Thumbs up on that decision. Thumbs up also on finding 50 more peak HP and 1200 RPM greater HP peak. Finding the missing torque will yield a ton of power across the curve.
Dyno possibly reading rpm wrong. Like it thinks it’s looking at a 6 cylinder. Back in the old days you remember the sun tack that had the switch you could flip for 4,6,8? 4 would double the rpm. I know it’s video but it doesn’t sound like 8k ish rpm.🤷♂️
Dude, I have never read anyone calling you an idiot!! Don't be so hard on yourself!! I for one, really appreciate what you do and give to the community!
Ya man shit happens..could of been worse. Like what happened to me, 2017 in finals with my sml blk 406, and I was at 3/4 track and my fluiddamper snapped the snout , blew my shit up, list the race and I never did find that cranksnout or fluid damper…
Richard Holdner recently had a similar issue with a SBF. He lost 50 ft./lbs. from previous pulls and couldn't figure out why. Turns out the collectors on the headers were way shorter and causing it! Put on the headers with longer collectors they used before and BAM! torque returned to where it was.
I agree with you, this I what I typed in my own comment further down:::::I think it would be good ask someone that is very familiar with the computer program (pipe-max) to simulate what the “ideal” header design would be, then you could at least see, “how close” the headers you used to test are to the “optimized” design......As others have said playing with header extensions would be a good next step on a different dyno (and likely the cheapest experiment), but I’d personally want to go there with multiple sets of headers, because of how much of a difference you saw on the dyno already with just a header swap......The next “cheapest” would be to get a set of (sprint-headers) from Schoenfeld in the raw, with slip on collectors....that way you could cut the primary’s to the length you want, get the merge collector dimensions you want (to match pipe-max calcs), so your going to the dyno with theoretically the best chance of obtaining the max gains from the exhaust side as possible.....I understand they wouldn’t fit his truck, but at least the investment could be re-used in testing future engines, and would tell you if it’s worth him buying a new set of headers / not....LASTLY; I’m by no means a camshaft expert but, I know the trends you observe during header tuning can be a “tell” to an engine having unoptimized camshaft events, and what direction to go with the next cam.
@@ericschumacher5189 If you been around the LS and Fox body debates for the last 10-20 years it seems in a 347-408 situation that 1 7/8" headers win out. 2" are too big. 1 3/4" provide off idle assistance, but you lose a little at the top over 1 7/8" and 1 3/4" stepped into 1 7/8" are a great compromise of the two. 2 1/4" is way too big, 1 5/8" is too small for something over 500HP.
What these guys said. You are super sharp and I greatly apreciate your knowledge, Genius.. But from this idiot me Id bet the huge headers are atleast contributing to the tq loss. I've had similar experiences with big, short primaries and short collectors,, killed tq.
Hey eric, in my engine world - more flow and and area rarely makes more power - OR torque. We work on really advanced 4 valve heads that produce hug power per CI or CC, and really good torque as well. The rev really high, a 4 inch bore engine will limiter at 11500 or 12000 for lower hour engines ( in our world - a 11500 engine will last 100 hours of extreme hard run time). It's frustrating but finding what the engines want is not achievable fo rme on the flow bench. We just dyno our ideas and see now - coupled with baseline flow testing to confirm our measured areas match up to flow rates. Our 80mm bore engines (about half displacement) rev to 15000, last 20 hours, and make even more power per cc but not the torque per cc. I think ultimately heads get to a point were at extremely high delta p's seen in running condition they just want to be taller/straighter rather than more area. Most often we fill floors up - but oddly enough some heads need epoxy in the roof too. Point is - after a certain point, it's not about flow we can measure but about flow quality. WE also see that bigger ports like smaller cams, smaller ports bigger (relatively to one another). Contrary to what the magazine car world says. And we run extremely "advanced" inlet cam timing considering the rpm and cam sizes. Almost always as much advance as we can get in the cam until piston to valve. I think a really informative test moving forward for you will be getting to try diff heads on the dyno back to back to back...with various MCSA and such.
Torque is REAL, can be measured on a scale (Pounds). Horsepower is mathematical. If a engine makes 1. 400 lbs/pounds at 2500 rpm = 190 2. 400 lbs/pounds at 5000 rpm = 380 If the heads can /cam keep the supply of airflow into the cylinders the same, at twice the rpm = twice the horsepower.
@@billywilliams6853 most people don’t understand horsepower….. The fact is horsepower is real, it ultimately is the more important number for racing, and it ALSO can be measured. Inertia dyno’s measure POWER. Torque is calculated from there.
@@garykarenmcgruther6386 the low torque of 501 tq on 406 cubes also jumped out at me. A good built 347 to 355 ci engine will make 500 to even 525 tq in a great build. A good 400 to 414 ci will make over 600 tq. If it made under 550 tq I'd start looking for inefficiencies or mismatch parts.
Many years back I built a 383ci engine.11.1 compression. I had built 2” headers with 4” collectors with 5’ extensions. On the Dino torque was way down. I slid in 4” x 4’ spiral baffles from a radiant tube heater. Picked up 50ftlb instantly. My hunch is a combination of the Dino possibly being off and header collector length are playing a big part in your results.
I would swap the camshaft keep the duration the same but have it ground with the same 103 lobe separation that the old camshaft was ground on I'm pretty sure that would help bring the torque back and pull the power down to a lower RPM for that duration. Between those great heads and the 108 lobe separation that it has now it's probably what's making the engine Carry further up the RPM range
Ask yourself, "what's really changed" compared to your other builds? For starters I would try a different dyno, 2nd I would suspect a camshaft issue if the dyno is eliminated.
From what I've experienced, with almost 50 years in, I think you're frustrated to the point of having scattered thoughts, I call it. Back off of it for a day or two, put it out of your mind, then return with a fresh mind. You're already chasing what I would naturally go to, which is the cam. Sometimes, engines throw you a pretty big curve, relative to what you know works. It usually only takes a slight difference in a single thing, to wake that particular engine up. You have infinite more resources at your disposal than I have ever had, and I know you will find it. Thanks for sharing this, this is where everyone learns. Keep it up, it will work itself out. I hope you will continue to share your experiences with us.
Hi Eric. In my experience the bigger the problem, the more simple the answer. Because you have overlooked it so many times. That said, you said you checked the cam timing, but you only mentioned the intake lobe. I personally always check the exhaust lobe as well. I have had custom cams supplied to me where they have not ground what I asked for, because they thought they knew better. I've had a few arguments with cam grinders, they even supplied a cam card that said I was supplied what I asked for. I had a motor back firing at 6000rpm through the carby, eventually I rectified it by changing the headers, it was a wave tuning issue/reversion issue. That said, I would suggest carefully looking at the cam, intake and exhaust, adding some collector length. The fact that the power keeps climbing might suggest that the exhaust side is not working as designed. We are of course assuming that the dyno numbers are actually in the ball park. With all of the sensor issues there would appear to be some justification for doubt. Good luck with this challenge, but please go back to basics first. Regards Greg.
Lowered air speed would decrease cyl pressure which would reduce torque. Higher RPM increases air speed then in comes the power. The 3 most important things for power production is, air speed, air speed and air speed.
Eric, try those heads on a larger displacement sbc. You are getting big block, big cubic inch flow numbers from your mods which is what you would want for a full race engine. That 406 would pull like a freight train on the top end!
I ruined a good intake messing around on the floor of it . Lessons hard school . Getting recipes to be perfact & duplicate is like heart surgery's. Cool & Clever vidio 🥂🏁🥂🏁
And I enjoy your videos and the tips. I have a Pro street 73 Plymouth Duster that went low 9 seconds in the quarter mile with just a 100 shot of nos. Andy helped me build a 421 cubic inch small block from a 340 block and a set of brodex B1 ba heads.
Sometimes we plan on a certain result and the engine does want it wants! I understand you missed the target rpm you wanted. It'll be if he try a dyno once it's installed in the truck and see how it does then. Thank you for your time and all your information you freely share! Ive learned way more being able to better understand head flow, velocities and coefficients/ effects on power. You'll get it figured out thats one thing I know from watching you! Take you time and relax, you got this!
