Afr heads with PAC 8002 spring upgrade.
#162
Registered

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,356
Likes: 1,515
From: NW Michigan
#164
In reality you'd think a more common question would be is what's the is LIFT at a particular crankshaft movement/degrees with a said cam. Depending lobe design and cam card its nearly impossible to say.
A degree wheel and dial indicator with a cam and solid lifter with a 1.7 and 1.85 rocker will cut to the chase in a hurry.
A degree wheel and dial indicator with a cam and solid lifter with a 1.7 and 1.85 rocker will cut to the chase in a hurry.
Also, Jim ports for below 0.700" for the marine customer that is why you will always see a 0.650" flow #. You can really hurt the lower #'s trying to achieve good 0.800".
.
.
.
.
SB
Oh, the difference of the integrals. Why didn't you say that to begin with... lol
.
#165
Registered

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
That's funny that you say this. Jim and I were at the shop a few years ago and he was degreeing a cam. Degree wheel, dial indicator and such. We actually started writing down cam events, looking at piston position in the cylinder, lift at those positions, calculating RPM vs piston velocity, piston dwell and other crap. It's scientific black magic, he could see how the air entered and exited the cylinder. I not so much. Now give me some non-Newtonian fluids... I can see them flow.
Also, Jim ports for below 0.700" for the marine customer that is why you will always see a 0.650" flow #. You can really hurt the lower #'s trying to achieve good 0.800".
.
.
.
.
SB
Oh, the difference of the integrals. Why didn't you say that to begin with... lol
.
Also, Jim ports for below 0.700" for the marine customer that is why you will always see a 0.650" flow #. You can really hurt the lower #'s trying to achieve good 0.800".
.
.
.
.
SB
Oh, the difference of the integrals. Why didn't you say that to begin with... lol
.
Thats pretty much what my local head guy says too. Sometimes to get flow at .800 to improve, you can hurt the low lift flow.
Its guys like him and jimv, who set the parameters for which these software programs to operate.
Its pretty cool to have a buddy to do that kind of stuff with at the shop
#166
One example I can give is when I built the upgraded small block for my 22' Apache. The stock 350MPI got on plane very easily and cruised very nicely with a top speed of 63mph. The 355" making 435hp fully dressed was a little doggy out of hole and the mid-range cruise under 3500 rpm was a few mph slower then with the MPI and it was the same exact prop and setup. However, once over 3500 the boat was faster and top end netted just under 74mph. Again, running the same prop as the MPI, turning about 700-800 more rpm on the big end.
#167
Registered

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
I would say that depends on single engine vs twin and many other factors like slip getting on plane. In a twin, there's plenty of torque between the two engines to get on plane.
One example I can give is when I built the upgraded small block for my 22' Apache. The stock 350MPI got on plane very easily and cruised very nicely with a top speed of 63mph. The 355" making 435hp fully dressed was a little doggy out of hole and the mid-range cruise under 3500 rpm was a few mph slower then with the MPI and it was the same exact prop and setup. However, once over 3500 the boat was faster and top end netted just under 74mph. Again, running the same prop as the MPI, turning about 700-800 more rpm on the big end.
One example I can give is when I built the upgraded small block for my 22' Apache. The stock 350MPI got on plane very easily and cruised very nicely with a top speed of 63mph. The 355" making 435hp fully dressed was a little doggy out of hole and the mid-range cruise under 3500 rpm was a few mph slower then with the MPI and it was the same exact prop and setup. However, once over 3500 the boat was faster and top end netted just under 74mph. Again, running the same prop as the MPI, turning about 700-800 more rpm on the big end.
What sucks is, when you build a new engine package, and lose power everywhere !
#168
Registered
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 2
From: rock Island wa
This is kind of the the question I axed a few cam...motion threads ago, if more ratio vs less cam could result in a quieter less destructive valve train. Sb's pic really expained a lot to me and made sense, as iwas having a hard time grasping what was being said. Still don't know, but the conversation is very interesting. 





