427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Locked
pastry_chef
Member
Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by pastry_chef » Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm

Everyone can subscribe or not, as they choose.
If any "other" works an inferior method, he loses the contest right?
Shake his hand and say "good luck" with a smile.
There will always be those who are jealous, if only for the attention the world grants another. Worthy or not.
Last edited by pastry_chef on Thu May 10, 2018 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mike R

digger
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 6:39 am

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by digger » Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm

For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Thu May 10, 2018 10:41 pm

novadude wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:11 pm
DrillDawg wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:04 pm
Real engine builders pick opening and closing points and the overlap/lsa/icl/ect fall where they may, lol.
I'm not a "real engine builder" so I am glad David dumbs it down for us stupid hobbyest types that don't have access to all the right empirical data to choose open and close points. His 128 method seems to work pretty well. I don't think that the engine builders winning NASCAR cup races and NHRA pro stock events are his intended audience.
Yes reading DV's stuff kept away from the bigger is better mentality that most beginners fall into, it taught me a lot about sizing heads, cam and compression for a given combo which gave me the info to build on that and build highly functioning engines with minimal dollars.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Thu May 10, 2018 10:45 pm

digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
I think the point is, that because of the cam testing he has done he has been able to use that data to save others from having to do multiple cam tests or at least go to the dyno with the cam nearest what is needed so you can find the next 6 ft lbs with very few cam changes.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!

groberts101
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 3:08 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by groberts101 » Thu May 10, 2018 10:46 pm

digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
Exactly! Some 225@.050 lobes move a lifter upwards of 150 degrees @.200 while shelf grinds moving heavy ass valvetrain might barely move it 120 degrees. BIG DIFFERENCE and too much overlap created by super tight centers will not be optimum for some combos.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Thu May 10, 2018 10:48 pm

groberts101 wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:46 pm
digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
Exactly! Some 225@.050 lobes move a lifter upwards of 150 degrees @.200 while shelf grinds moving heavy ass valvetrain might barely move it 120 degrees. BIG DIFFERENCE and too much overlap created by super tight centers will not be optimum for some combos.
Tight centers will return minimal overlap if combined with the correct duration.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!

groberts101
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 3:08 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by groberts101 » Thu May 10, 2018 10:48 pm

GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:45 pm
digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
I think the point is, that because of the cam testing he has done he has been able to use that data to save others from having to do multiple cam tests or at least go to the dyno with the cam nearest what is needed so you can find the next 6 ft lbs with very few cam changes.
Sure.. and I applaud him for that but there is never enough qualifying info attached to it for making complete sense of it all if you haven't attended his seminars. I think he needs to quit trying to keep the cat from completely getting out of the bag. Just suffocating the poor thing at this point.
Last edited by groberts101 on Thu May 10, 2018 10:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

swampbuggy
Expert
Expert
Posts: 802
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Location: central Florida

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by swampbuggy » Thu May 10, 2018 10:49 pm

Questions for the Scotthatch reply on Thur. May 10th @ 2:16 PM.
You wrote: using the H.P. peak you can calculate the used CFM of the engine (or this is me saying) i guess you could say "the CFM the engine used.
Two questions:
1. The CFM used, i assume is for (1) cylinder or intake port ??
2. Will this formula work on (any) 2 valve V-8 engine ?? Thanks Mark H. :-k

groberts101
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 3:08 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by groberts101 » Thu May 10, 2018 10:50 pm

GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:48 pm
groberts101 wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:46 pm
digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
Exactly! Some 225@.050 lobes move a lifter upwards of 150 degrees @.200 while shelf grinds moving heavy ass valvetrain might barely move it 120 degrees. BIG DIFFERENCE and too much overlap created by super tight centers will not be optimum for some combos.
Tight centers will return minimal overlap if combined with the correct duration.
Please explain how that's possible without killing the TIME needed to keep power where it's supposed to be aimed. Everything is a compromise Gary. Add too much here and you will need to take something away over there.

