Update-Hy-Gard made the converter too tight?

That intake lobe is bigger than most of us guys exhaust lobe................I'm sure Lem will comment .

That was my comment

Lem Evans wrote:That was my comment

I quote from only from the best.......see my sig below................

Lem Evans wrote:So, what was the 'old' cam?

I will find the cam card tomorrow...However, I would like to try and learn from this...but not get too off topic.
Why would the larger cam make 37 more HP and lose 20 on the torque and affect the converter that much?
I'm going to change out the fluid just to see...one thing at a time until it is right again.

If the conv. is as tight as it seems.....at that lower rpm the conv. is only seeing the loss of tq and not seeing the gain in hp untill it gets down the track a little way.

Lem Evans wrote:If the conv. is as tight as it seems.....at that lower rpm the conv. is only seeing the loss of tq and not seeing the gain in hp untill it gets down the track a little way.

I agree, still a lot of cam for A429 heads...

Nevs wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:If the conv. is as tight as it seems.....at that lower rpm the conv. is only seeing the loss of tq and not seeing the gain in hp untill it gets down the track a little way.

I agree, still a lot of cam for A429 heads...

Yes sir and it's more duration on the intake lobe than Oakley's 632" A460 headed Top Dragster engine has.

i'd bet you put a 4.86 gear in it and she'd roll! your not get'n in the rpm you need cuz the converter is tight and the tq be'n down with new cam.unless you plan to drop the gear and /or change the converter it'll probly not get where you want to be.converter's just too tight for what you got,IMO.that said,i think you'll be turnen more rpm with your new cam to get what you want however you go about it.looser converter=more rpm and may not mph.lower gear=more rpm more mph.i'v done my share of converter testing and it's just hard as hell to get enough stall for good 60' and then tight enough to mph.that big cam will need a high stall to 60' and will put you turnen more rpm than you'll like in the end.all this is JMO.good luck

Lem Evans wrote:

Nevs wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:If the conv. is as tight as it seems.....at that lower rpm the conv. is only seeing the loss of tq and not seeing the gain in hp untill it gets down the track a little way.

I agree, still a lot of cam for A429 heads...

Yes sir and it's more duration on the intake lobe than Oakley's 632" A460 headed Top Dragster engine has.

6500rpm shift point probably isn't helping with that cam either....

Good point.......6,900-7,000 would make it happier i.m.o.

You guys are the best....I am coming to the realization that I might have found where "Too Far" exists...
Still gotta' change the fluid....I have to know...
If you had three options...what would it be?

#1. Send the converter back and have it loosened up.
#2. Change back to the smaller cam that is tried and true.
#3 Swap to a shorter gear.
Leaning toward #2....

Thing is if the torque is low the stall speed will be too.

Honestly I'd swap the cam, see where the stall is and go from there.......cant see it bringing the stall up 1200rpm, still may need to send the converter back as I feel its part of the problem................but you'll know where you stand.

Treeyasoon wrote:You guys are the best....I am coming to the realization that I might have found where "Too Far" exists...
Still gotta' change the fluid....I have to know...
If you had three options...what would it be?

#1. Send the converter back and have it loosened up.
#2. Change back to the smaller cam that is tried and true.
#3 Swap to a shorter gear.
Leaning toward #2....

to run some 1/4 mile i'd do #2 first and depends on how that went i'd probly do #1 also.the shorter gear would do a lot for it how it is now,IMO,but you will be in the higher rpm to get it done.

When you find the card on the 'small' cam let us know the spec's.......'big' is too big and the 'small' may be too small. When 'we' speak of big/small 'we' are mostly addressing the duration at .050" lift.

Lem Evans wrote:When you find the card on the 'small' cam let us know the spec's.......'big' is too big and the 'small' may be too small. When 'we' speak of big/small 'we' are mostly addressing the duration at .050" lift.

x2,i'd say you could get a better "happy medium"kinda cam.a big #@.050 will also kill some compression too.

cool40 wrote:IMO,but you will be in the higher rpm to get it done.

