EMC 2013 Oakley and Freelander

blown86hallet wrote:Mod motor. 100mm bore center.

with an 95mm bore, and stock stroke 105mm, that is about 355 cubes.  With about 6mm left of bridge between the bores.
max i would give the engine is 96mm with  SPRAY bore, that leaves 4mm left of the bridge. (thats cutting it close)

this thing must have one hell of a stroke.!

i figure this is his engine.

100 mm bore centers, 96mm bores (sprayed) , 113.473 stroke with honda rod journals (to clear pan rails) 401 cubes/8 50.125 .
Im not a MOD motor expert, anyone have any other ideas???

Its about time people see what the MOD motor can do!

Can you say a 4.700" stroke in Kaase's "Winning" MOD motor...?  IT IS THAT LONG.
Those exhaust headers are outrageously cool with 16 primary tubes.

windsor wrote:Thanks Lem.  I figured that much when I looked at it a little longer that they'll actually have to sell that engine.


Randy, sorry that you had issues there.  Would've liked to have seen your score.  What were you getting in testing?

That engine had never run in that configuration; That stock crank/stock rod 429 short block was 10.5/1 compression ratio and was used at the 2008 contest with different heads.
I "broke-in" the flat hydraulic lifter camshaft RIGHT THERE for 5 minutes and after that completed 1 full dyno run which was VERY lean, (15/1 in some places and 14/1 in most). That run scored a dismal 2534 but, you need to complete at least 3 runs to get an average for a score to count.
When changing jets to make it richer, Mike Phillips noticed a major internal water leak had developed and I was done till next year.

Lem Evans wrote:

windsor wrote:Nice job fellas!

Just wondering why y'all went with such a large cubic inch?

 
 
 
I am not David but I think this question deserves an answer. This is my opinion:
 
1] I suspect it was driven by the fact that D. Freelander already owned some of the componets to make the 572" engine.
 
2] I suspect that Dave is way to smart to build a single purpose engine just to score some more points. i.e. a 479" P51 deal that would not fit any of his future needs & not be very saleable to others.

Both are true.

Mark Miller wrote:

dfree383 wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:

windsor wrote:Nice job fellas!

Just wondering why y'all went with such a large cubic inch?

 
 
 
I am not David but I think this question deserves an answer. This is my opinion:
 
1] I suspect it was driven by the fact that D. Freelander already owned some of the componets to make the 572" engine.
 
2] I suspect that Dave is way to smart to build a single purpose engine just to score some more points. i.e. a 479" P51 deal that would not fit any of his future needs & not be very saleable to others.

Both are true.

Congrats on the top horsepower and torque numbers.It's funny listening to the GM guys on Yellowbullet complaining about the Mod Motor winning.   

Later Mark.

The mod stuff is winning the war of output per CID..... The LS and other stuff still kicks the Mod motors ass in the displacement and packaging department.

dave d wrote:Hey Freelander your only about 20miles from my home ,how long you going to be in lima

Damn man sorry I missed ya.

windsor wrote:Wow, and they say hydraulic rollers won't work.  That's amazing power!

Can you share some cam specs?

Nobody that I know about said they CAN'T or WON'T work.  Simply that it will require a whole lot more to make them work half way decent.
When using RACE hydraulic roller lifters, (900.00+ dollars), with a camshaft giving more than .800" valve lift, (400+ dollars), along with valve springs with about 300 pounds pressure on the seat accepting that amount of lift, (450+ dollars), and the rest of the valve train to match, they can provide a lot of horsepower with limited durability.

This is definitely NOT your average everyday hydraulic roller set-up; don't try to make it seem like it is even close to being near the same.

The regular stuff will work fine as long as you have realistic rpm expectations from it. You need more than about 6500-6800 it starts to get expensive.