Port volosity issues ? Maybe the exhaust port is to big so it's lost the scavenging effect it would explain the tq loss and way the peak power has moved so high in the rpm range because the scavenging doesn't start working again until the engine is reving like a jet the sudden torque jump could be the point the scavenging effect is starting to work
That's some impressive HP for that duration cam. I'm thinking the intake is on the big side. Maybe tighter lobe separation. But I am wondering about the dyno calculation of torque .of course I'm guessing
I feel your pain, have had similar experience eventually traced to turbulence entering the chamber smooth that out and the power came back, you've probably looked at that one already just thought id pass on my experience. an old guy who used to build Formula one engines said to me never doubt the dyno that is a big mistake. thanks for all the videos.
I wonder how much a difference a dual plane intake would make. My guess is the air speed has peaked, but because of the intake design it can still keep ingesting more air at high rpms. Or maybe lower the rocker arm ratio so there is less lift. Might help low lift air speed, but these are just ideas. Can't say I know any more than Eric about what is happening. Still a good engine though.
Excellent opportunity to learn something. You're gonna come out on the other side of this more knowledgeable than before, and thanks to the miracle of youtube we all can benefit from this experience.
We had similar issue with my TFS R-Series (from TEA 356cfm@700 lift intake 282@700 exhaust) headed 13:1 430W on E-85🌽: 1st cam had to much split duration; it was LSM 55MM 282/296 @.50 768/768 net lift. #Lunati signature series crank, Oliver speedway series rods, diamond pistons. We thought the motor would flirt with 800 horse and it only made 705/559 tq. My engine builder said "F it" and we spec'd another cam. Ended going with a comp 271/281@ .753/753 net lift. The smaller cam made 716/592 hp/tq and made a lot more lower end tq too. The 1st cam from LSM was a custom ground that was heavily nitrous spec'd but because duratiin split was 14* degrees it was bleeding off cylinder press and losing power NA. Sinve the motor will spend most of its life NA - the 2nd cam split duration was only 10* degrees. We still think a motor like that shoulda made mid 700s power and lower 600s tq, but the only thing we can think if is it has a heavy ring pack, so there's rotational friction holding it back. Checkout my channel for both dyno videos: 430W dyno pt 1 & 2. 📷📸📽🏁🎬🔥
Did you ever get new numbers on the 430w? From your results I'd look at bring exhaust duration down even more or run 1.72 rockeer intake and 1.60 exhaust. What was the intake and carb on it? Its wild that you got nearly 50 ftlb but not much more power.
Most of it is the cam I think. Those comp K lobes are very aggressive and great until they send the valvetrain crazy and lose control. Plus now your also hurting torque by closing the intake valve later.
Eric, Nothing to be ashamed about. I would advance cam timing 4 to 6 degrees. Intake port volume may be too large & could require some epoxy filling. This is why you dyno. Great first attempt. You'll get it. Terry
As with all of your videos, I appreciate all of your efforts to share your knowledge and experiences. I can see how this is a head scratcher. My first thought was cam timing and lobe separation. Further in through watching this, I more and more question the dyno accuracy. I would try another dyno, and if that done fix it, I would try a different intake and then change the cam if the intake don't make much difference. Tighten lobe separation. I'm curious and look forward to a follow up as to what happens with this engine and issue you ran into. I've never seen a cam that size make power that high.
Another great video Eric. I got faith in you, you'll figure it out. Without a doubt the dyno is off, as well as the camshaft. I don't know your full head flow and valve sizes, or your rocker ratio. I'm not sure how you figured .750 of intake and .690 of exhaust. Based off what you showed I calculated this: The cam has a lift of .590 (intake) and .656 (exhaust) with a 1.6 rocker. 648HP 7100rpm and 539TQ at 5500rpm. I guessed the rocker arm ratio. Just for fun, I'd do a leak down test to see if something could be going on with the rings.
It's mostly the intake and headers, but you stated everything in this video. You have your answers. It's that the overall combination now hits just right to make it scream. It was being held back before to maximize TQ, and now it's not.
I don’t think it’s one thing! I would try the old cam just to eliminate some variables. I wouldn’t be suprised If the torque is better (but still down from before). It would be really interesting to see where it noses over with that one (If you see what I mean). Still have huge respect for you! Keep up the good work 👍. Johan Lindstrom/LRE Sweden 🇸🇪
I second what others said about collector extensions. But if you really want to have an accurate test, you've gotta run the headers you're gonna run in the chassis. What engine masters found with collector extension is you basically have resonant tubes behind the headers up until you hit a muffler. For open headers drag racing you'd want a particular length collector extension for optimum torque.
It would be interesting to see the dynamic compression between the two camshafts or cranking compression. The wider lobe separation is going to hamper the torque and raise the rpm range. What was the intake centerline. I’d think it would need to be between 104/105 to peak somewhere near the rpm range you’re looking for. Also was the race fuel oxygenated? If not that will also hurt it some. That’s a lot of torque to be down.
I think you are dead on John. I noticed in the cam video that the .050 number to the seat was forever. I'd bet the difference between .050 and when the valve actually hits the seat between those two cams is a ton. I know Eric said he PAYS NO ATTENTION to advertised numbers but the cam doctor info when the valve actually hits the seat matters!
Eric, is this just an example of changing too many things at once? From the engine master build you are comparing numbers with, you have a different cam, head port work, different intake, and a larger (950 vs 750?) carb. Interactions of 4 changes??? For what its worth. And at some point, adding another 50 HP is going to cost you torque right? (1.75 hp per cube). Keep going!
Put the same engine masters intake and carb on a dyno pull and split the mental masterbation in half. Did the cam and port work kill the low end torgue, or did the the intake and carb. I am not an expert, hard stop. But watching all the combos with Richard Holder, I bet a twelve pack the intake and 950 shifted the torque peak up. Sacrificig low end torque for HP. Yada yada..... the cliches. Divide and concore. You are a determined man that will not sleep until resolved in your mind. The smaller tube headers are my hint. I would love to see the same combo you dynoed with the same induction (engine masters) you have built you estimates on. AND, let me know your beer of choice. A bet I'm willing to loose out of couiosity. Divide 4 changes in half. I enjoy your videos, and respect your resolve. .
I would re-dyno on a different dyno, all the things you said weren't working properly sends up red flags to me. also, I'm wondering about the CC soft lobes, I think those do soften torque and promote that high rpm peak. another cam with the same numbers (ILC and LCA) with a more aggressive ramp may help....good luck, keep the great ifo coming.
curious about the resolution was... I had done a 468 (14.5:1 NA on methanol) and was running different cams through the thing on a Gopower dyno.. One change was for an Erson cam they sent us to try. (was an incrementally larger cam on all numbers) . The first cold fire up and warmup tha thing sounded like a killer.. Engine was probably 25% snappier off load.. So first pull, the torque curve was off by over 100ftlbs.... so back to the dial indicator and degree wheel.. was right were it belonged, so... bumped it up 2º and it did not improve.. Really did not work on that cam any further.. As this was running in a drag boat, there was no room for the impaired torque curve.. I am used to trading torque for HP and vica versa but this cam was only a tiny bit larger but made a giant difference.. Probably should have worked on it more but like you, I was pretty unhappy on that session...
I build a little 355 engine I called Summit Racing and they told me to put a 465 lift cam in it with 224 intake 224 exhaust I did what they told me to do Andy engine would fly it was fast as hell I went with 10.8 compression ratio that was enough for the street your truck would jump sideways the people at Summit Racing know what they're talkin about but I like the video man keep up the good work
What ended up being the answer? I forgot but others mentioned Richard Holdener situation where 50 ft lb was "missing" and it was due to having no extensions after the collector.