B Original
Member
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:51 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by B Original » Thu May 10, 2018 10:55 pm

zums wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:31 pm
Haven't signed in in a while, apparently aint missing much, ST should start another bar called FAG Talk, because this is all a waste of time, gary, gvx bunoriginal, dv and all the other assholes that suck each others diks that sit on their pc all day and get fat spewing bullshit should open their own forum called cool aid talk, you fucks cant handle that magazine articles and their authors arent the gods you think they are, much more quite shops and people on here making way more power with less chest beating and way more efficient engines- cya
Tom
Well I sit on my ass all day today I got up and took a break today a time or two . I went out and helped one of my texts cut the exhaust bolt out of a Ford Explorer so he could finish pulling the transmission out

After sitting for awhile I got up for another break and have two Tech disassemble and reassemble and AC and heater box I have a 2011 Dodge Caravan so he can put the dash back together

Then after this next break I went out tore down a 46re and got a parts list put the case in the jet spray cabinet let it clean

went to sit down on my ass but this time I put a parts order in

I got up for another break and I had 2 350 blocks just back from the Machine Shop so I prepped the cylinder walls and took them out back got the pressure washer, the brushes out, thoroughly clean the blocks then blow them dry before the block started flash rust and oiled cylinders down rolled both back inside done the cam bearings in the frost plugs my break was almost over but I still found time to lay out and Stage all the parts for the first short block on the bench where I set up to build this engine

man it's so tough getting ready to sit on my ass and work all day I so look forward to my next break time

Sit on my eyes for a while then I took another break went out and cleaned up the mess I made three different work areas

Then I got up and I had to take another break dog-gone-it had a 727 a Tech just pulled it out and we throw it on the bench and ripped it apart for parts list they'll have to order in the morning Call Transtar close by now and while I was there at the bench I went ahead and cleaned up the 46re stuff and built the drums and Pump so I can get a head start on that project tomorrow

So yes I'll sit on my ass all day posting on speed talk although I took a few breaks to make sure had enough cash flow coming in to make payroll on Friday

So Zuma what you do today while you wasn't having God Envy writing your post

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Thu May 10, 2018 11:01 pm

groberts101 wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:48 pm
GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:45 pm
digger wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:36 pm
For someone who has done thousands of cam tests this thread is lacking evidence that multiple cams were compared and that the one chosen and presented in the dyno is infact close to the optimum from the perspective of a specific stated goal.

This is what I would expect if you were trying to prove a cam is optimum.

Most of the previous tests shown regarding 128 in the previous threads compared cams with different lobes not simply different Lsa. You can make more area under the curve with same opening and closing points using different lobe shapes and lift.
I think the point is, that because of the cam testing he has done he has been able to use that data to save others from having to do multiple cam tests or at least go to the dyno with the cam nearest what is needed so you can find the next 6 ft lbs with very few cam changes.
Sure.. and I applaud him for that but there is never enough qualifying info attached to it for making complete sense of it all if you haven't attended his seminars. I think he needs to quit trying to keep the cat from completely getting out of the bag.
That is true if you are hoping to find the silver bullet by only reading a paragraph or 2 but for those of us who have taken the time to read what he has writen over the years it is a little different.
If you wanted to become anything in a professional field would you be willing to take the time to study the subject and be willing to pay tuition to go to college to get the degree or would you expect to get it all in one thread?

Go through his 128 threads, you will have to go through pages to find the info he posts in between all the bs of others.
http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45639
http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46038
Flow Balls for chamber work.
http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46308
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Thu May 10, 2018 11:05 pm

groberts101 wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:50 pm
GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:48 pm
groberts101 wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:46 pm


Exactly! Some 225@.050 lobes move a lifter upwards of 150 degrees @.200 while shelf grinds moving heavy ass valvetrain might barely move it 120 degrees. BIG DIFFERENCE and too much overlap created by super tight centers will not be optimum for some combos.
Tight centers will return minimal overlap if combined with the correct duration.
Please explain how that's possible without killing the TIME needed to keep power where it's supposed to be aimed. Everything is a compromise Gary. Add too much here and you will need to take something away over there.
Look at Creasons winning EMC engine thread, 105 LSA but function extremely well from 2500 to 7000.
http://www.speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopi ... =1&t=51911
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!

