![]() |
Originally Posted by sutphen 30
(Post 4542623)
rc motor
|
Would it be safe to assume, that if we are talking big blocks per say, that BSFC numbers, can go up with things like, longer stroke cranks, thick piston rings, windage control, aside from the obvious, like combustion efficiency, ignition timing, etc?
I would think that a 700HP 4 inch stroke, running modern ring package good windage,, would have lower BSFC numbers, than a 700HP 4.5" stroke deal running an old school ring package, windage, etc. Seems like some of the guys building NA engines, with low tension rings, vacuum pumps, short stroke, good heads, cam, compression, are getting some really low brake specifics. |
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4542606)
So lets say the HP was 753 corrected on sheet, and 685hp observed. The correction factor listed 1.0736 on sheet.
685 x 1.0736 = 735hp 685 x 1.0836 = 742hp 685 x 1.0936 = 749hp 685 x 1.1035 = 755hp Seems like while the correction factor was 1.0736, it actually added about 9% to the observed number with Depac. Air Temp listed at 84.6 F, 29.211 baro, SG .751, |
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4542627)
Would it be safe to assume, that if we are talking big blocks per say, that BSFC numbers, can go up with things like, longer stroke cranks, thick piston rings, windage control, aside from the obvious, like combustion efficiency, ignition timing, etc?
I would think that a 700HP 4 inch stroke, running modern ring package good windage,, would have lower BSFC numbers, than a 700HP 4.5" stroke deal running an old school ring package, windage, etc. Seems like some of the guys building NA engines, with low tension rings, vacuum pumps, short stroke, good heads, cam, compression, are getting some really low brake specifics. As far as the negative correction factor dyno session and sub .4 bsfcs i was talking about, it was on a 2 stroke snowmobile on a dyno where the dyno cell was cooled to sub 32 degrees, 2 strokes make best hp on edge of burndown |
Originally Posted by articfriends
(Post 4542641)
2 strokes make best hp on edge of burndown
Smitty, what's norms website? I have a few 4150's, I'm a carb kinda guy. |
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4542627)
Would it be safe to assume, that if we are talking big blocks per say, that BSFC numbers, can go up with things like, longer stroke cranks, thick piston rings, windage control, aside from the obvious, like combustion efficiency, ignition timing, etc?
I would think that a 700HP 4 inch stroke, running modern ring package good windage,, would have lower BSFC numbers, than a 700HP 4.5" stroke deal running an old school ring package, windage, etc. Seems like some of the guys building NA engines, with low tension rings, vacuum pumps, short stroke, good heads, cam, compression, are getting some really low brake specifics. |
Asking because i see engine builders on speedtalk and yellow bullet getting bsfc's of low 4s or even lower on NA bbc builds. I was always under the impression bsfc's were more an indicator of how efficient the engine build is, rather than the fuel mixture.
|
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4542653)
Asking because i see engine builders on speedtalk and yellow bullet getting bsfc's of low 4s or even lower on NA bbc builds. I was always under the impression bsfc's were more an indicator of how efficient the engine build is, rather than the fuel mixture.
|
Is there a summary of results? What is the outcome?
Carbs suck, EFI rules, some new carb guy who charges lipship prices is king. Is that the jist? |
Originally Posted by ICDEDPPL
(Post 4542670)
Is there a summary of results? What is the outcome?
Carbs suck, EFI rules, some new carb guy who charges lipship prices is king. Is that the jist? |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:32 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.