It’s alright Eric, let’s see if we can diagnose this, so the first thing that caught my attention was the headers way to big for the displacement. Maybe 1 3/4 going to 1 7/8 would’ve been about right. Not sure if this cam was bought for this stage of the engine but 108* LSA, I’d probably go with 105-106. I’d almost question the performance of the dyno maybe something is wrong with it, besides some of the sensors. Are the rings broken in? The lash set correctly? A lot of times when things are changed from baseline, you got look back at what has changed and what’s the same. You’ll figure it out Eric your a smart dude!
When you degreed the cam to get true valve timing you have to load it with the valve pressure I have seen up to 4 degrees with single point tension belt drives and 1.5 on the jesel according to spring pressure
My buddy brought his blown big block Chevy to the dyno, the first run it made 400 horsepower. After almost puking they went over the motor, found nothing wrong mechanically, pulled the plugs and they all looked weird, so they changed the plugs and picked up 300 horsepower with no other changes, sometimes it’s the simple things that you overlook that make the most difference. After that the dominator carb wouldn’t work and after a few pulls they called it quits
Hey Eric, great information on the video! I seriously doubt it was anything you did. That engine should have hit it out of the park. I think something could have been wrong with the dyno. You said the air hat sensor was questionable. Did he run a known motor on it recently with no known issues? My suggestion would be after Cecil gets it installed to run it on a chassis dyno. If your torque and hp are down similarly across the board, I would suspect some clearance or something in the bottom end is too tight. If you end up making 500 ft lbs or more on the chassis dyno, you found your problem. Keep up the great work, you're an awesome dude!!!
I remember a few years back a local shop that was doing all my machine work was upgrading their customers 418sbc. I can't remember if the engine had a Dart 230 or Brodix 230 but one of the "upgrades" was going to be the brand new AFR245. They fly cut the pistons for some additional P to V so probably lost a little compression (comb chamber volume before/aft?) and changed the rockers taking the cam from around .680" lift to around .725". In doing that they inadvertently added more duration therefore bleeding off even more compression.. On their dyno the engine previously made just over 650hp with the old combo and around 530tq. They spanked that poor engine silly for days and could only get 660hp out of it and lost a whack load of torque. I even lent them a set of 1-7/8x2x3-1/2" sprint car headers with 2 feet of collectors on them. In the end they swapped the AFR245 for an AFR227 and the engine made 685hp and 565tq. Good luck. I hope you get it sorted out. Love the content!
Hi Eric, brave video sir. What did you do to the ex port? Try a manifold with way less volume, and l dont get the small cam durations. Colin Lloyd, Headsense Engines Heads,, Aust
if I remember right from the other video you put a new cam with less aggressive lobe profiles to help be easier on the valvetrain. Maybe the profile change is hurting torque? Also think the dyno having some issues that day could be a factor and would probably start there with a different dyno to confirm.
Double check where the cam is installed, I bet the cam is installed late, 1 tooth off =14.4° maybe the adjuster slipped. After watching your video, I would think that the dyno was the problem, those cam numbers sound a little short to turn those kind of RPMs not to mention it's on a 108 lobe Center
Eric, 1st I would test another dyno. If it duplicates or is close to the same results then I’d look at the cam lobes. Is the cam lobe design ( low shock) bleeding off to much cylinder pressure down low hurting the torque but carrying out up top to make good power beyond 7500rpm? Just a thought. 🤷🏻♂️
Intake plenum volume has a treshold, where it stops pulling new air through the carb, and only feeding the cylinders with the mist that lingers in the plenum. You should've taken it to the 9000, just to see how it reacts. Second thing is the lobe separation/exhaust valve timing. When you are running high octane fuel, it burns slowly and if the exhaust valve opens before the fuel has done it's job, the power output goes down. This is backed by the smaller header, so when there's more back pressure in the exhaust, it makes more power, keeping the combustion inside the chamber. One quick fix is bigger lash on the exhaust valve, another is faster burning fuel. but both of these won't help on the plenum volume. If you have a spacer on the intake, take it off and try again.
1 7/8 headers seem really big to me. Doing some quick calcs, at 8k rpm your still only getting about 350ft/s. Even with the smallish camshaft i am really surprised it made power way out there at 8k rpm. In the chassis an H pipe would make a bunch in the middle, without the extensions on the headers it doesnt surprise me that it was kind of gutless down low but 100ftlbs seems like a lot to take off the bottom. That 4 degrees of LSA is going to do something as well. It is maybe a confluence of these factors. Without a functioning air hat that makes diagnosis tough.
350-400 ci engines from 6-8000 RPM seem to like 1 7/8" headers. These results come from the many LS dynos. 1 3/4" make a little more torque down low but not much, and 2" are just too big. Like Eric said collector length can make a huge difference, and header design. But check over there, they have tons of data, and 1 7/8" is the winner.
@@the318pop True. I was saying what counts for us is the inside diameter. However, when we model after known combos and they state a known header of a known OD, that data is still useful. But for the engine models and simulations, the ID is what determines the exhaust capability of the engine.
Eric. I've been modifying high performance multi valve heads for race and rally for forty years. Although you are being hard on yourself, you have actually discovered the sweet spot. For an engine curve to not "turn over" and continue revving with more power like that means the system itself is perfect. It's just the numbers don't suit you. Somewhere along the line, a part of the inlet tract (manifold runners?) are too large (or flowing more no matter what size- could be the shapes?) and the whole thing needs choking down up to the throat. As an upside, I bet that engine will sound glorious in a circuit race car.
A 7* later IVC (best I can figure based on the cam numbers and assuming you've got them both 4* advanced) is gonna shift power up substantially, and kill the low end. I'm headed to the redemption video now to see what you learned.
Sound s to me you have a cam that makes power above your usable RPM range? Amd a merge collector with a 2.500 " cross section would work way better than a 3.5" straight?
Just a suggestion, do a leak down test. Check the percentages. Your idea of advancing the cam. Header extensions. Change manifold. Great content. Nice horse power, says heads Are working. The camshaft is conservative. Thank you, EM.
I looked some more at your sheet , the dyno correction is drifting or cal is off, look at your torque , it peaks then remain flat for over 1500 rpm , I think the dyno has a strain gauge issue. He needs to rehang his cal weights.
Have you run this combo on a good computer program? I've had excellent results with Engine Analyzer Pro. Otherwize might advance the cam, reduce diameter of collector.
I'd look into the rod ratio at high rpm. Unless it was a raised deck block, that pass poor rod ratio of a 400 can kill torque while making great power with a similar stroke in a taller block.
Have you heard of the IOP program? Might be worth checking out? We know the AFR227 you ported was good. If we say 233 ccm / 5.1 inch length, we get average CSA of 2.79 inch square. A 2.08 valve is 3.4 inch square and 2.79 / 3.4 = 82 % as Area and 90.6% as diameter. I belive this is high enough and this latest engine has way more than this. That may kill torque due to low port energy. Also, I must remind all that Darin Morgen has warned us all about touching the "hyper critical SSR" on some heads. ruclips.net/video/qhsTQn0uUOQ/видео.html ruclips.net/video/lcxp9ufC1DY/видео.html AFR @20:34 show way lean in the midrange. Looking at the torque curve, it does taper of.
Man I was just typing out a comment that the cam should be checked and then you go into the details of having it checked. I've got a set of your dragon slayers from 2016 going on my 427 with a Jones 254/256 solid roller an planning on dynoing it before installing in the car.
It seems you`ve built an open wheeled circle track motor, more compression, more cam shaft and crank it to 8500+ and that pump would scream. I hosed myself like this about 25yrs ago with a superlate model asphalt motor. I replaced an 034 bowtie casting 207cc intake runner with a 220 RHS head, with a solid roller instead of a solid flat tappet that was in the 034 head. Lost maybe 60ft/lbs of torque and only gained 18hp, it was sleepy under 5500 and reached max hp at 7700rpm. Respectfully I believe the loss of torque was the cylinders weren`t being filled, so I had the intake valves increased to 2.050 on the bowtie heads (new rule change) and bowls blended, kept the solid roller and that was what we needed. Got back 90lbs torque (+30 net) and about 60 hp (48Hp net). For what it`s worth my friend, good luck and don`t beat yourself up too much.
I feel your frustration, I invested way too much time just getting all the blue printing aircraft quality right. Seemingly everything fought me. Though it turned out blessedly well. I'm wondering about your dyno personally. But I think 570 torque would be maximum expectation but I'm not sure. your 50 away. As for the peak hp above the 355 is just bizarre. It would keep me up at night. I'd have to spend some money to someone like kaase identify the situation. Thus might keep me up at night. There should be a way to scale reset dyno for torque and power easily.
I think you are on the right path with going back to the original camshaft. The compression is a bit low. Were the valve seats ground? Lowering the compression even more? Maybe an angle mill on the heads to raise compression?
Thinking about my previous comment, I think i would install the original cam and dyno again, i think this would also showcase your porting skills and make an awesome comparison.
I would get that cam measured out, nevermind lol. I think 8 degrees and that LSA change was enough to do it. The valve opening at TDC combined with a different port shape could be really hurting low speed flow
I would be mad about going to an engine dyno and their equipment being messed up and not working correctly. I my head I am thinking, well if the basic peripherals aren't working, how can I trust what the dyno is telling me? I understand each dyno is different, and for comparison sake using the same one is the best idea, but in this case I'd be tempted to find another dyno.
11.5:1 compression have you thought about header extensions? 501tq is great numbers depending on the application the engine is used for plus depending on what chassis is going in. That engine in my 66 Chevy II Nova would run great times in the 1/4 mile.
@@dennisrobinson8008 but remember cam profile, duration, lift and LSA all can cause low torque production and high horsepower production. I would suggest looking at the cam first and see if installing a different cam would change the outcome of the engine powerband/torqueband
@@dennisrobinson8008 I'm a Honda enthusiast, so my main goal for my racecar is to mid range and topend power. My f20b engine makes 14.5:1 compression, 13mm lift with a 315⁰ duration. My rev limit is 10,500rpm and on ignite red I make close to 400whp all motor, and on M1 race gas I make close 450whp. If I want more of a mid range powerband I would change the duration to lower my rpm range and increase my torque production thus increasing my low to mid range usage. But those cams I use it when I'm track/time attack racing my first cams that I talked about that allows me to rev to 10,500rpm are my drag racing cams
Erik. What size the carb.I would look at changing carb.from what I saw of the early BSFC was lean.i have run 1,000 cfm pro systems carb on similar cid engines and made 600 trq around 5100.also used 1 7/8 primary 3 1/2 collector.on a quick note did you see if it had a dead cylinder,I have had that happen and it had me itching my head.the engine didn't sound like had any misfire .found it had a closed strap on the plug
Iv never had any luck with cams in the mid 240s @.050 have you tryed a cam in the mid 250s i know it sounds wrong but iv had good luck there i like the isky stuff like 256/264 @050 on a 104 installed on 99 thats 5 advance make 770/595 torque
I'm definetly no expert but on my bb 67 Camaro i had 30 years ago and my pressent day 512 ci 73 challenger my lift on the exhaust valve is higher than the intake. I picked this cam based on a formula I found on the youtube channel Myvintageiron. his formula was pretty in depth. You may want to check it out.
If it peaked at 7800 rpm with a lack of torque... there's no way it has a 248/253 cam with a 108 LSA. I'd double check the cam. It's probably something different.
That cam doctor sheet had advertised numbers above 310*. I'd send that thing back and get it ground for some damn shock! LOL I see no reason a 240's duration cam should be above 280's seat to seat!
I’m guessing that the dyno is not exactly correct and the headers are hurting more than we really expect them to. But my explanation for the power loss is the intake manifold. Large intake manifold will definitely kill torque and make big rpm’s up top!!! JMO. Great video.
I would verify those numbers elsewhere if possible. It could have been a loading issue. If it does turn out the same, my personal opinion would be the air speed. Im no porter, but have some experience with it. If by changing the short side it dropped a ton of air speed, it may have hurt it enough to need the higher rpm to meet same demand.
I had a similar thing happen to me and it was the camshaft, it was not ground anywhere close to what the card said in other words right card, wrong camshaft. . I replaced the camshaft and it fixed it. Not saying this is what your problem is but it does sound very similar although not very common. Question: did you experiment with headers and/collectors at all?
Same thing happens when people start carving on Vortec heads.. You can go the other way fast and not to mention take reliability out of them and causing weak casting points and get cracks even more...
I cannot remember if you degreed the camshaft, I've seen timing gears machined wrong as well as camshafts ground incorrectly. Advancing the cam timing or changing to a more narrow LSA might be the simplest trick & where I would investigate first.
I'm sorry. I do believe you had announced that. I was watching some of your older videos today & forgot what you had learned about this engine. I'm glad as it surely was bizarre results as you knew what you should expect. Gladbit worked out well. Very stout SBC and I would be very proud as I am sure you are. We'll done Eric.
What was the Length of the Dyno Header's Collector? What type of Carb Spacer, Open or Tapered Four Hole such as the HVH SS4150/4500-1.5A? Did you try advancing the Cam to see if it liked it? How about seeing if it liked 1.6:1 Intake and/or Exhaust Rockers?
My last engine a cleveland 408 with unported CHI heads and manifold with 11.5 comp and 262/272@50 and 721 lift it dynoed from 4500 made 429 hp and 501 lb of torque and peak torque 546.5 at 5500 and made 655 hp @7000.This was done with a superflow 902,but my engine builder says that his dyno is rated differently to a lot of dynos,being a drag race builder he says his hp equats to the moroso calulater,your deal doesnt sound like that weeny cam
Well, shoot. I'm amazed the torque is flat at the top like that. I quoted a 7100 RPM decline on the original video. That was supposed to be the HP decline, not the torque decline! I'm gonna sit down with a cup of coffee and re-assess this. -- I'm inclined to think that a smaller cam like a 232/242 on a 112 will have a higher average draw on the port, therefore activating the resonant properties of the intake manifold sooner, but the difference between the cams was soooo small.
Intake valve closing event can kill torque, how late are you closing the intake valve? Too much port volume to CID will hurt torque production. I’m shocked too to see a loss of almost 100 ftlb. 🤔🤔🤔 Maybe put the old cam back in and see what only the head work changed?
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
With so many issues going on with the dyno, I wouldn’t trust any of it. I’d dyno it elsewhere before changing anything
My EXACT thoughts!!!
Waste of time and money!!!
That is exactly what I would do, there's no way I would trust that dyno.
Thumbs up on that decision. Thumbs up also on finding 50 more peak HP and 1200 RPM greater HP peak. Finding the missing torque will yield a ton of power across the curve.
Dyno possibly reading rpm wrong. Like it thinks it’s looking at a 6 cylinder. Back in the old days you remember the sun tack that had the switch you could flip for 4,6,8? 4 would double the rpm. I know it’s video but it doesn’t sound like 8k ish rpm.🤷♂️
@@besgar5172 Yes, dyno somewhere else. Just do it on a dynojet.
Dude, I have never read anyone calling you an idiot!! Don't be so hard on yourself!! I for one, really appreciate what you do and give to the community!
Same here
Ya man shit happens..could of been worse. Like what happened to me, 2017 in finals with my sml blk 406, and I was at 3/4 track and my fluiddamper snapped the snout , blew my shit up, list the race and I never did find that cranksnout or fluid damper…
Richard Holdner recently had a similar issue with a SBF. He lost 50 ft./lbs. from previous pulls and couldn't figure out why. Turns out the collectors on the headers were way shorter and causing it! Put on the headers with longer collectors they used before and BAM! torque returned to where it was.
Yep, I remember this, Agreed!! Check collector length!
