PDA

View Full Version : NEW lifters for race applications



glhs727
02-01-2008, 10:48 AM
we are currently testing a new lifter. These are almost identical to the stock lifter but are approx. 1mm longer so if you are using a regrind that requires shims, this will go in without having to use a shim. it has a large bleed hole on the top, and can withstand a lot more abuse and rpm than our other lifters. We have tried them on our drag car, w/o issue, but before we release them for sale, I'd like to try them in a couple of road race applications. If you know anyone running one of our regrinds and they have a motor that easily spins past 7K, we would like to talk to them.
Later,
Cindy

ShelGame
02-01-2008, 11:50 AM
Will they work with a stock cam (ie, NOT reground)?

BLUEBALL
02-01-2008, 12:45 PM
:wave1:Once head gasket changed and a day at the track,the cam is goin in!:nod:(hint,hint)

mw6886
02-01-2008, 01:12 PM
I can spin my 2.2 with a F4 cam easily to 7500....

Directconnection
02-01-2008, 01:57 PM
Cool. Do they work with the stock cams? I am assuming no. If not, will you be releasing these for stock cam applications as well?

John B
02-01-2008, 02:53 PM
So, are these like long PT lifters?

turbovanmanČ
02-01-2008, 04:21 PM
Cool. Do they work with the stock cams? I am assuming no. If not, will you be releasing these for stock cam applications as well?

Why wouldn't they? it would mean just more preload. 1mm is not much. :nod:

glhs727
02-01-2008, 04:42 PM
first off they are 91 thousand longer than stock. I thought the PT was shorter than stock not longer, but since I do not have a PT one here, I cannot tell you how much they are different from the PT. My understanding was that the PT required several shims. Could you use these with a stock cam? maybe but I don't see why. I mean why have a bad --- lifter and just use a stock cam when there are so many good profile cams available that make more power.
Kevyn, hurry down......we are waiting for ya!!.........
still loookign for a road racer. I want to test these at a tarck where someone is running high rpms for a sustained period. I know they will work 1/4 mile at a time already.
later,
Cindy

turbovanmanČ
02-01-2008, 06:38 PM
first off they are 91 thousand longer than stock. I thought the PT was shorter than stock not longer, but since I do not have a PT one here, I cannot tell you how much they are different from the PT. My understanding was that the PT required several shims. Could you use these with a stock cam? maybe but I don't see why. I mean why have a bad --- lifter and just use a stock cam when there are so many good profile cams available that make more power.
Kevyn, hurry down......we are waiting for ya!!.........
still loookign for a road racer. I want to test these at a tarck where someone is running high rpms for a sustained period. I know they will work 1/4 mile at a time already.
later,
Cindy

Ahhhh, that makes sense, ;), I think people got confused with the PT thing.

Yes, the PT's are shorter than stock, I have the spec somewhere but if memory serves, there around .064"

Clay
02-01-2008, 07:18 PM
cindy - would these work in a street/strip car?

John B
02-02-2008, 04:49 AM
Ahhhh, that makes sense, ;), I think people got confused with the PT thing.

Yes, the PT's are shorter than stock, I have the spec somewhere but if memory serves, there around .064" The two washers that Rob sent me for use with the PT lifters were each .061" thick for a total of .122" shim. Does anyone know the factory preload on the stock lifter/follower?

John B
02-02-2008, 04:56 AM
first off they are 91 thousand longer than stock. Cindy I don't want to be argumentative, but 1mm is .0394":nod:

turbovanmanČ
02-02-2008, 05:02 AM
The two washers that Rob sent me for use with the PT lifters were each .061" thick for a total of .122" shim.

Ok, that sounds right, its in my faq but too lazy to look, :lol:

BadAssPerformance
02-02-2008, 09:47 AM
...We have tried them on our drag car, w/o issue, but before we release them for sale, I'd like to try them in a couple of road race applications. If you know anyone running one of our regrinds and they have a motor that easily spins past 7K, we would like to talk to them.
Later,
Cindy

Good call on testing in a road racer, stock lifters live past 7k fine in a street/strip car :thumb:

So FWDP has a drag car now? Since when? Pics?

