 
     |
| Project 3400 Roller Cam Block (Page 32/82) |
|
DefEddie
|
FEB 12, 01:46 AM
|
|
I understand what Lou is talking about,and you have both made your respective points.
Since this particular thread is about Lou's engine and his HP goal and not your opinion that he shouldn't have his opinion I think that officially means all your doing is pissing in his cheerios (or thread) for no particular reason other than to prove your right.
I'm interested in hearing more,I love when people improve on stuff rather than take the easy way.
Doesn't sound like max torque and smooth curve is the point,more about "This was the previous bar,let's attempt to get it higher".
For some reason this reminds me of a guy I personally admire who races an LT1 with worked stock heads and intake at a local track i've had the pleasure to visit with before.
This particular car pulls wheelies to my shoulder,and he's a most awesome guy to talk with if you ever get to B.S with him.
Ed wright would laugh prob if you told him he could go faster with an LS1,I can almost hear him saying "why the hell would I do that if I have a perfectly good Lt1 lol."
Then again,maybe not.
But i'm sure lots of other NHRA stock eliminator guys would just say "anybody can go faster with new better parts,but can you run what you brung?"
Then again,i'm just a redneck with a slow car so I don't know crap.
It's about having fun and pushing the envelope,so i've been suscribed and continue to be interested-project fail or pass.[This message has been edited by DefEddie (edited 02-12-2013).]
|
|
|
|
masospaghetti
|
FEB 12, 03:47 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by lou_dias:
comparing the torque of a 2.8 to the torque of a 3.4 is pretty useless, you guys keep switching goal posts. The point is that iron heads flow enough to make more horsepower than anyone ever has naturally aspirated so your argument is useless. Why can't you honor a simple request to exit my thread. You are not adding to it. Would you like me to troll your thread?
PS,
Horses don't drink kool-aid.
|
|
I think the relevance is the shape of the torque curve. Your dyno shows torque falling off at high RPMs which may be a symptom that the engine is not breathing well. The 3500 shows a mostly flat torque curve. It's a given that a 3500 will have more torque than a 2.8.
Your build is impressive though and it's an interesting option for a lot of us.
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
FEB 12, 07:55 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by masospaghetti:
I think the relevance is the shape of the torque curve. Your dyno shows torque falling off at high RPMs which may be a symptom that the engine is not breathing well. The 3500 shows a mostly flat torque curve. It's a given that a 3500 will have more torque than a 2.8.
Your build is impressive though and it's an interesting option for a lot of us. |
|
My torque curve was flat until I hit the 300CFM limit of the Fiero intake neck.
but that's not what he was comparing...and I out torqued him anyway. He was comparing the fact that GM made a 2.8 with iron heads put out 275 hp because they "think" iron heads can't flow enough to do so yet the #'s they posted to dispute it proves that they can. If I didn't have the intake neck restriction, I would have made power to 5200, the cam's limits. I too can run the same performance cam on my next rebuild. They can't show me a 3400 running stock cam that made more power. There champion is using 3500, a racing cam with .540" lift and an open exhaust and trying to make it sound like a street motor. I built a street motor. I too may use a 3500 block next...but that "next" won't be until one of my current v6's dies. Hopefully that will be my stock 88 formula's v6 so I can get the DAWG mod put back on that old intake and run it on that car for pooops and giggles since Trueleo's are no longer available.
That's the other thing. My 3400 build is running a trueleo and makes power past 5000rpm. All of this could have waited until I post that dyno. Nothing but trolling in the end.[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 02-12-2013).]
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
FEB 12, 12:43 PM
|
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
FEB 12, 03:42 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by DefEddie:
I understand what Lou is talking about,and you have both made your respective points.
Since this particular thread is about Lou's engine and his HP goal and not your opinion that he shouldn't have his opinion I think that officially means all your doing is pissing in his cheerios (or thread) for no particular reason other than to prove your right.
I'm interested in hearing more,I love when people improve on stuff rather than take the easy way.
Doesn't sound like max torque and smooth curve is the point,more about "This was the previous bar,let's attempt to get it higher".
For some reason this reminds me of a guy I personally admire who races an LT1 with worked stock heads and intake at a local track i've had the pleasure to visit with before.
This particular car pulls wheelies to my shoulder,and he's a most awesome guy to talk with if you ever get to B.S with him.
Ed wright would laugh prob if you told him he could go faster with an LS1,I can almost hear him saying "why the hell would I do that if I have a perfectly good Lt1 lol."
Then again,maybe not.
But i'm sure lots of other NHRA stock eliminator guys would just say "anybody can go faster with new better parts,but can you run what you brung?"
Then again,i'm just a redneck with a slow car so I don't know crap.
