After 14 mounths of collecting parts ,i am starting all over

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24752
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

mopar_mark wrote: If I had 2 mild cams with exactly the same profile, one roller the other solid....
They would perform about the same. A good Mopar solid has as fast a rate of climb as a mild roller. Well close enough enyway. The roller has less stresses applied to it too. It is only when you start getting into more radical cams that the roller shoots ahead.

But by then you are starting to get into the realms of massive spring pressures etc.

I would personally stick with a solid lifter unless I was building a radical engine with silly levels of power. Or intended only to drive on the street to the odd local event and not much more. I don't think these blocks were designed for big roller cams.

I think what we need here is a decision on final weight. If there is no ET limit (just want to go as fast as possible) then you have to decide how streetable it needs to be instead.

I wouldn't want a more radical engine in my car for instance. There are times when I need to drive 300miles from home. So that limits how "race" I can make mine. If i wanted to go 10s I would have to go lighter. Put the engine in a street rod or something.
User avatar
AllKiller
Posts: 15191
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 04 9:33 pm
Location: Hampshire

Post by AllKiller »

Dave wrote:
mopar_mark wrote: If I had 2 mild cams with exactly the same profile, one roller the other solid....
They would perform about the same. A good Mopar solid has as fast a rate of climb as a mild roller. Well close enough enyway. The roller has less stresses applied to it too. It is only when you start getting into more radical cams that the roller shoots ahead.

But by then you are starting to get into the realms of massive spring pressures etc.

.
Exactly Dave....hence the termal stabilisation of the valvetrain and frequent tear downs of the rocker gear etc to stop a pan full of broken Fulcrums parts
ALL KILLER NO FILLER
Nostalgia, its not what it used to be.

Carbon footprint of a Saturn V
Image
NaughtyAlan

Post by NaughtyAlan »

Exactly Dave :thumbright:
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

:-k
Mick
Posts: 3070
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 10:55 pm
Location: Nottingham

Post by Mick »

I wouldn't of thought you could get a solid big enough to feed a 572, unless you're building it for torque and not HP.
The old mushroom lifter cams were quite big though.
Mick
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Mick wrote:I wouldn't of thought you could get a solid big enough to feed a 572, unless you're building it for torque and not HP.
The old mushroom lifter cams were quite big though.
Mick


Hav'nt those mushroom lifters gotta go in before the cam is fitted?

Funny , was thinking about them , ole Smokey Yunnock. :shock:
User avatar
mopar_mark
Posts: 6738
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 06 8:01 pm
Location: Windlesham, Surrey

Post by mopar_mark »

Brutus wrote:
Mick wrote:I wouldn't of thought you could get a solid big enough to feed a 572, unless you're building it for torque and not HP.
The old mushroom lifter cams were quite big though.
Mick


Hav'nt those mushroom lifters gotta go in before the cam is fitted?

Funny , was thinking about them , ole Smokey Yunnock. :shock:
Yes, Mushroom lifter go in before Cam, there pretty much old hat these days & I doubt if many are still running them
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."
User avatar
AllKiller
Posts: 15191
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 04 9:33 pm
Location: Hampshire

Post by AllKiller »

NaughtyAlan wrote:Exactly Dave :thumbright:
:roll:
Great input Al :thumbright:
ALL KILLER NO FILLER
Nostalgia, its not what it used to be.

Carbon footprint of a Saturn V
Image
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

AllKiller wrote:
NaughtyAlan wrote:Exactly Dave :thumbright:
:roll:
Great input Al :thumbright:
Think he done well bearin in mind how many Vodkas he poured down his neck. :shock:

:D :D
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Its all about Ramp angles!!!

Lifter goes up OK, then has to not fly off the top of the lobe, and then has to drop down the other side even quicker!

Wow, how does it do that 116 times a second???

I know, BIG valve springs!!!

Bozobac.
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Asymmetrical lobes?

:D
Guy
Posts: 5002
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 10:20 pm
Location: Behind a Camera

Post by Guy »

baccaruda wrote:


Wow, how does it do that 116 times a second???


Who revs there motor to 14000rpm :shock:
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Guy wrote:
baccaruda wrote:


Wow, how does it do that 116 times a second???


Who revs there motor to 14000rpm :shock:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey Baccy you dissapoint me , thought you were a loyal mother Mopar guru , did'nt realise you gone Jap. :shock:
:shock:

Get off that calculator Guy. :D
Guy
Posts: 5002
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 10:20 pm
Location: Behind a Camera

Post by Guy »

Brutus wrote:
Get off that calculator Guy. :D
:D :D
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Sorry I meant 150 times a second, I made an error???

Yamaha FZR motor 18K rpm!!!

I'm turning Japanese, I'm turning Japanese, I really think so???

You are right about mechanical cams for the street and BIG rollers for the track!
There are several street rollers available and I would go for a CROWER!
It makes the same power at 550lift as a mech makes at 590!
Faster ramps and valve open longer at full lift.

You just gotta change the springs more often!!!

Small potatoes methinks Bozobacca?
Post Reply