Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Some Saturday Motor Fun >

Some Saturday Motor Fun

Notices

Some Saturday Motor Fun

Thread Tools
 
Old 02-17-2017 | 08:20 PM
  #51  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
Default

Originally Posted by getrdunn
Hey now....

It is kinda funny though when your think of a tunnel ram 565 with 236/244 much smaller than 252/252 yet pulls peak hp at 6k. Port velocity??? Valve timing??? Wonder what peak hp woulda been with some 315 cnc heads. Btw I did end up with cams that even make yours look small. Lol
Main thing is , He doesnt have a tunnel ram, fully ported aftermarket heads, 2.3 plus intake valve, 1.85 ratio rocker arms, and 700ish lift with solid lifters on hyd lobes.

Like i said earlier, rpm capability, can be affected by valve lift, valve diameter, head flow, and so on. If his velocity was crapola, i dont think hed be making more torque at lower rpms than bcks smaller headed, smaller cammed, 10:1 548 with 305 afr heads.

Change the camshaft lobe, and valve size, and your velocity can go way up, or way down. It all plays a part. Thats what "custom" cams were meant to do. Design a cam for the engine package the customer has.
MILD THUNDER is offline  
Reply
Old 02-17-2017 | 09:03 PM
  #52  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
Default

Getrdunn, just entering some information in pipemax.

With tahoe's specs, his cam, and 2.25 valve , it shows the intake system, is good for 5760rpm

By simply adding a 2.3 valve, with .700 lift, it raises to 6019 rpm. A 2.35 valve, with .730 lift, goes up to 6159 rpm.

Thats adding 400 additional RPM to the intake system, without a single change to the .050 duration.

By adding 1.85 rocker arm, which would increase his lift to roughly .685, his intake system went from 5760, to 5928 rpm.

While its just a computer program, seems pretty dam close to me, suggesting the engine would run out of steam with that combination of lift, duration, and valve size at 5700, and his dyno sheet seems to agree. Pretty neat stuff.
MILD THUNDER is offline  
Reply
Old 02-17-2017 | 09:16 PM
  #53  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,356
Likes: 1,515
From: NW Michigan
Default

Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
Getrdunn, just entering some information in pipemax.

With tahoe's specs, his cam, and 2.25 valve , it shows the intake system, is good for 5760rpm

By simply adding a 2.3 valve, with .700 lift, it raises to 6019 rpm. A 2.35 valve, with .730 lift, goes up to 6159 rpm.

Thats adding 400 additional RPM to the intake system, without a single change to the .050 duration.

By adding 1.85 rocker arm, which would increase his lift to roughly .685, his intake system went from 5760, to 5928 rpm.

While its just a computer program, seems pretty dam close to me, suggesting the engine would run out of steam with that combination of lift, duration, and valve size at 5700, and his dyno sheet seems to agree. Pretty neat stuff.
That's pretty amazing data. If I had that software I wouldn't get anything done. Lol..
getrdunn is offline  
Reply
Old 02-17-2017 | 09:24 PM
  #54  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,356
Likes: 1,515
From: NW Michigan
Default

It is just interesting how cam duration always gets discussed where people want to make their peak power at a said rpm yet heads, valve size and induction can change it in a hurry with the same cam. Combo, combo....
getrdunn is offline  
Reply
Old 02-17-2017 | 10:35 PM
  #55  
Registered
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver BC
Default

Looks like you could've pulled a few jets out for sure. For cam duration vs cylinder head comparisons, here's a very similar combo with a lunati 238/248 114. Same cubes, same heads, a little less comp. 1 7/8 ID headers with 3" exhaust and mufflers. No accessories. Vic Jr. Hp950

[ATTACH=CONFIG]564863[/ATTACH]
Attached Thumbnails Some Saturday Motor Fun-doug540.jpg  
HaxbySpeed is offline  
Reply
Old 02-18-2017 | 07:20 AM
  #56  
Thread Starter
Registered
5 Year Member
 
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 312
Likes: 22
From: Reno, NV
Default

Yes for sure going to lean it out a little, you have great numbers as well. Very similar. Here is the complete pic of the Dyno graph.

Tahoe540 is offline  
Reply
Old 02-18-2017 | 08:34 AM
  #57  
Registered
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver BC
Default

Looks great. That should work very well for you, and I bet upgrading to a quick fuel 1050 4150 carb or something similar down the road will pick up a fair bit more power too. Nice build.
HaxbySpeed is offline  
Reply
Old 02-18-2017 | 09:07 AM
  #58  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
Default

Heres Tim's 540. 9.6:1 , 1050 quick fuel, AFR 325 heads, 241/246 112 680 lift madera cam. Stainless marine exhaust with accessories.
Attached Thumbnails Some Saturday Motor Fun-timsdyno.jpg  
MILD THUNDER is offline  
Reply
Old 02-18-2017 | 10:33 AM
  #59  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,961
Likes: 6,444
From: Chicago
Default

So AFR heads and custom cam same power as 088 GM heads and off the shelf cam.
Marine Kinetics really killin it!
ICDEDPPL is offline  
Reply
Old 02-22-2017 | 04:36 PM
  #60  
Registered
 
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
From: Stephenville
Default

Originally Posted by Tahoe540
Yes for sure going to lean it out a little, you have great numbers as well. Very similar. Here is the complete pic of the Dyno graph.

What are you looking at to know that its running rich?
TruxtonFox is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.