Scotthatch
Pro
Pro
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:12 pm
Location: 7000 ft up

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Scotthatch » Thu May 10, 2018 11:08 pm

swampbuggy wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 10:49 pm
Questions for the Scotthatch reply on Thur. May 10th @ 2:16 PM.
You wrote: using the H.P. peak you can calculate the used CFM of the engine (or this is me saying) i guess you could say "the CFM the engine used.
Two questions:
1. The CFM used, i assume is for (1) cylinder or intake port ??
2. Will this formula work on (any) 2 valve V-8 engine ?? Thanks Mark H. :-k


Yes it will ... was not sure anyone wanted to talk Tech

If you get a way higher cfm number on torque then HP look for a restriction in carb size or air cleaner ...

David's engine is just a bit carb undersized ....

B Original
Member
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:51 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by B Original » Thu May 10, 2018 11:13 pm

[*]Is it true that David dyno'd over 12,000 cams over a several year period When he work for on the big cam companies maybe Harold at Ultradyne? I might be wrong about the company but I understand he took the data from all these Dyno sessions and develop trends that he used to come up with some of the formulas he used to come up with his 128 rule of thumb and the variations for the different kinds of engines? Maybe David or somebody that's known him a lot longer than I have will step in here and correct me or I might be wrong. Between his engineering background and his years building and researching different kinds of racing engines I think gives him a pretty strong background to speak about cam applications.

fastblackracing
Member
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:13 am

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by fastblackracing » Thu May 10, 2018 11:15 pm

What a shame it is when we have a chance to learn something and likely something good but the haters are out in full on mob mentality to bash a man who has likely done more than all of them put together.

Gary C I echo your comment about someone that is supposed to be the smartest one here....99% of what
I have seen that poster share is 1 or 2 line smart, pointed comments that have Zero knowledge enhancing
content.

Their is 1 other hi profile poster here that I have no doubt is correct in his thought process that the 128 cam rule is insanely basic and can be improved on but I ask what does he have to offer that will help me and many others to do a better job building my next engine?

What good is it guys if you have all of this knowledge and experience but you cannot drop it down say
50 IQ points for a guy like me to benefit from it? In the end you will take it with you because of failure
to pass it on in a meaningful way.....not much good to take it to your grave unless you really do not want
to share and help fellow enthusiasts out...which I suspect is the case with 1, the other struggles with getting things to a more simplified nature.

What David Vizard has been able to do is put the leg work in, build the engines, gather the data and make sense of it in a way that those of us with less than 130 IQ can understand it and learn from it. He has been able to share a lot of information with a lot of gearheads.

People are so fast to bash the 128 deal but when used as intended it works.....by now we should all know that all of the cam events can be manipulated to change an engines character.....LSA is only going to vary so much....104-120 will cover 99%, break it down further to SBC 104-114, start breaking it down further with bores/strokes/head flow/valve size and real quick you can see that the LSA will fall into a small window.

When picking cam events sure you can add 6 degrees and widen the LSA 1 to reduce OL or whatever so
that you can say you picked the events and let the lsa fall where it may but on a few different types
of engines David has done the work and collected and analyzed the data to a point where using
the 128 rule you can likely get 95% of all their is to get given your limited budget......

I think it is brilliant what Vizard has come up with for those few limited engine families and If I ever get the chance I will put my hand in his and shake it while I tell him job well done......

I have many of his publications and have learned a great deal from them,and will continue to look forward to his future publications........ if the nay sayers here have info or links to info that I could learn from then I would ask you share that with me so I can further educate myself.

The last time I spoke up against a member here I received a time out, I hope that is not the case again.

Now please can we get back to the subject that the OP posted about which is a BAMF 427 inch power house?
Thanks again DV.....The majority of us are interested in what you have to share.
Last edited by fastblackracing on Thu May 10, 2018 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked