not see a peak. At 6700RPM, it was still climbing, but just about done. Torque peaked at 4500RPM also.
Another buddy of mine, had some 540ci N/A engines. Dart 320 heads (race series not pro 1s). Static was somewhere in the 9.25 range, flat top piston. He originally had some 250/260ish cams in them, dominator carb...they were not the best around the docks, but ran good. When freshening the engines, he wanted to focus on a more user friendly rpm range, he called bob for cams. new cams were around 240ish 248ish. Its been a while, and dont remember the exact numbers. Engines made 680-690hp at 6000. Now, his boat, didnt gain any top speed with the smaller cams (30ft vee straight bottom coupled to SSM drives running 90ish mph), however, what he did gain, was a better idle, and acceleration thru the rpm range, with less camshaft.
Something to remember, our boats aren't dynos. You want to look at the full picture. Losing 10HP at peak, might not be worth losing 30-40 ft lbs of average torque. I agree with what KVogt said earlier, about things being a compromise. In marine offshore, when it comes to cams and heads, usually erroring to the smaller side of things, is a better bet, than erroring to the large side of things.
Speed wise, a very rough rule of thumb, is it takes around 25HP, to gain 100RPM with your props. The average offshore boat, that might be 1, maybe 2 mph. The difference between a 675hp engine, and a 700HP engine, might not net you the speed gains you might expect. Most of the time, there's more to throwing HP at your boat, to increasing speed.
Dale, bigboat28, I would focus on reliability, after all the BS you've been thru the past year with engines. A mild camshaft setup, may cost you a little power, but it can pay off in the long run. How many hours would you be happy with, before replacing valvetrain components?
On cranks, my .02 is that I'd also look at Scat. Many don't know, but they have some really nice American forgings with center counter weights, and they also have an import forging with center counter weights that I've used in a couple high hp applications. I'd put these forgings up against any American forging and Scat finishes these in house so the finish work is as good as any. See maybe .0002 variation (+/- .0001) the entire crank. I know of several cases where these cranks have seen in excess of 2K hp.
Not sure if you're familiar with Molnar rods, but I've been impressed with them so far as well.
11-20-2015 | 07:23 AM
#347
Banned
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 277
Likes: 1
I was recently reading a thread on one of the other forums. I dont recall all of the details. But I remember horsepower1 being the main guy posting, and it was regarding some of the design issues with afrs casting, or what he felt were issues. What i found interesting, was Tim, from air flow research, chimed in on the thread, thanking him for bringing the issues up, and said that on their next run of bbc head castings, they would be making the according changes, based on that information.
Sorry, but I have to think, if horsepower1 made posts, that the manufacturer of the said product, is going to actually make a change based upon his findings, i would think "this guys no dummy"
Maybe he can talk about that, i dont recall the details of the whole thing.
Sorry, but I have to think, if horsepower1 made posts, that the manufacturer of the said product, is going to actually make a change based upon his findings, i would think "this guys no dummy"
Maybe he can talk about that, i dont recall the details of the whole thing.
11-20-2015 | 07:36 AM
#349
Gold Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,691
Likes: 217
From: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
11-20-2015 | 07:49 AM
#350
Registered
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
I just wish scat offerered a center counterweighted crank option. They do, but only on the american made forging, which is priced in the callies magnum range. Eagle, compstar, molnar, manley, and a couple others have the center counterweights if not mistaken.