JamesL
02-08-2008, 04:22 PM
Helloooooo.......

As they are still in test, I'm not sure they have been priced. Give her a call if you need a better answer then that.

JamesL
02-08-2008, 04:35 PM
Good call on testing in a road racer, stock lifters live past 7k fine in a street/strip car :thumb:

So FWDP has a drag car now? Since when? Pics?

I've had the car for a while now. We don't promote it very much and I prefer to take cars to events that I can road and drag race. I've actually never taken any pictures of it and it needs paint. I do have some in car video of a pass where I blew the head gasket. The car started as Gary McKissic's (SP?) "Sleeper". When we received it, it was supposed to do 11's right off the trailer. Instead, I had to gut it and start over. It was a complete POS! hacked wiring, leaky injectors, blown turbo.......total crap. Since then, I've done a lot of work to it and ran 7.0 in the 1/8th while trying to work the tune. I need to beef up the trans a bit, I'd like a tran's brake for it and I want to put my header equal length header on it. It takes time and money though.

John B
02-08-2008, 06:04 PM
Man! No wonder he gave up on the long rod project!

BadAssPerformance
02-10-2008, 03:02 PM
I've had the car for a while now. We don't promote it very much and I prefer to take cars to events that I can road and drag race. I've actually never taken any pictures of it and it needs paint. I do have some in car video of a pass where I blew the head gasket. The car started as Gary McKissic's (SP?) "Sleeper". When we received it, it was supposed to do 11's right off the trailer. Instead, I had to gut it and start over. It was a complete POS! hacked wiring, leaky injectors, blown turbo.......total crap. Since then, I've done a lot of work to it and ran 7.0 in the 1/8th while trying to work the tune. I need to beef up the trans a bit, I'd like a tran's brake for it and I want to put my header equal length header on it. It takes time and money though.

I remember that car from ~15 years ago... would have been nice to see Garry finish it the way he wanted to.

So thats now the official FWD-P drag / product test car? You should show off what it's got to help promote FWD-P and your products :thumb:

BTW, sorry to hijack...

JamesL
02-11-2008, 12:49 PM
Thats fine, but the answer would have been nice a week ago when I first asked ;)


With so many things to do, its hard to watch and answer every post on every forum. We'll try to do better.:)

JamesL
02-11-2008, 12:51 PM
I remember that car from ~15 years ago... would have been nice to see Garry finish it the way he wanted to.

So thats now the official FWD-P drag / product test car? You should show off what it's got to help promote FWD-P and your products :thumb:

BTW, sorry to hijack...

Great minds think alike. :thumb:
Now, I need more hours in a day.

BLUEBALL
02-11-2008, 04:38 PM
Wow,did that use to be the real clean Charger with SLEEPER across ft windshield, modified intake w/tb pointing to fender and aluminum radiator at SDAC 6? If so, i remember that one fallin behind on highway:D.
Also if it is,how long will it stay the alpha dog at FWD ;) lol? Sorry James,couldnt resist

JamesL
02-12-2008, 11:19 AM
Wow,did that use to be the real clean Charger with SLEEPER across ft windshield, modified intake w/tb pointing to fender and aluminum radiator at SDAC 6? If so, i remember that one fallin behind on highway:D.
Also if it is,how long will it stay the alpha dog at FWD ;) lol? Sorry James,couldnt resist

I get your point.:eyebrows:

badandy
02-12-2008, 08:06 PM
With so many things to do, its hard to watch and answer every post on every forum. We'll try to do better.:)
I wouldn't sweat it if I were you James. If people want to know something they can just call you like the rest of us do.

badandy
02-12-2008, 11:03 PM
Whats the FWD-P part of the forum doing here then? :rolleyes:
That's a good point:thumb:

It's always been my experience to call if I want a quick reply :)

JamesL
02-13-2008, 12:30 PM
Whats the FWD-P part of the forum doing here then? :rolleyes:

As I said, we do our best but forums have never been the best avenue for real-time communication if that is what you need.