It's about having fun and pushing the envelope,so i've been suscribed and continue to be interested-project fail or pass.
|
|
At the oval track I race on, there is an 1997 LT1 Camaro that is the 2nd fastest car that competes (2nd only to a sick 3000GT VR4). He is a second faster than me and no LS1 car can touch him. We have amazing tuners in my area and they specialize in LS1 and this LT1 still is the top F-body dog.
Here's the battle for 1st and 2nd...just sick 18 second laps, I'm in the mid 19's...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aom4VafGTgw
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
FEB 23, 05:42 PM
|
|
Had to get one side all new because the collision bent the driver's side:
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
MAR 11, 12:27 PM
|
|
|
Called the collision center today. The suspension is back on the car but they are waiting for a bolt for a caliper. After that, straightening the frame should get scheduled shortly thereafter. Apparently the new side uses a different thread pattern than the old setup. There have been some revisions made since I orignally bought my kit back in Feb 2006...
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
MAR 25, 12:29 PM
|
|
I'm going to stop by the collision center tomorrow to check up on the car.
Here you can see how the impact on the left side of the car affected the right side of the car. The door is completely pushed back against the rear quarter and even knocked off the molding.
For reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb6Y_f9w2FM
|
|
|
|
Francis T
|
MAR 26, 08:10 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by lou_dias:
comparing the torque of a 2.8 to the torque of a 3.4 is pretty useless, you guys keep switching goal posts. The point is that iron heads flow enough to make more horsepower than anyone ever has naturally aspirated so your argument is useless. Why can't you honor a simple request to exit my thread. You are not adding to it. Would you like me to troll your thread?
PS,
Horses don't drink kool-aid.
|
|
Lou's spot-on, the heads are not the power limiter that most believe.
We tested our first intake on the flow bench with STOCK IRON heads and the results clearly show the iron heads can support way more HP -over 300- than a 2.8 - 3.4 can make still survive. Below is a printout from our sight. BTW we have improved the design of our intakes a lot since that first prototype used below.
Flow-bench numbers for Stock intake and SR14 & LR17 below.
Valve lift_________________________.100"____________.200"__________.300"_________.400__________.500"
Stock intake----CFM----------------55.945-------------106.88----------124.415--------131.93----------139.445
Trueleo Short---CFM----------------62.625-------------114.395---------133.6----------146.96-----------146.96
No intake-head-CFM----------------64.295--------------116.9-----------133.6----------146.96----------146.96
On the flow-bench we tested the cylinder head with no intake on it all to get a baseline. We tested the bare cylinder head and intakes at 5 different valve lifts in the above listed amounts. We then tested the stock intake manifold with the results above. The long runner intake and short runner intake were also tested. As you can see with the results, both intakes are improved over stock and the short runner intake will flow as much CFM as no intake on there from .300" lift and above. Pictures on the flow-bench at H.P.WORKS below.[This message has been edited by Francis T (edited 03-26-2013).]
|
|
|
|
lou_dias
|
MAR 26, 01:45 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Francis T:
Lou's spot-on, the heads are not the power limiter that most believe.
We tested our first intake on the flow bench with STOCK IRON heads and the results clearly show the iron heads can support way more HP -over 300- than a 2.8 - 3.4 can make still survive. Below is a printout from our sight. BTW we have improved the design of our intakes a lot since that first prototype used below.
Flow-bench numbers for Stock intake and SR14 & LR17 below.
Valve lift_________________________.100"____________.200"__________.300"_________.400__________.500"
Stock intake----CFM----------------55.945-------------106.88----------124.415--------131.93----------139.445
Trueleo Short---CFM----------------62.625-------------114.395---------133.6----------146.96-----------146.96
No intake-head-CFM----------------64.295--------------116.9-----------133.6----------146.96----------146.96
On the flow-bench we tested the cylinder head with no intake on it all to get a baseline. We tested the bare cylinder head and intakes at 5 different valve lifts in the above listed amounts. We then tested the stock intake manifold with the results above. The long runner intake and short runner intake were also tested. As you can see with the results, both intakes are improved over stock and the short runner intake will flow as much CFM as no intake on there from .300" lift and above. Pictures on the flow-bench at H.P.WORKS below.
|
|
Even the section on the v6/60 that includes GEN2 heads from Chevy Power Service Manual said that iron heads can flow 1.5HP/ci and that article was well-aware of the 3.4L engine at 207ci...
Simply skip to the iron head section: http://www.gafiero.org/docs/60V6Pwr.pdf
However, trolls will be trolls...
Latest "hiccup" with my car is that mounting the old caliper on the new spindle/HUB that got replaced is causing the rotor to bind. It will probably need washers to offset but the results are being communicated back to Richard at Arrat Motorsports...wondering if they are using different calipers now since my kit goes back to when "Lee" owned HELD MotorSports back in 2006.
|
|
|
|