Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

hoffman900 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:24 pm I’ve posted this before, but this was a great manifold test on a brake and an inertia dyno.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120307005 ... Engine.pdf

I wish there were more of those dynos around.

Wow that is quite the article. Thanks for putting that up.

hoffman900 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:42 pm

Warp Speed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:40 pm That whole deal kinda came and went. .......

Is there a reason why?

If you can, what would you look for in a test like this?

A test that have you useable data. Lol an A to B

MTENGINES wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:14 pm

hoffman900 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:42 pm

Warp Speed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:40 pm That whole deal kinda came and went. .......

Is there a reason why?

If you can, what would you look for in a test like this?

A test that have you useable data. Lol an A to B

You have brake and inertia data. What more do you need?

This is how the test/comparison came about. A customer ordered an intake from me months ago for combination that he already had parts for. He had Chris Cobb build the engine. Chris says hey customer I have some manifolds here would you like to compare them to yours.( The one I did.) Customer says sure. It begins. I had no idea this had been brought up until a few weeks ago. Chris posts on fb I read it and say hey Chris I would like to see how a Motown would do. Can we compare them? He says sure but let me ask the customer. From that point the test is on.

It may seem like we all sat down and came up with an amazing plan but in reality it just sorta came together. It took a lot willing participants to make it happen, a customer that didn’t mind using his motor, Chris giving up days on the dyno, and the time all spent Porting manifolds.

I know a good test would have been a stock manifold for baseline but that doubles the pulls and to be honest none of us run an as cast manifold on any of our stuff. Anything worth doing is worth over doing.

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:23 pm

MTENGINES wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:46 pm What does this test show us? Other than there was no control.

Also i think more cam would show these manifolds potentials better.

What do you mean "no control"..

Maybe a cam would have, but how many people build engines like this??

I'm not sure what you mean "how many". This engine is very close to mine, without the .030" overbore, and my cam is on 106. I am using a 330- 25 with a 4780 Holley. This is a pump gas engine, How much more cam can be used at this range of compression?

On a drag car weighing 3000 lbs with this engine, 5000 converter,etc. how much difference in et would there be in the 1/8 mile between all the manifolds?

I think with maybe 3 of the intakes you would have virtually the same et, the others would not vary .05 in the 1/8th from fastest to slowest.

Maybe I'm wrong.

hoffman900 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:42 pm

Warp Speed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:40 pm That whole deal kinda came and went. .......

Is there a reason why?

If you can, what would you look for in a test like this?

If you are asking the reason that that Dyno came and went. Had to do with some of the people involved (MV).

This "test" is a not very well disguised piece of propaganda to sell those dynos. If this dyno design was better, you would see them at the major NASCAR shops.

So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:26 pm So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

He may be referring to the PDF posted earlier. I could see how it may be framed as a propaganda piece.

Bos's5.0 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:10 am

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:26 pm So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

He may be referring to the PDF posted earlier. I could see how it may be framed as a propaganda piece.

Ahh. Thanks!

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:26 pm So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

Huh?!? Lol
The ONLY reason I asked, is because it was brought up that a lower hp manifold had a faster acceleration on the dyno. I was curious about the dyno and how acceleration is measured.
I don't get out much.........lol

Charliesauto wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:11 pm

hoffman900 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:42 pm

Warp Speed wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:40 pm That whole deal kinda came and went. .......

Is there a reason why?

If you can, what would you look for in a test like this?

If you are asking the reason that that Dyno came and went. Had to do with some of the people involved (MV).

This "test" is a not very well disguised piece of propaganda to sell those dynos. If this dyno design was better, you would see them at the major NASCAR shops.

That was kinda my point. Those inertia dynos were billed as the cats meow at one time, but never really caught on in professional motorsports.
What I look for in testing is pure consistency in both parameter controls and procedures, to give repeatable data. I prefer to go back to baseline every 2-3 manifolds. The manifold testing done here is hard, as it takes a bit to change manifolds. It not like you are quickly changing the X of a 2 piece. Allot of work involved for sure.
The results, if they were consistent between run sets, show what works best on that combo between the pieces on hand. You can argue that an as cast vs ported of each would be good, but that isn't what the intent was.

Warp Speed wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:50 am

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:26 pm So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

Huh?!? Lol
The ONLY reason I asked, is because it was brought up that a lower hp manifold had a faster acceleration on the dyno. I was curious about the dyno and how acceleration is measured.
I don't get out much.........lol

I didn't say that towards you Warp.

I read test and propaganda and didn't realize he was talking about the other link posted.

My bad, it's all good.

Chad, Eric made the comment about his manifold in the test you posted. Warp’s question was in regards to that.

Warp, thanks. Good info.

cspeier wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:26 pm So now there is something wrong with a Stuska?

No.