"Top Fuel" Bender
02-13-2008, 01:28 PM
Man! No wonder he gave up on the long rod project!

I like my long rod motor:nod:

JamesL
04-07-2008, 10:24 AM
I am still running the long rod setup but only until I can't use these pistons anymore. Once I hit 10's with the 8v setup on my computer, I'm going to a 16v head for it as part of an R&D effort to produce a " hybrid kit". I just need to get find some time to get the work done. I'm pretty sure I toasted the trans last time out.

The Pope
04-09-2008, 02:19 PM
In the 80s Mopar found that with high lift cams the followers would fall off the valve tip. They did because the geometry of the follower swings down and as the lift gets higher the contact on the valve gets near the edge of the valve. So 20 years ago Mopar came out with a longer race follower that later has been called a super 60 follower. The roller follower is very short where it contacts the valve. Now lets look at basic valve train geometry. When building anything, V8s or 4 bangers with rockers you always have to look at rocker angle. Stock a 2.2 rocker sits flat, the contact point is near the middle of the valve. Then the cam opens the valve and the rocker swings down pulling the contact point out to the edge of the valve. With a larger base circle you can lower the point at the lifter pulling the contact point away from the middle of the valve. Then as the lift hits about .300" with a PT lifter your now on the center of the valve pushing it. Then as you hit .500" lift like a S60 cam your follower is pushing on the valve where it does stock at only .200" lift. So lowering the rocker at the lifter is the same as lower the rocker on a V8 to keep the contact patch accross the middle of the valve.

http://www.compcams.com/information/Products/Pushrods/

But what happens when you raise your lifter? The same thing as when you lower it at 0 lift, moves the contact point away from the center of the valve. Anyone ever use a simple car jack? At low lifts the jack is pretty centered, but near the top of the jack the jack is pulling the car toward you quite a bit. Rocker geometry is not too different. The farther you push the rocker and the steaper the angle of the rocker, the farther to the side it goes. So what does this all have to do with a 2.2? A lot. You can choose to lower the rocker in the direction of the valve, keeping it near level the whole time and keeping your contact patch on the valve centered. Or you can raise the rocker putting it at an angle, then when lift starts the contact patch goes from the side of the valve even farther towards the edge of the valve. By being lifted and changing the rocker angle the rocker moves out to the edge at a lot higher rate as it is already being tilted at 0 lift. How much lift can it handle before it falls off the valve like the old sliders did, with a valve contact 3 times longer? How long will the valve stems and guides last pushing on the edge of the valve more?

I am not a complete fool when it comes to saving a buck in the TD world. 98% of the people will always go the cheaper direction, always. But at what cost? Is it really that much cheaper to buy a aftermarket expensive cam design. Then put that expensive design on an old factory core and set it up with poor rocker geometry just to save the money it cost to have the cam cut on a new billet? Want to still save a buck on billets but run a safe valve train? How about a larger diameter roller? That would follow the cam better and raise the roller to meet the cam without changing the geometry for the worse. Granted I've delt with valve train many years and have had to cut off the rocker towers and lower the shafts to safely use big cams before. Something most never need to deal with or they just buy a big cam and have problems and blame the problem on something else. Now that people are walking away from the "just run a stock cam in a TD" rut, it may be time to read on what happens when you go bigger. Then read on how to adjust your rocker angle for the right valve contact.

The "other" cheap way around this is a longer valve. But your going nearly twice the distance at the valve end as the lifter end per inch of lift. So thats not really an answer either. BTW this post isn't to bag on FWD, I have supported them for a long time. As much time and money as FWD invests in top end work for our cars ANY costly step in the wrong direction is too costly. It would take ten minutes but I can draw up all of the angles and contact locations in ACAD and show you in a picture whats going on here. 3 circles to show rocker swing and contact intersection. 3 vertical lines to locate the lifter center and valve edges. Then lastly a horizontal lines to show 0 lift and arc intersections to the horizontal lines at different lifts. Piece of cake lol. Need to figure out how to do a bitmap conversion from a drawing file with XP lol.

