mtmvette wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:29 pm
Yes, Chris I would like more details on that engine build. Is it a trade secret?
Considering the way he and others get treated by the ST hate crowed when they post a build don't be surprised if he chooses not to, most have gone to posting detailed builds and dyno videos on their FB pages due to the handful of attackers here.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
cstraub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:46 am
Gary,
You are 100% correct and that is why I don't post much anymore. We still provide free tech support everyday on the phones to people who have never bought from us.
Chris,
Please don't punish the many for the deeds of a few- we get enough of that from government
Thanks for the info.
He who is in me is greater than he who is in the world.
Kenova wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 1:54 pm
Thanks for the info Chris.
The heads and cam are surprisingly modest. I guess it's another case of "less is more".
Ken
I heard some one somewhere quote the “Stroker McGurk” “If some is good, more must be better, then too much must be just right.”
This thread and it's posts are "Drifting AND Digressing" as a lot of them usually do!
The OP if you take the time to re-read his post question #1 is asking for low rpm, high low rpm torque engine in a SBC somewhere in the range of a 383 to 400 cubic inches.
We know that SBC 383-408 cu. inch can be built to make 500HP and 500lb/ft. of torque. The issue here is to do that in normal street and highway driving conditions with pump gas and at lower rpms. So posting about engines and dynos sheets start at 3000 rpms and go to 6500-7000 rpms is ridiculous and clearly off the mark!
I am assuming a bit but from what OP seems to be asking for is a SBC, 383-400 or so cubic inches that has peak torque of as close to 500 as possible and that peak is somewhere between 3200-4200rpms and peak power also close to 500 that hits that number around 4500-5000rpms and goes in a towing truck daily driver use use. This truck most likely will get driven dailey and used for towing where it will probably spend 90% of its hours between 2500-3000rpms.
He is not racing or drag stripping so let's get back to a workable range here on the thread.
Talking about what some guy is doing with a 408SBC without power and torque ranges and numbers is not relative or helpful. I guaranty you that 408 you mentioned did not make 500 lb/ft. torque or 500HP in these ranges this truck will be driving and working in!
Sorry, but I get frustrated listening to this drifting banter and bullshit all the time where these posts get drug to! Read the original question in the OP first post and then open your flappers with relative input and ideas and reasonable suggestions!
Newold1 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:13 pm
This thread and it's posts are "Drifting AND Digressing" as a lot of them usually do!
The OP if you take the time to re-read his post question #1 is asking for low rpm, high low rpm torque engine in a SBC somewhere in the range of a 383 to 400 cubic inches.
We know that SBC 383-408 cu. inch can be built to make 500HP and 500lb/ft. of torque. The issue here is to do that in normal street and highway driving conditions with pump gas and at lower rpms. So posting about engines and dynos sheets start at 3000 rpms and go to 6500-7000 rpms is ridiculous and clearly off the mark!
I am assuming a bit but from what OP seems to be asking for is a SBC, 383-400 or so cubic inches that has peak torque of as close to 500 as possible and that peak is somewhere between 3200-4200rpms and peak power also close to 500 that hits that number around 4500-5000rpms and goes in a towing truck daily driver use use. This truck most likely will get driven dailey and used for towing where it will probably spend 90% of its hours between 2500-3000rpms.
He is not racing or drag stripping so let's get back to a workable range here on the thread.
Talking about what some guy is doing with a 408SBC without power and torque ranges and numbers is not relative or helpful. I guaranty you that 408 you mentioned did not make 500 lb/ft. torque or 500HP in these ranges this truck will be driving and working in!
Sorry, but I get frustrated listening to this drifting banter and bullshit all the time where these posts get drug to! Read the original question in the OP first post and then open your flappers with relative input and ideas and reasonable suggestions!
? see page 2, 3 and 5 at least. Where is the 7000 rpm build?
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
I am the OP... But not from Mayberry. I have put together a few engines in my day, drag raced a few, and raced circle track as well. Track Champion one year. So I'm not green. Some good info here. But, the truck is A SBC. No big block, no FAI, no Extruded TPI, no computer control, no other flavor engine. Compression... As low as I can get it to make the power I need. I think I can do it with 9 to 1 or less. Been studying a lot on compression and power. 500ft/lbs at 3500rpms. I may not get that but I'm going to get close. 450ftlbs in this range is pretty common. I just thought someone has already done this and could give me some details on the build. I really didn't want to change cams three times and experiment with cam timing. Just looking for a short cut. Is that bad? Looking at the GM Crate 383. Has very small cam and probably stock-ish iron vortec heads. Replacing the cam with say ... 210 106lsa and .475 4 degrees advance and a better intake and good crisp carb may get me at least 30ft/lbs. That gets me close to 480ft/lbs. Is this feasible? I cant afford the crate engine at $4000, but I have almost all the parts to duplicate it.
