300WHP Supernatural 3.XX Coming Soon! (Page 3/54)
mender JAN 06, 10:49 PM

quote
Originally posted by Betty67:
pre detonation


Please, make a note and tell all your friends that it's either pre-ignition or detonation.
rogergarrison JAN 07, 12:01 PM
Seen at SEMA is an easy way to get to 300 hp. This bolt on unit, just mounts to the head/block, uses a cogged belt drive directly to the the front of the crankshaft, and a 6 battery trunk array. Control module mounts anywhere and connects thru OBD connector. 2 hour installation, plus what you do for batteries. Includes 150 hp, 150 ftpnd electric drive motor, mounts for your application, belt drive and control unit, required cables. Makes any car a hybrid to increase power and mileage. Demo car was a 1957 Pontiac V8. When coasting and braking, motor acts as a generator to recharge the batteries. 6 battery set up takes 3 hours to charge. This is not an electric supercharger (that dont work btw).

https://echargersystem.com/
Will JAN 07, 12:41 PM

quote
Originally posted by Blacktree:

The correct term to use would have been just "inertia" (minus the "moment of"). Apparently, Will forgot to mention that. But he didn't forget to admonish you for using the wrong term. He does that a lot.

That said, Will is absolutely right about roller lifters. The benefit of roller lifters FAR outweighs the benefit of lighter weight lifters.



I didn't forget. I infer that he understands inertia just fine.
However, lightweight reciprocating parts only affect the moment of inertia of the rotating assembly indirectly when they require extra balancing mass on a rotating component. Unlike a crankshaft, a lighter valvetrain doesn't let the engine accelerate faster just by virtue of being lighter.
Tony Kania JAN 07, 01:01 PM
Another cool build to watch! Love reading about your work. I thought that I was hyper organized?
La fiera JAN 07, 05:47 PM


quote
Originally posted by La fiera:
You'd be surprised if you see how many experimental camshafts I have sitting on my shelves, from different engines.


I don't think I would. An avid builder will have experimental parts around.
*Most* of the time those are from failed experiments, though.

Thanks for the complement Will but they are brand new and each of them is designed for a specific purpose and as a matter of fact each of my cams I give it a personal name based on their characteristics. For example, the cam that Blacktree has I named it "Le Mans" and he'll see why when he installs it.

Everyone talks about roller cams like they are invulnerable to wear, that flat tappets are the only ones prone to failure due to their design. But if you do a search in the net you'll find 1000's of roller lifter and cam failures specially on LS engines.

This is just a little example.

I myself have replaced many lifters and cams from LS and other GM and Ford engines due to failure. That taught me a lesson.
I haven't yet seen one of my builds with flat tapped cams hydraulic of solid failed. The reason is very simple, I use the correct oil with the additive package for my application. Don't think because an oil is synthetic is good for your flat tapped 2.8 or 3.4. They are very good mineral oils out there that because of the additive package is so good they out perform most of the synthetics sold in the US.
La fiera JAN 07, 06:57 PM

quote
Originally posted by Will:


I didn't forget. I infer that he understands inertia just fine.
However, lightweight reciprocating parts only affect the moment of inertia of the rotating assembly indirectly when they require extra balancing mass on a rotating component. Unlike a crankshaft, a lighter valvetrain doesn't let the engine accelerate faster just by virtue of being lighter.



Use some common sense for once and let your intelligence aside and try this exercise Will:

Get a Volley ball, bounce it up and down to the floor and back striking it with your hand at hip level as fast as you can. Time yourself for 15 seconds and write down the number of bounces.
Do the same test but this time with a Basket ball and write the number of bounces and tell me:

-Which ball has the highest number of bounces in the 15 second span?
-Which ball made your hand hurt more?
-Which ball made your bicep, triceps, elbow and shoulder hurt more?
-Which ball represents a heavy lifter?
-Which ball represents a lighter lifter?

My 8 year old niece knows the answer to this Will.
pmbrunelle JAN 07, 07:35 PM

quote
Originally posted by La fiera:
Use some common sense for once and let your intelligence aside and try this exercise Will:



My common sense agrees with that of Will.

When you have mass in a tappet, you need energy to accelerate it as the lobe lifts it. However, you get the energy back by the time the valve is shut. Over the time scale of a camshaft revolution, you've broken even.

Flywheel inertia is different. During a WOT pull, as the engine accelerates to redline, some energy is not delivered to the transmission input shaft; this energy is instead stored in the spinning flywheel.

The problem with the flywheel is that while its energy is not destroyed, when you lift the throttle at the end of a straightaway, you can't put the flywheel's energy to good use. You're slowing down, so you end up throwing away whatever energy you had stored in the flywheel.
Steel JAN 08, 06:52 AM
I'd be more impressed to see you actually drive the car for a few thousand miles without it failing in multiple areas.

** This isn't an insult at all either, please don't take it that way. I was hoping for some performance numbers (times etc) on your 250whp venture.. that's why I'm baffled to see you going for yet more power but haven't actually made the car functional to handle 250whp yet?

Very interesting thread, not many are willing to spend time and money on the 60* platform these days.

[This message has been edited by Steel (edited 01-09-2018).]

FieroWannaBe JAN 08, 09:36 AM
Just to help those that may not know. Because a flat tappet lifter, the type the first generation 60 degree V6 has, has a flat surface to interact with the cam, a factor for design is that the rate at which lift increases againts cam rotation is limited. That limitation comes frome the need for the lobe to be gradual enough as to not contact the sides of the lifter throughout the arc of rotation. A larger diameter lifter allievates some of this, but a roller lifter offers the benifit of having a rounded profile at the end of the lifter, this provides clearance for a more aggresive ramp through the cams rotation. When a very aggressive roller lifter profile is used sliding friction from the cam and lifter interface is lower than a flat tappet, but side loading of the lifter becomes more of an issue that needs to be dealt with due to highly aggressive ramp rates.
https://youtu.be/8VjFZMKvEwY
pmbrunelle JAN 08, 12:28 PM

quote
Originally posted by FieroWannaBe:

Just to help those that may not know. Because a flat tappet lifter, the type the first generation 60 degree V6 has, has a flat surface to interact with the cam, a factor for design is that the rate at which lift increases againts cam rotation is limited. That limitation comes frome the need for the lobe to be gradual enough as to not contact the sides of the lifter throughout the arc of rotation. A larger diameter lifter allievates some of this, but a roller lifter offers the benifit of having a rounded profile at the end of the lifter, this provides clearance for a more aggresive ramp through the cams rotation. When a very aggressive roller lifter profile is used sliding friction from the cam and lifter interface is lower than a flat tappet, but side loading of the lifter becomes more of an issue that needs to be dealt with due to highly aggressive ramp rates.
https://youtu.be/8VjFZMKvEwY



I think that these compromises explain the high rocker arm ratios in GM V8s lately.