Clay
04-09-2008, 02:44 PM
The "other" cheap way around this is a longer valve. But your going nearly twice the distance at the valve end as the lifter end per inch of lift. So thats not really an answer either. BTW this post isn't to bag on FWD, I have supported them for a long time. As much time and money as FWD invests in top end work for our cars ANY costly step in the wrong direction is too costly. It would take ten minutes but I can draw up all of the angles and contact locations in ACAD and show you in a picture whats going on here. 3 circles to show rocker swing and contact intersection. 3 vertical lines to locate the lifter center and valve edges. Then lastly a horizontal lines to show 0 lift and arc intersections to the horizontal lines at different lifts. Piece of cake lol. Need to figure out how to do a bitmap conversion from a drawing file with XP lol.

Do it.

Very easy, go to "export" in the "file" pull down menu, select .bmp it will ask you what to select, type "all". Hit enter. All done. If you want, paint can convert to .jpg.

Do it.

JamesL
04-09-2008, 06:09 PM
What would a lash cap do to help with the condition you are describing?

turbovanmanČ
04-09-2008, 07:32 PM
What would a lash cap do to help with the condition you are describing?

If I am following, it would alter the geometery and lessen the rocker arm movement.

JamesL
04-09-2008, 07:48 PM
If I am following, it would alter the geometery and lessen the rocker arm movement.

I guess I'm thinking the rocker would have a larger surface to ride on therby reducing the risk of slipping off in a high lift as well as reducing the side load on the valve?

The Pope
04-09-2008, 08:54 PM
Do it.

Very easy, go to "export" in the "file" pull down menu, select .bmp it will ask you what to select, type "all". Hit enter. All done. If you want, paint can convert to .jpg.

Do it.

Did it and it is posted on TD. My dinosaur ACAD didn't let me convert it so I went the long way. :thumb:

The Pope
04-09-2008, 09:02 PM
What would a lash cap do to help with the condition you are describing?

The lash cap would help, but not much because of rocker ratio. Then you risk tilting the cap. Lastly the caps are WAY too wide for the roller followers. How do I know? Because in my quest to screw with our valvetrain completely I tried them. You have to grind down the sides of the cap to fit them in the follower. PITA :( I make my own 767 regrinds and try to use the PTs with them. 3 washers really isn't enough even with just a .460 cam. The reason is a regrind cuts first the top of the lobe, then the base circle to match. So the base goes down past what you gain just from the lift. Anyway I drew a good picture and it actually shows the shimmed or longer lifter pretty low. The .500" regrinds are no dout much higher than I drew out but it is "close". I explained it to Cindy on the phone and in writing to others online but that never works lol, everyone needs a picture. :thumb:

BadAssPerformance
04-09-2008, 09:02 PM
Any way you can post it here so those of us that cannot log onto TD can see it?

The Pope
04-09-2008, 09:05 PM
I guess I'm thinking the rocker would have a larger surface to ride on therby reducing the risk of slipping off in a high lift as well as reducing the side load on the valve?

In order for a cap to really do the job, it has to go up near twice as high as you shim a lift because of the ratio. Litterally you need a 1/4" cap for a S60 regrind lol, a reason Dodge and Ford guys do the lifter.

The Pope
04-09-2008, 09:07 PM
Any way you can post it here so those of us that cannot log onto TD can see it?

I don't have an account here for posting pictures, I can however post them on the PNW SDAC site and send the URL for everyone. Give me a minute.

BadAssPerformance
04-09-2008, 09:08 PM
That's cool... :thumb:

The Pope
04-09-2008, 09:15 PM
Any way you can post it here so those of us that cannot log onto TD can see it?


http://www.pnw-sdac.org/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=2824

http://www.pnw-sdac.org/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=2827

*snip from TD*

In dicussion on the the issue of valvetrain geometry I was asked to show in a picture whats going on. Rocker angle with the 2.2 is intresting as it tilts on the end, not in the middle.