Not exactly a 383/400 cid, but did that with a 434cid SBC over a decade ago for the 2006 Engine Masters Challenge. Standard deck carbureted SBC - 507 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm. Not the way I'd do it these days. The AFR 215 RR heads back then were a pain in the ass. Shaft rockers were not allowed at the time. A well thought out proven design with carefully selected parts could achieve a similar result with a lower displacement. Here's the Popular Hot Rodding Article from Sept. 2007 detailing the original build.
Larry
Traco EMC 434 SBC003.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Larry Salisbury wrote: ↑Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:42 am
Not exactly a 383/400 cid, but did that with a 434cid SBC over a decade ago for the 2006 Engine Masters Challenge. Standard deck carbureted SBC - 507 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm. Not the way I'd do it these days. The AFR 215 RR heads back then were a pain in the ass. Shaft rockers were not allowed at the time. A well thought out proven design with carefully selected parts could achieve a similar result with a lower displacement. Here's the Popular Hot Rodding Article from Sept. 2007 detailing the original build.
Like I said earlier.. study any engine platform similar to yours in the EMC and you can see big torque numbers at lower rpm's. But.. look VERY closely at the tricks and trends used to get there. Certainly see no 9:1 motors using tiny Vortec heads and .475 lift cams either. The first 95% is easy.. that last 5% will be much harder and far more expensive than most will ever realize. Shorten the cam up all you want and you'll just end up killing off the cylinder filling aspects of the motor. That .475 lift will snuff power out just like a potato in the tailpipe. Think slightly bigger well prepared head and mucho grande lift.
People still think compression is the enemy even with far superior combustion space designs used today. Not the case at all if other supporting anti-detonation features have been added into the mix. And also why we have multi-gear transmissions and choices in axle ratios. If every thing works together as a team compression is your friend.
Nowadays, motorhome, towtruck, tugboat, don't care what it is.. I'd never even consider building a 9:1 motor unless it was going to be squeezed.
Here is another 383 I done a couple years back with dart 165 iron heads that meets the op's requirements so 500 ft lbs in a low rpm torque motor is perfectly doable although this had a mild lopey idle
Most on this board seem like this just cant happen maybe someone can put this in your dyno software or whatever and share the results
501 ft lbs 420 HP
383 scat rotating assembly -12.5 dish pistons
9.5 compression 202 cranking compression 87 octane
peak power @ 4700 RPM
vacuum at idle 15.5"-16"
cam
266/266
210 @.050
54 over lap 106 LSA
.533/.533 lift
1.6 rockers
China import air gap intake
650 vacuum sec Holley HEI
B Original wrote: ↑Sat Apr 21, 2018 7:05 pm
Here is another 383 I done a couple years back with dart 165 iron heads that meets the op's requirements so 500 ft lbs in a low rpm torque motor is perfectly doable although this had a mild lopey idle
Most on this board seem like this just cant happen maybe someone can put this in your dyno software or whatever and share the results
501 ft lbs 420 HP
383 scat rotating assembly -12.5 dish pistons
9.5 compression 202 cranking compression 87 octane
peak power @ 4700 RPM
vacuum at idle 15.5"-16"
cam
266/266
210 @.050
54 over lap 106 LSA
.533/.533 lift
1.6 rockers
China import air gap intake
650 vacuum sec Holley HEI
Edit; Hydraulic roller 880 casting late block
I like how similar this mill is to my 90's 383. Mine also had 200psi + cranking pressure, ran on 87 octane and had 20" vacuum at idle. If you ran those Dart 165 stock with 1.94"/1.5" they flow about 220cfm on the intake. Thanks, Charlie
Servedio Cylinder Head Development
631-816-4911
9:00am - 9:00pm EST
Ok. Most guys here build for horsepower...wherever the torque ends up so be it. I'm building kind of the opposite. Thinking my horsepower will be in the mid 300s. gnicholson, carnut1, and B original are on the right track for my build. Compression is not your friend on a low rpm high torque build, especially with the crap gas available. Lower compression and correct timing events will yield big torque numbers in low rpms. As compression increases, the power will increase in a higher rpm band. The engine masters challenge is not a good example of what I am trying to accomplish. I guess there is not to many people trying to make this type of engine.
