2017 Engine Masters ???

Open

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
randy331
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2498
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: N.W. MO.

Re: 2017 Engine Masters ???

Post by randy331 » Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:53 am

moparjohan wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:39 am


I`m thinking more duration same lift :wink:

The simple explanation to why I don´t want more lift is because Ive never seen a #302 head flow over .500" lift

Johan
I understand the theory, but in practice more rocker has helped almost everything I've put it on and hurt the power of none of them, even when the port didn't flow up at that lift.

Our EMC engine with a 1.8 rocker was short of the lift limit. Going to a 1.85 rocker was 50 points. That was about a .018" increase in lift.

I'd bet a 236-240 ish duration on a 106 LSA MH type lobes with enough rocker to get it to .600" would put score on your engine.

But,..I'm not a Mopar guy so I could be wrong. :D

I like your cubic inch choice for this years rules.

Randy

moparjohan
New Member
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:37 am

Re: 2017 Engine Masters ???

Post by moparjohan » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:20 am

randy331 wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:53 am
moparjohan wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:39 am


I`m thinking more duration same lift :wink:

The simple explanation to why I don´t want more lift is because Ive never seen a #302 head flow over .500" lift

Johan
I understand the theory, but in practice more rocker has helped almost everything I've put it on and hurt the power of none of them, even when the port didn't flow up at that lift.

Our EMC engine with a 1.8 rocker was short of the lift limit. Going to a 1.85 rocker was 50 points. That was about a .018" increase in lift.

I'd bet a 236-240 ish duration on a 106 LSA MH type lobes with enough rocker to get it to .600" would put score on your engine.

But,..I'm not a Mopar guy so I could be wrong. :D

I like your cubic inch choice for this years rules.

Randy
You are probably not wrong, Im trying to test something completely new here (for me anyway) :wink:
the problem is that I dont know of any LA rockers with more than 1.6 ratio, so the only way for me to get more lift is true a different lobe
(like the exhaust) but I dont think that would be favorable.
I would love to test a higher rocker ratio though.

Johan

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3349
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: 2017 Engine Masters ???

Post by Walter R. Malik » Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:36 am

moparjohan wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:20 am
randy331 wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:53 am
moparjohan wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:39 am


I`m thinking more duration same lift :wink:

The simple explanation to why I don´t want more lift is because Ive never seen a #302 head flow over .500" lift

Johan
I understand the theory, but in practice more rocker has helped almost everything I've put it on and hurt the power of none of them, even when the port didn't flow up at that lift.

Our EMC engine with a 1.8 rocker was short of the lift limit. Going to a 1.85 rocker was 50 points. That was about a .018" increase in lift.

I'd bet a 236-240 ish duration on a 106 LSA MH type lobes with enough rocker to get it to .600" would put score on your engine.

But,..I'm not a Mopar guy so I could be wrong. :D

I like your cubic inch choice for this years rules.

Randy
You are probably not wrong, Im trying to test something completely new here (for me anyway) :wink:
the problem is that I dont know of any LA rockers with more than 1.6 ratio, so the only way for me to get more lift is true a different lobe
(like the exhaust) but I dont think that would be favorable.
I would love to test a higher rocker ratio though.

Johan
Just for information here ...
I have had Harland Sharp make some 1.66/1 rockers for an "LA" but, they were custom and not in any catalog.
Randy Becker Jr. at Harland Sharp will do whatever he can to get you what you want ... I wanted 1.7/1 but, 1.66/1 was all I could get without back-setting the shaft and Harland Sharp does make shaft mounts and shafts to do just that for using longer valves or to get even more rocker ratio with an "LA".
You can get catalog 1.7/1 rocker arms for a stud MAGNUM head, though. That is what we had on Adney's engine a few years ago.
EQ offers a MAGNUM head with the "LA" intake bolt pattern.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

gmrocket
Expert
Expert
Posts: 737
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:40 pm
Location: Grimsby Ontario

Re: 2017 Engine Masters ???

Post by gmrocket » Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:05 am

Rick360 wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:16 am
TheSwed wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:23 am
Hi Marcus here. I would just like to say that we had an EPIC!! time at engine masters. And especially thanks to team Creason. What a great bunch of pepole, I hope didn`t kill Ricks mod for bbq forever after my tour in maybe not the best area of Lima :wink:
And all you others
Adney Brown,Gene Adams/Smithberg, Jon Kaase, and all the others that I certainly forgotten you guys rock.
I think Johan will come on here and say the same.
This has been a dream come true.

Thanks from Marcus Team LRE.
That was Randy, not me, that you took on the scenic bbq tour of Lima. lol

We had a great time there at EMC and visiting with the LRE team. Lot's of great people and interesting engines. Jon Kaase stands out as an incredibly smart man yet so humble. Nice induction system from Nick Smithberg. My hats off to Adger and RJ for a great job too.

Thanks to all,
Rick
well done you guys! hope we dont have to wait months for all the details&pics

Post Reply