Watched this a second time...man that is good stuff. A very smart guy told me years ago...an engine doesn't know what brand it is, what size it is, what planet it is on, what it is supposed to do, ect, ect.... It knows that certain factors control it's ability to make power, from one second to another. These are those things that really call the shots. That smart person.....Jim Kinsler, Kinsler Fuel injectiom, 1984. This is good stuff!
I wish there where more of his vids😔if any one knows of any I’m interested ! I have watched this many times over the years and learn something every time!! Very cool!! I used to do a lot of the planning and engineering for all ECR Pistons @ BMEltd this stuff is very cool
That's about what I expected. The chart at 6.29 is interesting. What's the firing order of that engine? I see the longer runners on that intake manifold are doing better.
@groomlake51I am a novice. Yet that is my thought. Individual cylinder spark timing can be fine tuned. Yet a variation of cam lobes should help. Thanks for your comment. @groomlake51
+Daniel Bargas That is by far the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. If this shit were "so stupid simple", internal combustion engines all throughout history would be "stupid cheap".........and for that matter, half the population would be ordering a bunch of parts and building THEIR OWN ENGINES, and I don't mean simply bolting parts together. They would be buying parts with UNFINISHED SURFACES in order to "custom design" those parts to perform the way THEY want them to perform. Example: "Just send me the rough heads, I will do the valve job AND port & polish the combustion chambers & intake and exhaust ports myself, and save TONS OF $$$"............"because it's so "stupid simple"......................Get real mister. It's one thing to "understand what is going on inside of any part of an engine".............but knowing it SO WELL that you can actually APPLY YOURSELF in the realm if engineering all this stuff, is ANYTHING BUT "STUPID SIMPLE". Let's see you figure out FROM SCRATCH, by YOUR OWN DESIGN, how to build an engine that can produce so much horsepower & torque at over 9000 rpm.........and hold it there for 500 miles without failing, let alone to be the first guy to finish the race................Yeah buddy............good luck with that one. ........."stupid simple"................MY ASS.
The basic operations of the engine are stupid simple. I mean a carburetor, solid flat tapped cam, solid lifters, a distributor. Sometimes the most powerful engines are the simplest.
And then, after all the engineering and hard work by the engineers and engine builders, NASCAR slaps the choker rule on and it's follow the leader and the evolution toward all cars looking the same and being the same aerodynamically and tire and pit management.
It should be best to give a little bit information about the valve OverLap condition of the Cup engines and Valves open-close angle and timing. Unfortunately it is the main secret of the high rpm atmospheric engines. But anyway it is very good speech, lecture for the enthusiasts who wants to learn more about the engine tune and race engines.
they shorten the over lap, but the duration is around 300 degrees, which is why they idle at 2000 rpm, plus the lift on the valve is almost .700, which is a hell uv a lot
That is completely wrong. They run individual coils for ignition, the injectors are in the ports - location per NASCAR spec, throttle body where the carburetor was, and its a Mclaren ECU running the whole thing. Not quite as good as a clean slate EFI set-up, but it's way beyond what you think it is.
This is how NASCAR ruined the old " Win on Sunday, Sell on monday". Automobile manufacturers are no longer offering their own engine designs. NASCAR like other racing organizations is all about control over who's going to be making the money in racing, NHRA is cut from the same cloth!
Archaic design? ALL piston engines are pre-historic. They're all in the same boat. Now electric motors on the other hand, now we're talking efficiency.
Didnt get the reaction you were expecting did you? 0 comments 0 likes He means archaic relative to other engine designs. Push rod engine architecture is archaic compared to OHC or DOHC
So let me get this right, the Toyota and Ford teams race a "chevy" engine... ridiculous. Each team should be able to build their own V8 with limits on cubic inch(cc), maybe run the same fuel injectors but this one engine for all makes no sense
The GM, Ford, and Toyota engines are each a distinct design built from the same rules. Notice where the distributor is on that engine. Originally it was in the back on the Chevy and the front on the Ford. That engine "looks" more like a Ford than a Chevy but it's not a Ford. Also if I understand things correctly (I may not.) the Chevy Cup motor now has canted valves. The original small block based Cup motor did not. However the original Ford 358 Cup motor was based on the 351 Cleveland and has always been a canted valve engine. Again the Chevy "looks" more like the Ford, but it is not. The Chevy Ford and yoter are evolved racing engines. That they "look" the same only means racers are figuring out what works, and what doesn't. The closer to optimized these engines get the more they will be the same. When Stewart/Haas switched to Fords they had to reconfigure all of their cars to accommodate the Ford because they are not the same.
![ROSÉ(로제) - APT. (Band VER.) (With. 이영지) [더 시즌즈-이영지의 레인보우] | KBS 241129 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IW8qaemx74g/mqdefault.jpg)
![NLE Choppa - Or What ft. 41 (Orchestra Mix) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/biOFASEgSOM/mqdefault.jpg)
11 years later and I'm still sharing this video to explain to people that wealthy teams with top talent win because of people like Andrew.
Andrew is a wonderful teacher! He understands and can break it down to anyone's level of understanding which is a real talent. Thank you.
Mike Caruso
I love when I find videos that I can just link people to, instead of having to try to explain everything myself, repeatedly.
Fantastic presentation. I have watched it multiple times and my knowledge has grown, so very much. Great teacher.
Watched this a second time...man that is good stuff. A very smart guy told me years ago...an engine doesn't know what brand it is, what size it is, what planet it is on, what it is supposed to do, ect, ect.... It knows that certain factors control it's ability to make power, from one second to another. These are those things that really call the shots. That smart person.....Jim Kinsler, Kinsler Fuel injectiom, 1984. This is good stuff!
Very very interesting !! This is why I love this sport so much. Now my brain is going to be up all nite looking for that 570 hp
Norm Macdonald explains race engines.
Sounds like him, but Norm was funny.
Great video!
I wish there where more of his vids😔if any one knows of any I’m interested ! I have watched this many times over the years and learn something every time!! Very cool!! I used to do a lot of the planning and engineering for all ECR Pistons @ BMEltd this stuff is very cool
This is a fantastic lecture! Anyone know of similar video material available on the Web?
CoolBananas look up David vissard he is very good also
very good, I got one for you, when the valve changes direction does it rotate due to the spring having a slight twist to it as its compressed?
No. Not on race motors. GM OEM production small blocks have "rotator" V.S. retainers on the exhaust valves.
I saw Chief Keef @ 5:05
That's about what I expected. The chart at 6.29 is interesting. What's the firing order of that engine? I see the longer runners on that intake manifold are doing better.
different rocker ratios, will help equalize combustion pressure due to different intake port lengths.
tom ashton why not just do it with cam lobe profile? There are manny “scatter pattern “ out there
@groomlake51I am a novice. Yet that is my thought. Individual cylinder spark timing can be fine tuned. Yet a variation of cam lobes should help. Thanks for your comment. @groomlake51
how old is this video, because they switched to roller cams and they put efi holly terminator on the motors now
Michael Tallent this video explains a 2010 sprint cup engine, so yes, in the last 7 years they've changed a bit.
Maybe they could make a rule change that allows nitrogen charged valvetrain vs mechanical springs
No matter how advanced it gets it is still stupid simple.
+Daniel Bargas That is by far the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. If this shit were "so stupid simple", internal combustion engines all throughout history would be "stupid cheap".........and for that matter, half the population would be ordering a bunch of parts and building THEIR OWN ENGINES, and I don't mean simply bolting parts together. They would be buying parts with UNFINISHED SURFACES in order to "custom design" those parts to perform the way THEY want them to perform. Example: "Just send me the rough heads, I will do the valve job AND port & polish the combustion chambers & intake and exhaust ports myself, and save TONS OF $$$"............"because it's so "stupid simple"......................Get real mister. It's one thing to "understand what is going on inside of any part of an engine".............but knowing it SO WELL that you can actually APPLY YOURSELF in the realm if engineering all this stuff, is ANYTHING BUT "STUPID SIMPLE". Let's see you figure out FROM SCRATCH, by YOUR OWN DESIGN, how to build an engine that can produce so much horsepower & torque at over 9000 rpm.........and hold it there for 500 miles without failing, let alone to be the first guy to finish the race................Yeah buddy............good luck with that one. ........."stupid simple"................MY ASS.
The basic operations of the engine are stupid simple. I mean a carburetor, solid flat tapped cam, solid lifters, a distributor. Sometimes the most powerful engines are the simplest.
Howabouthetruth I concur sir
Daniel Bargas the static engine might be simple but a dynamic engine is full of unknowns
Really interesting.
Fantastic! Bravo!
And then, after all the engineering and hard work by the engineers and engine builders, NASCAR slaps the choker rule on and it's follow the leader and the evolution toward all cars looking the same and being the same aerodynamically and tire and pit management.
Hkw do I sign up for this class?
Fascinates me how these cross plane v8s with no bundle of snake headers can rev upto 9k rpm and make power there
It should be best to give a little bit information about the valve OverLap condition of the Cup engines and Valves open-close angle and timing. Unfortunately it is the main secret of the high rpm atmospheric engines. But anyway it is very good speech, lecture for the enthusiasts who wants to learn more about the engine tune and race engines.
they shorten the over lap, but the duration is around 300 degrees, which is why they idle at 2000 rpm, plus the lift on the valve is almost .700, which is a hell uv a lot
The lift is far greater than .700....
Freevalve, direct injection, individual knock and egt on each cylinder and wpc treatment = more
They no longer use carbirators and flat tappet cams they are fuel injected and roller cams
That is completely wrong. They run individual coils for ignition, the injectors are in the ports - location per NASCAR spec, throttle body where the carburetor was, and its a Mclaren ECU running the whole thing. Not quite as good as a clean slate EFI set-up, but it's way beyond what you think it is.
This is how NASCAR ruined the old " Win on Sunday, Sell on monday". Automobile manufacturers are no longer offering their own engine designs. NASCAR like other racing organizations is all about control over who's going to be making the money in racing, NHRA is cut from the same cloth!
Archaic design? ALL piston engines are pre-historic. They're all in the same boat. Now electric motors on the other hand, now we're talking efficiency.
Didnt get the reaction you were expecting did you? 0 comments 0 likes
He means archaic relative to other engine designs.
Push rod engine architecture is archaic compared to OHC or DOHC
So let me get this right, the Toyota and Ford teams race a "chevy" engine... ridiculous. Each team should be able to build their own V8 with limits on cubic inch(cc), maybe run the same fuel injectors but this one engine for all makes no sense
The GM, Ford, and Toyota engines are each a distinct design built from the same rules. Notice where the distributor is on that engine. Originally it was in the back on the Chevy and the front on the Ford. That engine "looks" more like a Ford than a Chevy but it's not a Ford. Also if I understand things correctly (I may not.) the Chevy Cup motor now has canted valves. The original small block based Cup motor did not. However the original Ford 358 Cup motor was based on the 351 Cleveland and has always been a canted valve engine. Again the Chevy "looks" more like the Ford, but it is not. The Chevy Ford and yoter are evolved racing engines. That they "look" the same only means racers are figuring out what works, and what doesn't. The closer to optimized these engines get the more they will be the same. When Stewart/Haas switched to Fords they had to reconfigure all of their cars to accommodate the Ford because they are not the same.
@@duster0066 Greg Gets it lol
This is sad, to many rules are the death of that sport. Let them build what they want..
It's very easy to find all 2400 hp. Just add nitro
Maybe go 2stroke, efficiency 👽
Internal combustion engine= Friction=Heat=35% Efficiency..
In f1 they have hit 50%
F1 has a shit load of telemetries controlled by the ECM.. And they still are not allowed to run remote telemetries. To slow them down even more..
@@groomlake51 with energy recovery calculated yes, bare engine maybe 45%.