Re: More engine porn

bbf-falcon February 13th 2011, 10:40 am

Nice job guy's. A couple questions, Is that a New style intake or old? and how much difference would there be in HP/Torque,between new and old?

And also,did'nt George Keown's engine also have a flat spot in that rpm range also. I think he has the older TFS if my memory is correct.

Lem Evans February 13th 2011, 10:45 am

bbf-falcon wrote:Nice job guy's. A couple questions, Is that a New style intake or old? and how much difference would there be in HP/Torque,between new and old?

And also,did'nt George Keown's engine also have a flat spot in that rpm range also. I think he has the older TFS if my memory is correct.

New style manifold.
George's , Phillip's and this one are fussy in that same spot.

Lem Evans February 13th 2011, 10:54 am

KY JELLY wrote: Very nice Would the manifolds act the same considering you are not using adapter plates on the a - heads ?

What seems to be the limiting factor with the cast c manifold , carb size limitation due to use of one carb , or runner length issues ?

I think it's a little better with the adapter plates installed. When the Keown A460 engine was on gas and big carbs I'm not sure if we ever saw peak, it wanted to run to the moon.

Lem Evans February 13th 2011, 12:09 pm

David Willingham wrote:I hope my deal can make that much power. Lem, what size is this engine?

622"

dfree383 February 14th 2011, 11:01 am

c.evans wrote:Blake,

That deal from 7000 rpm to 7200 rpm has got to be a harmonic due to runner length. We're in a depression or trough in that area. Like halfway in between a second order harmonic and a third order harmonic. Lem and I were talking about it tonight, these engines seem to be pissed off in that area. I'm going to go back to last year and study Krisse's engine because we dynoed it with both the old style (Holmes) and the new style TFS tunnel rams. There will be a couple of more engines being built here in the next few weeks that will have tunnel rams and the 2 X 4 set-up on them. I've got some ideas on changing the runner length, so we might be able to do some experimenting. Also notice that the torque peak was at 6100 rpm again.

Charlie

Its in the Headers Charlie....... Collectors / Dia / Length......

Bad assed Engine !!!

Lem Evans February 14th 2011, 11:19 am

The three engines did not have the same headers.

dfree383 February 14th 2011, 11:33 am

Lem Evans wrote:The three engines did not have the same headers.

I understand that, but the simplest part to modify to get rid of the torque dip (if you want to get rid of it) is the headers. Changing the length, collector type, ect. Each engine is liable to want something a little different.

Its pretty tough / alot of work to tune the intake vs playing with the headers

I'd say Charlie is right about being between frequencies / Waves on the motors.

jsracing February 14th 2011, 10:24 pm

amazing numbers ! wow