I`ve been thru many cams, I havent noticed much honestly. 20-30 hp can`t feel that in anything I`ve had.
If you want more power now that you have better pistons and what not just turn up the boost (i think you have a different pulley ) there`s your "I want something out of the build " no?

Dan,

You're not wrong. And we have discussed that. All options are still on the table.

What kind of a world are we in where YOU are the voice of reason?

Yes. I turned up the wick a bit. I went from a 4-1/2” pulley to 4-1/4”. We’ll see how that works out.

Thanks. Brad.

No matter what it might not be a bad idea to be looking for a used XZ drive to have rebuilt and waiting when the B1 lets go.

Wildman,

I have always referred to the ProCharger as "not a real supercharger". The one saving grace of a ProCharger over a positive displacement blower, in my case at least, is that it doesn't make any real boost until 3500 RPM or so. If I'm not trying to holeshot it, but rather planing as normal, I can easily keep the manifold pressure below zero until the vast majority of the load is off the prop. The smaller pulley is going to change that a bit, but I suspect I will still use the same RPM sequence, just a little different position on the stick. That said.....

I have been intending to address the outdrive for a while. I have the link open on my desktop for a XZ conversion kit from CP Performance. Work has significantly dropped off in the last several months, so money is tight. Hopefully, once election season is over, the work will pick back up and I can start entertaining the idea again.

Thanks. Brad.

Tartilla,

The Raylar cam has been referred to as both, but I believe the official Raylar designation is BP211. It's their mild blower application cam. And, yes... I realize the cam I spec'd earlier is higher energy than the 211. Which is why the builder and I are going to discuss a middle ground. I've been back and forth (mood swings, I guess) on the topic several times, wanting more, then realizing the outdrive won't handle much more than it already has. I don't want to drop an outdrive either.

The Wiseco pistons have plenty of valve relief for far more valve lift than we are going to use, and that is the issue being discussed in that thread. The OEM pistons have almost none, which is where that max valve lift recommendation comes from. Back to that whole "truck engine origins" thing. Mechanically, we can go as high as .650", maybe more, and not run into clearance issues with either the pistons/valves or the lifters/dogbones. The limitations are the flow of the heads and, in my particular case, the stress on the outdrive.

The builder has already fully cleaned and inspected the lifters. Whichever can we go with, we are keeping the lifters. He is still holding firm that the used OEMs are a safer bet than about anything aftermarket at the moment.

Thanks. Brad.

Guys,

So this will make some of you guys pretty happy. Me, too, actually. While I’ve gotten wrapped up in the idea of gaining a bunch of HP in the rebuild, it’s always been in the back of my mind that it would likely mean, in regard to the outdrive. So….

I spoke with the builder this evening. We discussed splitting the difference between the OEM cam and the one I’d spec’d earlier. I also asked him about leaving the OEM cam in and just allowing the additional boost from the smaller blower pulley to give us that little extra. I had already given him some money to commission the custom cam, so he suggested I invest that into some 1.8 ratio roller rockers and keep the OEM cam. We keep the stock cam durations, just open the valves a bit more, allowing a bit more of that extra boost to flow, plus gain the benefit of less friction in the valve train.

Done deal.

Thanks. Brad.

Perfect. Your stock HO cam is pretty good for a SC with the wider LSA.
​
Let is know what you end up doing for rockers. I'm tempted to put some 1.8s on my 088 heads.

​​​​We're all a tactical bound away from your project, where you've got your fingers in how many changes? Solving how many issues/upgrades? Directly fabricating your fuel rail with the intent to produce/sell them.

Looking forward to the fire up.

Tartilla,

My guess is the builder will go with Harland Sharp. They seem to be his go-to for BBC rockers, and he can get them locally.

To be honest, I'm just trying to address all the things that Merc should have addressed when marinizing the 8.1 Vortec, and all the issues ProCharger should have addressed when fitting out their kit. Let's face it, the 496 is a wonderful platform. But you can't just swap a cam and ECM and rework the cooling and call it a marine engine. And, while the ProCharger is a perfectly viable option for packing more air into an intake plenum than the engine would ingest NA, the kit leaves a lot to be desired. You can't just crank fuel pressure from 42 to 70 PSI at the transition between manifold vacuum and manifold boost, and not adjust injector fire duration. That AFR table had to be just all over the place. Not to mention the whole PCV valve in the underside of the intake, forcing oil out the dipstic whenever manifold pressure is above zero. Most everything else we are doing is simply for aesthetics or addressing potential contributors to the failure that led us to where we are.

Thanks. Brad.

I like the new plan.

Just a FYI. While standard BBC roller rockers and polylocks will work on an 8.1, the stock valvecovers will not fit. Good choice on keeping the stock cam. I upgraded to the Raylar 203 cam. It sounds a little better than the HO Cam but you can't tell any difference behind the wheel at WOT.