And that is not necessary for bracket racing....The very reason I built a bigger mill in the first place.... I really appreciate
everyones input.
Jeff

If your new engine made more HP and less toque, it's making peak torque at a good bit higher rpm. Now your engine doesn't have 20 ft pound less torque at the same rpm, it going to be a good bit lower where your old cam made peak torque.

The engine doesn't have enough torque at the old peak to get the converter to that point. Good rule of thumb is 3-400 rpm stall above peak torque. then shift at 1000 rpm above that with a glide, probably 800 with a three speed.

So 5400 peak torque rpm + 400 = 5800 stall + 1000 = 6800 shift point if you try to keep that cam.

When you post the old dyno sheet and the old cam card, I think it will be obvious what the problem is.

But right now if the converter was at 5800-6000 it would run. I ran my 557 15:1 with 4:10 gears and a 28 inch tire and went through the 1/4 at 7100 1/8 was 6700 that's with a 5400 converter and my torque was 760 ft lb's at 4800 rpm.

Another thing is these conventional headed BBF's with the victor intakes seem to peak at 6500-6700 rpm regardless of the cam size.

My opinion is your cam is to big and bleeding off cylinder pressure to run it in the rpm range your running it at.

My cam was 278-286 on a 110 but it was a dove size cross section head (TFS Streets) air speed through the port was good for cylinder filling at lower rpms (4800) your A-429's are SCJ size air is slower plus cam is bigger @ .050 so torque down low has to be less.

another note............ I shifted my deal at 7100 that's where it ran the fastest.

Blake, That cam has 68* of overlap even with the 114* lsa.

Lem Evans wrote:Blake, That cam has 68* of overlap even with the 114* lsa.

Yes I checked it............ Just didn't post it. I would put him around a 62-63 degree. 67 is a bunch.
Make it want to run up top, but the victor won't let it, so all that happens is you narrow the power curve from the bottom up. Now it feels like a 2 stroke.............


Maybe a 280-294 on a 112 = 63* the A's have a weak exhaust port compared to the TFS Streets, put 14 degrees of split in it.

I might back up when I see his original dyno and cam sheet. (but I doubt it)

IDT-572 wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:Blake, That cam has 68* of overlap even with the 114* lsa.

Yes I checked it............ Just didn't post it. I would put him around a 62-63 degree. 67 is a bunch.
Make it want to run up top, but the victor won't let it, so all that happens is you narrow the power curve from the bottom up. Now it feels like a 2 stroke.............


Maybe a 280-294 on a 112 = 63* the A's have a weak exhaust port compared to the TFS Streets, put 14 degrees of split in it.

I might back up when I see his original dyno and cam sheet. (but I doubt it)

That makes sense...because once it comes off of the converter, it pulls like a mo-fo...I mean really lays ya' to the seat.
I just hope I can find where I stuck the old cam card and dyno sheet.

Let me throw something else into the mix...I learned today that there is a high viscosity and low viscosity tractor fluid. The stuff I used is the O'Reilly Brand of Premium Tractor Fluid...the stuff had about the same consistancy as maple syrup.
Jeff

Hy-Guard is a specific Brand Fluid by / For John Deere Tractors........ not the stuff you just said you used.... Houston, we have a subsitute !!!

change the fluid and see what it does to the stall, still doubt that alone will fix it.

dfree383 wrote:Hy-Guard is a specific Brand Fluid by / For John Deere Tractors........ not the stuff you just said you used.... Houston, we have a subsitute !!!

You are right...I should have been more specific on the actual brand I used...even though it meets the J20 spec, it may still be thicker.
I called them "Channel-Locks" when I should have called them "Tongue and Groove Pliers"....so to speak...lol.
I'll find out this weekend and then go from there.

But like Fabio's said, its probably still not the root of the problem.