I agree with you, this I what I typed in my own comment further down:::::I think it would be good ask someone that is very familiar with the computer program (pipe-max) to simulate what the “ideal” header design would be, then you could at least see, “how close” the headers you used to test are to the “optimized” design......As others have said playing with header extensions would be a good next step on a different dyno (and likely the cheapest experiment), but I’d personally want to go there with multiple sets of headers, because of how much of a difference you saw on the dyno already with just a header swap......The next “cheapest” would be to get a set of (sprint-headers) from Schoenfeld in the raw, with slip on collectors....that way you could cut the primary’s to the length you want, get the merge collector dimensions you want (to match pipe-max calcs), so your going to the dyno with theoretically the best chance of obtaining the max gains from the exhaust side as possible.....I understand they wouldn’t fit his truck, but at least the investment could be re-used in testing future engines, and would tell you if it’s worth him buying a new set of headers / not....LASTLY; I’m by no means a camshaft expert but, I know the trends you observe during header tuning can be a “tell” to an engine having unoptimized camshaft events, and what direction to go with the next cam.
@@ericschumacher5189 If you been around the LS and Fox body debates for the last 10-20 years it seems in a 347-408 situation that 1 7/8" headers win out. 2" are too big. 1 3/4" provide off idle assistance, but you lose a little at the top over 1 7/8" and 1 3/4" stepped into 1 7/8" are a great compromise of the two. 2 1/4" is way too big, 1 5/8" is too small for something over 500HP.
What these guys said. You are super sharp and I greatly apreciate your knowledge, Genius..
But from this idiot me Id bet the huge headers are atleast contributing to the tq loss. I've had similar experiences with big, short primaries and short collectors,, killed tq.
Amazing how much a small design change can help or hurt power so much.
Haven't even watched the whole video and already appreciate you and your work
He will be driving his pick up
Quarter mile @ a time.
Going to the Grocery store.
Hey eric, in my engine world - more flow and and area rarely makes more power - OR torque. We work on really advanced 4 valve heads that produce hug power per CI or CC, and really good torque as well. The rev really high, a 4 inch bore engine will limiter at 11500 or 12000 for lower hour engines ( in our world - a 11500 engine will last 100 hours of extreme hard run time). It's frustrating but finding what the engines want is not achievable fo rme on the flow bench. We just dyno our ideas and see now - coupled with baseline flow testing to confirm our measured areas match up to flow rates. Our 80mm bore engines (about half displacement) rev to 15000, last 20 hours, and make even more power per cc but not the torque per cc. I think ultimately heads get to a point were at extremely high delta p's seen in running condition they just want to be taller/straighter rather than more area. Most often we fill floors up - but oddly enough some heads need epoxy in the roof too. Point is - after a certain point, it's not about flow we can measure but about flow quality. WE also see that bigger ports like smaller cams, smaller ports bigger (relatively to one another). Contrary to what the magazine car world says. And we run extremely "advanced" inlet cam timing considering the rpm and cam sizes. Almost always as much advance as we can get in the cam until piston to valve. I think a really informative test moving forward for you will be getting to try diff heads on the dyno back to back to back...with various MCSA and such.
I agree, the intake port is to large.
Or
Engine to small.
Torque is REAL, can be measured on a scale (Pounds).
Horsepower is mathematical.
If a engine makes
1. 400 lbs/pounds at 2500 rpm = 190
2. 400 lbs/pounds at 5000 rpm = 380
If the heads can /cam keep the supply of airflow into the cylinders the same, at twice the rpm = twice the horsepower.
@@billywilliams6853 most people don’t understand horsepower….. The fact is horsepower is real, it ultimately is the more important number for racing, and it ALSO can be measured. Inertia dyno’s measure POWER. Torque is calculated from there.
Great data. Thanks for sharing.
@@garykarenmcgruther6386 the low torque of 501 tq on 406 cubes also jumped out at me. A good built 347 to 355 ci engine will make 500 to even 525 tq in a great build. A good 400 to 414 ci will make over 600 tq. If it made under 550 tq I'd start looking for inefficiencies or mismatch parts.
Many years back I built a 383ci engine.11.1 compression. I had built 2” headers with 4” collectors with 5’ extensions. On the Dino torque was way down. I slid in 4” x 4’ spiral baffles from a radiant tube heater. Picked up 50ftlb instantly. My hunch is a combination of the Dino possibly being off and header collector length are playing a big part in your results.
Would add in the exhaust mods which will push the RPM higher easier
I would swap the camshaft keep the duration the same but have it ground with the same 103 lobe separation that the old camshaft was ground on I'm pretty sure that would help bring the torque back and pull the power down to a lower RPM for that duration. Between those great heads and the 108 lobe separation that it has now it's probably what's making the engine Carry further up the RPM range
That seems like the Cam is much bigger than a 248 @ .050 on a 108 for it to make peak at 7900...
Glad you figured it out. Was thinking it may have been the wider LSA, but the fact that it was the dyno must have been a HUGE relief!
Ask yourself, "what's really changed" compared to your other builds?
For starters I would try a different dyno, 2nd I would suspect a camshaft issue if the dyno is eliminated.
That’s what I was thinking…… maybe advance the cam ( I have not watched the whole video at time of leaving this comment)
With a lobe separation of 108 I don't see what surprising
David Vizard did a piece on dynoes w/blown engines w/some pretty interesting intel!
It sounds like you have 20-30 degrees more cam duration than what you thought.
Seeing those 310+ numbers of duration seat on that cam doctor. 60+ degrees from .050 to the seat? That thing is killing power!!
How much power is he expecting here? Is this not normal?
From what I've experienced, with almost 50 years in, I think you're frustrated to the point of having scattered thoughts, I call it. Back off of it for a day or two, put it out of your mind, then return with a fresh mind. You're already chasing what I would naturally go to, which is the cam. Sometimes, engines throw you a pretty big curve, relative to what you know works. It usually only takes a slight difference in a single thing, to wake that particular engine up. You have infinite more resources at your disposal than I have ever had, and I know you will find it. Thanks for sharing this, this is where everyone learns. Keep it up, it will work itself out. I hope you will continue to share your experiences with us.
Hi Eric. In my experience the bigger the problem, the more simple the answer. Because you have overlooked it so many times. That said, you said you checked the cam timing, but you only mentioned the intake lobe. I personally always check the exhaust lobe as well. I have had custom cams supplied to me where they have not ground what I asked for, because they thought they knew better. I've had a few arguments with cam grinders, they even supplied a cam card that said I was supplied what I asked for. I had a motor back firing at 6000rpm through the carby, eventually I rectified it by changing the headers, it was a wave tuning issue/reversion issue. That said, I would suggest carefully looking at the cam, intake and exhaust, adding some collector length. The fact that the power keeps climbing might suggest that the exhaust side is not working as designed. We are of course assuming that the dyno numbers are actually in the ball park. With all of the sensor issues there would appear to be some justification for doubt. Good luck with this challenge, but please go back to basics first. Regards Greg.
Lowered air speed would decrease cyl pressure which would reduce torque. Higher RPM increases air speed then in comes the power. The 3 most important things for power production is, air speed, air speed and air speed.
Eric, try those heads on a larger displacement sbc. You are getting big block, big cubic inch flow numbers from your mods which is what you would want for a full race engine. That 406 would pull like a freight train on the top end!
@@garykarenmcgruther6386 CR...
I ruined a good intake messing around on the floor of it . Lessons hard school . Getting recipes to be perfact & duplicate is like heart surgery's. Cool & Clever vidio 🥂🏁🥂🏁
And I enjoy your videos and the tips. I have a Pro street 73 Plymouth Duster that went low 9 seconds in the quarter mile with just a 100 shot of nos. Andy helped me build a 421 cubic inch small block from a 340 block and a set of brodex B1 ba heads.
Sometimes we plan on a certain result and the engine does want it wants! I understand you missed the target rpm you wanted. It'll be if he try a dyno once it's installed in the truck and see how it does then. Thank you for your time and all your information you freely share! Ive learned way more being able to better understand head flow, velocities and coefficients/ effects on power. You'll get it figured out thats one thing I know from watching you! Take you time and relax, you got this!
I think the lobe separation angle has reduced the tourque number as you have widened the angle and taken cylinder pressure away.
Agreed and more duration adding to the low speed problem
Port volosity issues ? Maybe the exhaust port is to big so it's lost the scavenging effect it would explain the tq loss and way the peak power has moved so high in the rpm range because the scavenging doesn't start working again until the engine is reving like a jet the sudden torque jump could be the point the scavenging effect is starting to work
That's some impressive HP for that duration cam. I'm thinking the intake is on the big side. Maybe tighter lobe separation. But I am wondering about the dyno calculation of torque .of course I'm guessing
I feel your pain, have had similar experience eventually traced to turbulence entering the chamber smooth that out and the power came back, you've probably looked at that one already just thought id pass on my experience. an old guy who used to build Formula one engines said to me never doubt the dyno that is a big mistake. thanks for all the videos.
I wonder how much a difference a dual plane intake would make. My guess is the air speed has peaked, but because of the intake design it can still keep ingesting more air at high rpms. Or maybe lower the rocker arm ratio so there is less lift. Might help low lift air speed, but these are just ideas. Can't say I know any more than Eric about what is happening. Still a good engine though.
Excellent opportunity to learn something. You're gonna come out on the other side of this more knowledgeable than before, and thanks to the miracle of youtube we all can benefit from this experience.
Enjoyed the video, and good luck sorting things out. Thanks for sharing
We had similar issue with my TFS R-Series (from TEA 356cfm@700 lift intake 282@700 exhaust) headed 13:1 430W on E-85🌽: 1st cam had to much split duration; it was LSM 55MM 282/296 @.50 768/768 net lift. #Lunati signature series crank, Oliver speedway series rods, diamond pistons. We thought the motor would flirt with 800 horse and it only made 705/559 tq. My engine builder said "F it" and we spec'd another cam. Ended going with a comp 271/281@ .753/753 net lift. The smaller cam made 716/592 hp/tq and made a lot more lower end tq too. The 1st cam from LSM was a custom ground that was heavily nitrous spec'd but because duratiin split was 14* degrees it was bleeding off cylinder press and losing power NA. Sinve the motor will spend most of its life NA - the 2nd cam split duration was only 10* degrees. We still think a motor like that shoulda made mid 700s power and lower 600s tq, but the only thing we can think if is it has a heavy ring pack, so there's rotational friction holding it back. Checkout my channel for both dyno videos: 430W dyno pt 1 & 2. 📷📸📽🏁🎬🔥
Did you ever get new numbers on the 430w? From your results I'd look at bring exhaust duration down even more or run 1.72 rockeer intake and 1.60 exhaust. What was the intake and carb on it? Its wild that you got nearly 50 ftlb but not much more power.
Most of it is the cam I think. Those comp K lobes are very aggressive and great until they send the valvetrain crazy and lose control. Plus now your also hurting torque by closing the intake valve later.
Eric,
Nothing to be ashamed about. I would advance cam timing 4 to 6 degrees. Intake port volume may be too large & could require some epoxy filling.
This is why you dyno. Great first attempt.
You'll get it.
Terry
Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
As with all of your videos, I appreciate all of your efforts to share your knowledge and experiences. I can see how this is a head scratcher. My first thought was cam timing and lobe separation. Further in through watching this, I more and more question the dyno accuracy. I would try another dyno, and if that done fix it, I would try a different intake and then change the cam if the intake don't make much difference. Tighten lobe separation. I'm curious and look forward to a follow up as to what happens with this engine and issue you ran into. I've never seen a cam that size make power that high.
It ended up being the dyno. It went faster on the track.
Another great video Eric. I got faith in you, you'll figure it out.
Without a doubt the dyno is off, as well as the camshaft. I don't know your full head flow and valve sizes, or your rocker ratio. I'm not sure how you figured .750 of intake and .690 of exhaust. Based off what you showed I calculated this:
The cam has a lift of .590 (intake) and .656 (exhaust) with a 1.6 rocker. 648HP 7100rpm and 539TQ at 5500rpm.
I guessed the rocker arm ratio. Just for fun, I'd do a leak down test to see if something could be going on with the rings.
It's mostly the intake and headers, but you stated everything in this video. You have your answers. It's that the overall combination now hits just right to make it scream. It was being held back before to maximize TQ, and now it's not.
I don’t think it’s one thing!
I would try the old cam just to eliminate some variables.
I wouldn’t be suprised If the torque is better (but still down from before).
It would be really interesting to see where it noses over with that one (If you see what I mean).
Still have huge respect for you!
Keep up the good work 👍.
Johan Lindstrom/LRE Sweden 🇸🇪
Absolutely 2nd
I second what others said about collector extensions. But if you really want to have an accurate test, you've gotta run the headers you're gonna run in the chassis. What engine masters found with collector extension is you basically have resonant tubes behind the headers up until you hit a muffler. For open headers drag racing you'd want a particular length collector extension for optimum torque.
It would be interesting to see the dynamic compression between the two camshafts or cranking compression. The wider lobe separation is going to hamper the torque and raise the rpm range. What was the intake centerline. I’d think it would need to be between 104/105 to peak somewhere near the rpm range you’re looking for. Also was the race fuel oxygenated? If not that will also hurt it some. That’s a lot of torque to be down.
I think you are dead on John. I noticed in the cam video that the .050 number to the seat was forever. I'd bet the difference between .050 and when the valve actually hits the seat between those two cams is a ton. I know Eric said he PAYS NO ATTENTION to advertised numbers but the cam doctor info when the valve actually hits the seat matters!
Especially on that 11:1 CR.
Eric, is this just an example of changing too many things at once?
From the engine master build you are comparing numbers with, you have a different cam, head port work, different intake, and a larger (950 vs 750?) carb. Interactions of 4 changes???
For what its worth. And at some point, adding another 50 HP is going to cost you torque right? (1.75 hp per cube).
Keep going!
Put the same engine masters intake and carb on a dyno pull and split the mental masterbation in half. Did the cam and port work kill the low end torgue, or did the the intake and carb. I am not an expert, hard stop. But watching all the combos with Richard Holder, I bet a twelve pack the intake and 950 shifted the torque peak up. Sacrificig low end torque for HP. Yada yada..... the cliches.
Divide and concore. You are a determined man that will not sleep until resolved in your mind.
The smaller tube headers are my hint.
I would love to see the same combo you dynoed with the same induction (engine masters) you have built you estimates on.
AND, let me know your beer of choice. A bet I'm willing to loose out of couiosity.
Divide 4 changes in half.
I enjoy your videos, and respect your resolve.
.
Are the heads too big for the camshaft engine combo?
I would re-dyno on a different dyno, all the things you said weren't working properly sends up red flags to me. also, I'm wondering about the CC soft lobes, I think those do soften torque and promote that high rpm peak. another cam with the same numbers (ILC and LCA) with a more aggressive ramp may help....good luck, keep the great ifo coming.
Consider trying 1 3/4 × 30" long Headers. .1 7/8 stepped to 2" may be the problem.
curious about the resolution was... I had done a 468 (14.5:1 NA on methanol) and was running different cams through the thing on a Gopower dyno.. One change was for an Erson cam they sent us to try. (was an incrementally larger cam on all numbers) . The first cold fire up and warmup tha thing sounded like a killer.. Engine was probably 25% snappier off load.. So first pull, the torque curve was off by over 100ftlbs.... so back to the dial indicator and degree wheel.. was right were it belonged, so... bumped it up 2º and it did not improve.. Really did not work on that cam any further.. As this was running in a drag boat, there was no room for the impaired torque curve.. I am used to trading torque for HP and vica versa but this cam was only a tiny bit larger but made a giant difference.. Probably should have worked on it more but like you, I was pretty unhappy on that session...
Ive been around people engine wise since the 80s, your very very good at what you do ,make no mistake
I build a little 355 engine I called Summit Racing and they told me to put a 465 lift cam in it with 224 intake 224 exhaust I did what they told me to do Andy engine would fly it was fast as hell I went with 10.8 compression ratio that was enough for the street your truck would jump sideways the people at Summit Racing know what they're talkin about but I like the video man keep up the good work
What ended up being the answer? I forgot but others mentioned Richard Holdener situation where 50 ft lb was "missing" and it was due to having no extensions after the collector.
It’s alright Eric, let’s see if we can diagnose this, so the first thing that caught my attention was the headers way to big for the displacement. Maybe 1 3/4 going to 1 7/8 would’ve been about right. Not sure if this cam was bought for this stage of the engine but 108* LSA, I’d probably go with 105-106. I’d almost question the performance of the dyno maybe something is wrong with it, besides some of the sensors. Are the rings broken in? The lash set correctly? A lot of times when things are changed from baseline, you got look back at what has changed and what’s the same. You’ll figure it out Eric your a smart dude!
When you degreed the cam to get true valve timing you have to load it with the valve pressure I have seen up to 4 degrees with single point tension belt drives and 1.5 on the jesel according to spring pressure
My buddy brought his blown big block Chevy to the dyno, the first run it made 400 horsepower. After almost puking they went over the motor, found nothing wrong mechanically, pulled the plugs and they all looked weird, so they changed the plugs and picked up 300 horsepower with no other changes, sometimes it’s the simple things that you overlook that make the most difference. After that the dominator carb wouldn’t work and after a few pulls they called it quits
Hey Eric, great information on the video! I seriously doubt it was anything you did. That engine should have hit it out of the park. I think something could have been wrong with the dyno. You said the air hat sensor was questionable. Did he run a known motor on it recently with no known issues? My suggestion would be after Cecil gets it installed to run it on a chassis dyno. If your torque and hp are down similarly across the board, I would suspect some clearance or something in the bottom end is too tight. If you end up making 500 ft lbs or more on the chassis dyno, you found your problem. Keep up the great work, you're an awesome dude!!!
The cam in my Hemi is a 116 degree and it pulls 22ip of vacuum a old blower helper crane cam from the 70es.
I remember a few years back a local shop that was doing all my machine work was upgrading their customers 418sbc. I can't remember if the engine had a Dart 230 or Brodix 230 but one of the "upgrades" was going to be the brand new AFR245. They fly cut the pistons for some additional P to V so probably lost a little compression (comb chamber volume before/aft?) and changed the rockers taking the cam from around .680" lift to around .725". In doing that they inadvertently added more duration therefore bleeding off even more compression.. On their dyno the engine previously made just over 650hp with the old combo and around 530tq. They spanked that poor engine silly for days and could only get 660hp out of it and lost a whack load of torque. I even lent them a set of 1-7/8x2x3-1/2" sprint car headers with 2 feet of collectors on them. In the end they swapped the AFR245 for an AFR227 and the engine made 685hp and 565tq. Good luck. I hope you get it sorted out. Love the content!
Hi Eric, brave video sir. What did you do to the ex port? Try a manifold with way less volume, and l dont get the small cam durations.
Colin Lloyd, Headsense Engines Heads,, Aust
Much obliged sir for the insight.
Whats the Bore & Stroke.
if I remember right from the other video you put a new cam with less aggressive lobe profiles to help be easier on the valvetrain. Maybe the profile change is hurting torque? Also think the dyno having some issues that day could be a factor and would probably start there with a different dyno to confirm.
Double check where the cam is installed, I bet the cam is installed late, 1 tooth off =14.4° maybe the adjuster slipped. After watching your video, I would think that the dyno was the problem, those cam numbers sound a little short to turn those kind of RPMs not to mention it's on a 108 lobe Center
I agree... And if it is a tooth off will throw away a ton of torque..
Eric, 1st I would test another dyno. If it duplicates or is close to the same results then I’d look at the cam lobes.
Is the cam lobe design ( low shock) bleeding off to much cylinder pressure down low hurting the torque but carrying out up top to make good power beyond 7500rpm? Just a thought. 🤷🏻♂️
Intake plenum volume has a treshold, where it stops pulling new air through the carb, and only feeding the cylinders with the mist that lingers in the plenum. You should've taken it to the 9000, just to see how it reacts. Second thing is the lobe separation/exhaust valve timing. When you are running high octane fuel, it burns slowly and if the exhaust valve opens before the fuel has done it's job, the power output goes down. This is backed by the smaller header, so when there's more back pressure in the exhaust, it makes more power, keeping the combustion inside the chamber. One quick fix is bigger lash on the exhaust valve, another is faster burning fuel. but both of these won't help on the plenum volume. If you have a spacer on the intake, take it off and try again.
Heads flow too Good, only want to make horsepower at 7,500 rpm.
1 7/8 headers seem really big to me. Doing some quick calcs, at 8k rpm your still only getting about 350ft/s. Even with the smallish camshaft i am really surprised it made power way out there at 8k rpm. In the chassis an H pipe would make a bunch in the middle, without the extensions on the headers it doesnt surprise me that it was kind of gutless down low but 100ftlbs seems like a lot to take off the bottom.
That 4 degrees of LSA is going to do something as well. It is maybe a confluence of these factors. Without a functioning air hat that makes diagnosis tough.
350-400 ci engines from 6-8000 RPM seem to like 1 7/8" headers. These results come from the many LS dynos. 1 3/4" make a little more torque down low but not much, and 2" are just too big. Like Eric said collector length can make a huge difference, and header design. But check over there, they have tons of data, and 1 7/8" is the winner.
It's also worth noting that that's the o.d. of the primaries, you have to allow for wall thickness when running the numbers.
@@the318pop Inside diameter.
@@dennisrobinson8008 nope, they're all measured on o.d.
@@the318pop True. I was saying what counts for us is the inside diameter. However, when we model after known combos and they state a known header of a known OD, that data is still useful. But for the engine models and simulations, the ID is what determines the exhaust capability of the engine.
Eric. I've been modifying high performance multi valve heads for race and rally for forty years. Although you are being hard on yourself, you have actually discovered the sweet spot. For an engine curve to not "turn over" and continue revving with more power like that means the system itself is perfect. It's just the numbers don't suit you. Somewhere along the line, a part of the inlet tract (manifold runners?) are too large (or flowing more no matter what size- could be the shapes?) and the whole thing needs choking down up to the throat. As an upside, I bet that engine will sound glorious in a circuit race car.
A 7* later IVC (best I can figure based on the cam numbers and assuming you've got them both 4* advanced) is gonna shift power up substantially, and kill the low end. I'm headed to the redemption video now to see what you learned.
Sound s to me you have a cam that makes power above your usable RPM range? Amd a merge collector with a 2.500 " cross section would work way better than a 3.5" straight?
Just a suggestion, do a leak down test.
Check the percentages.
Your idea of advancing the cam.
Header extensions.
Change manifold.
Great content.
Nice horse power, says heads Are working.
The camshaft is conservative.
Thank you, EM.
I looked some more at your sheet , the dyno correction is drifting or cal is off, look at your torque , it peaks then remain flat for over 1500 rpm , I think the dyno has a strain gauge issue. He needs to rehang his cal weights.
Have you run this combo on a good computer program? I've had excellent results with Engine Analyzer Pro. Otherwize might advance the cam, reduce diameter of collector.
I'd look into the rod ratio at high rpm. Unless it was a raised deck block, that pass poor rod ratio of a 400 can kill torque while making great power with a similar stroke in a taller block.
Have you heard of the IOP program? Might be worth checking out?
We know the AFR227 you ported was good. If we say 233 ccm / 5.1 inch length, we get average CSA of 2.79 inch square.
A 2.08 valve is 3.4 inch square and 2.79 / 3.4 = 82 % as Area and 90.6% as diameter.
I belive this is high enough and this latest engine has way more than this. That may kill torque due to low port energy.
Also, I must remind all that Darin Morgen has warned us all about touching the "hyper critical SSR" on some heads.
ruclips.net/video/qhsTQn0uUOQ/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/lcxp9ufC1DY/видео.html
AFR @20:34 show way lean in the midrange. Looking at the torque curve, it does taper of.
Man I was just typing out a comment that the cam should be checked and then you go into the details of having it checked. I've got a set of your dragon slayers from 2016 going on my 427 with a Jones 254/256 solid roller an planning on dynoing it before installing in the car.
It seems you`ve built an open wheeled circle track motor, more compression, more cam shaft and crank it to 8500+ and that pump would scream. I hosed myself like this about 25yrs ago with a superlate model asphalt motor. I replaced an 034 bowtie casting 207cc intake runner with a 220 RHS head, with a solid roller instead of a solid flat tappet that was in the 034 head. Lost maybe 60ft/lbs of torque and only gained 18hp, it was sleepy under 5500 and reached max hp at 7700rpm. Respectfully I believe the loss of torque was the cylinders weren`t being filled, so I had the intake valves increased to 2.050 on the bowtie heads (new rule change) and bowls blended, kept the solid roller and that was what we needed. Got back 90lbs torque (+30 net) and about 60 hp (48Hp net). For what it`s worth my friend, good luck and don`t beat yourself up too much.
I feel your frustration, I invested way too much time just getting all the blue printing aircraft quality right. Seemingly everything fought me. Though it turned out blessedly well.
I'm wondering about your dyno personally.
But I think 570 torque would be maximum expectation but I'm not sure. your 50 away. As for the peak hp above the 355 is just bizarre. It would keep me up at night. I'd have to spend some money to someone like kaase identify the situation. Thus might keep me up at night. There should be a way to scale reset dyno for torque and power easily.
More cid needs a tighter LSA but, what's the CR? The LSA seems like a big change
Did you have an 18 inch collector extension on the headers? 108 degree lobe center on a 7800 rpm engine is kind of tight.
my guess is intake modifications specificly runner length. might flow better, but maybe the modification messed with the pulse in the runner.
That thing is a monster ! It just keeps giving ! And giving !
I think you are on the right path with going back to the original camshaft. The compression is a bit low. Were the valve seats ground? Lowering the compression even more? Maybe an angle mill on the heads to raise compression?
I doubt it one single thing. Majority of it is likely in the camshaft. What’s the dynamic compression with both camshafts?
Thinking about my previous comment, I think i would install the original cam and dyno again, i think this would also showcase your porting skills and make an awesome comparison.
I would get that cam measured out, nevermind lol.
I think 8 degrees and that LSA change was enough to do it. The valve opening at TDC combined with a different port shape could be really hurting low speed flow
I would be mad about going to an engine dyno and their equipment being messed up and not working correctly. I my head I am thinking, well if the basic peripherals aren't working, how can I trust what the dyno is telling me? I understand each dyno is different, and for comparison sake using the same one is the best idea, but in this case I'd be tempted to find another dyno.
11.5:1 compression have you thought about header extensions? 501tq is great numbers depending on the application the engine is used for plus depending on what chassis is going in. That engine in my 66 Chevy II Nova would run great times in the 1/4 mile.
They are concerned because people achieve over 500tq out of a well built 350ci.
@@dennisrobinson8008 but remember cam profile, duration, lift and LSA all can cause low torque production and high horsepower production. I would suggest looking at the cam first and see if installing a different cam would change the outcome of the engine powerband/torqueband
@@eliasmelendez1271 Good observation.
@@dennisrobinson8008 I'm a Honda enthusiast, so my main goal for my racecar is to mid range and topend power. My f20b engine makes 14.5:1 compression, 13mm lift with a 315⁰ duration. My rev limit is 10,500rpm and on ignite red I make close to 400whp all motor, and on M1 race gas I make close 450whp. If I want more of a mid range powerband I would change the duration to lower my rpm range and increase my torque production thus increasing my low to mid range usage. But those cams I use it when I'm track/time attack racing my first cams that I talked about that allows me to rev to 10,500rpm are my drag racing cams
@@eliasmelendez1271 incredible numbers
Erik. What size the carb.I would look at changing carb.from what I saw of the early BSFC was lean.i have run 1,000 cfm pro systems carb on similar cid engines and made 600 trq around 5100.also used 1 7/8 primary 3 1/2 collector.on a quick note did you see if it had a dead cylinder,I have had that happen and it had me itching my head.the engine didn't sound like had any misfire .found it had a closed strap on the plug
Iv never had any luck with cams in the mid 240s @.050 have you tryed a cam in the mid 250s i know it sounds wrong but iv had good luck there i like the isky stuff like 256/264 @050 on a 104 installed on 99 thats 5 advance make 770/595 torque
I always wondered how close them cam cards actually were on the boxes .
Did you try advancing the cam timing to even out the hp&tq some?
I'm definetly no expert but on my bb 67 Camaro i had 30 years ago and my pressent day 512 ci 73 challenger my lift on the exhaust valve is higher than the intake. I picked this cam based on a formula I found on the youtube channel Myvintageiron. his formula was pretty in depth. You may want to check it out.
Is it a new cam? Maybe cylinder 1 is OK but some issue with other lobes?
If it peaked at 7800 rpm with a lack of torque... there's no way it has a 248/253 cam with a 108 LSA. I'd double check the cam. It's probably something different.
That cam doctor sheet had advertised numbers above 310*. I'd send that thing back and get it ground for some damn shock! LOL
I see no reason a 240's duration cam should be above 280's seat to seat!
I’m guessing that the dyno is not exactly correct and the headers are hurting more than we really expect them to. But my explanation for the power loss is the intake manifold. Large intake manifold will definitely kill torque and make big rpm’s up top!!! JMO. Great video.
Did you measure cranking compression? Can you measure cylinder pressure?
I would verify those numbers elsewhere if possible. It could have been a loading issue. If it does turn out the same, my personal opinion would be the air speed. Im no porter, but have some experience with it. If by changing the short side it dropped a ton of air speed, it may have hurt it enough to need the higher rpm to meet same demand.
Hi Eric, What epoxy did you use on that intake manifold?
I had a similar thing happen to me and it was the camshaft, it was not ground anywhere close to what the card said in other words right card, wrong camshaft. . I replaced the camshaft and it fixed it. Not saying this is what your problem is but it does sound very similar although not very common. Question: did you experiment with headers and/collectors at all?
Same thing happens when people start carving on Vortec heads.. You can go the other way fast and not to mention take reliability out of them and causing weak casting points and get cracks even more...
I cannot remember if you degreed the camshaft, I've seen timing gears machined wrong as well as camshafts ground incorrectly. Advancing the cam timing or changing to a more narrow LSA might be the simplest trick & where I would investigate first.
It was the dyno. It went faster at the track.
I'm sorry. I do believe you had announced that. I was watching some of your older videos today & forgot what you had learned about this engine. I'm glad as it surely was bizarre results as you knew what you should expect. Gladbit worked out well. Very stout SBC and I would be very proud as I am sure you are. We'll done Eric.
What was the Length of the Dyno Header's Collector? What type of Carb Spacer, Open or Tapered Four Hole such as the HVH SS4150/4500-1.5A? Did you try advancing the Cam to see if it liked it? How about seeing if it liked 1.6:1 Intake and/or Exhaust Rockers?
It’s nice to watch a video about somebody telling the truth and know what he’s talking about at the same time 👍👍
My last engine a cleveland 408 with unported CHI heads and manifold with 11.5 comp and 262/272@50 and 721 lift it dynoed from 4500 made 429 hp and 501 lb of torque and peak torque 546.5 at 5500 and made 655 hp @7000.This was done with a superflow 902,but my engine builder says that his dyno is rated differently to a lot of dynos,being a drag race builder he says his hp equats to the moroso calulater,your deal doesnt sound like that weeny cam
Well, shoot. I'm amazed the torque is flat at the top like that. I quoted a 7100 RPM decline on the original video. That was supposed to be the HP decline, not the torque decline! I'm gonna sit down with a cup of coffee and re-assess this.
-- I'm inclined to think that a smaller cam like a 232/242 on a 112 will have a higher average draw on the port, therefore activating the resonant properties of the intake manifold sooner, but the difference between the cams was soooo small.
Do you have any pushr050 shorter the valve will come off the seat quicker would be a good experiment
Dyno issue . Almost wish it was still there maybe open up lash .005 too see if it would have picked up tq
Intake valve closing event can kill torque, how late are you closing the intake valve?
Too much port volume to CID will hurt torque production.
I’m shocked too to see a loss of almost 100 ftlb. 🤔🤔🤔
Maybe put the old cam back in and see what only the head work changed?