In red you can see the arc the stock follower runs on. The follower starts near the middle and works its way towards the edge of the valve. This moving to the edge is why Mopar came up with a longer slider for the high lift cams.

Green shows the arc the follower is on when you lift the lifter. IE shim it up to use a regrind with a heavily cut base circle for high lift cams. With .460" lift cams I need a .06" shim on regrinds, to take roughness and to true them for higher lift. So I went off the longer lifters and they are about the opposite of a PT. The difference at 0 lift is really nothing. But look how far out the arc goes at high lift. Look also at the angle, not just placement effects valve ware. Direction can also effect it. This is the same thing with a shimmed stock lifter or a longer one, any regrind with high lift.

The comes the blue arc. This is a new billet cam cut for PT lifters without shims, not an old regrind. Notice how the valve is litterally pushed straight down all the way to full lift. Notice the angle of the arc and direction is pushes on the valve.

Anyway, something I've talked about for a long time but haven't shown a photo. My ACAD is a dinosaur, it doesn't transfer to a bitmap. So I have to plot it and scan it, then turn it and shrink it PITFA. But hey I don't need to spend on a new system though, does the job lol. The roller followers also have a small contact at the valve, not a long one like a slider. I may be just a perfectionist, does it really matter that much? Can you get the other design to work? Do we need PT lifters that bleed the air out of them at high RPM? Do we need conical springs with very light retainers that resist harmonix at high RPM? Do we need rocker geometry that pushes on the valve right? Truth is I may just be nuts but hey I am willing to draw folks a picture

*snip*

feel free to grab them and post them here if it helps :)

Rob

The Pope
04-09-2008, 09:31 PM
http://www.holley.com/data/TechService/Technical/Valve%20Train%20Geometry.pdf

You can see the pattern in the arc lines. Lowering the lifter centers the contact area. Go from high lift to 0 lift, between them is the contact area on the valve. Also the edge is narrower on the tip as they are chamfered or rounded normally. A detail I left out.

MiniMopar
04-09-2008, 10:38 PM
I'm a bit confused. The tip of the lifter is convex from the perspective of the valve stem tip. If the radius of the tip is not the same radius as the lifter itself, then the contact point can't be represented by that picture. No?

The Pope
04-10-2008, 02:24 AM
I'm a bit confused. The tip of the lifter is convex from the perspective of the valve stem tip. If the radius of the tip is not the same radius as the lifter itself, then the contact point can't be represented by that picture. No?

The lifter end is a ball and socket, the valve end is cut on that curve. So they ride up together in the same direction. One problem is that the follower at the valve is not made to be tilted too far before it can ride on the edge of the valve. The roller isn't bad and can be tilted a long ways. The sliders can go from pushing on the inside of the valve to being tilted far enough to catch the back side of the valve. In other words the valve side is a tight curve on the roller and a near flat curve on the slider. The tight curve of the roller "looks" to handle the extra tilt. I havn't looked at it but the slider may not even have the range for that much tilt. Waste of time though as everyone is building rollers. Riding the follower on edge could raise the rocker ratio by making the follower longer. In that case yes, at .500" lift it would contact a bit different, but a .500" lift cam is really near .520" lift from a change in ratio. So if it rides out on the follower the lift goes up changing the lift in the end and keeping the same contact area on top of the valve at the cams full lift. The tight edge on the roller and the small diameter of the roller make for a real tight ratio. The slider ratio is all over the place on the cam and the valve :bump2:

gti_7
04-19-2008, 04:55 PM
I can spin my 2.2 with a F4 cam easily to 7500....

Please, do tell!:D what did you do to get it to spin that high?

bernie

ATaylorRacing
04-20-2008, 06:43 AM
I am still running the long rod setup but only until I can't use these pistons anymore. Once I hit 10's with the 8v setup on my computer, I'm going to a 16v head for it as part of an R&D effort to produce a " hybrid kit". I just need to get find some time to get the work done. I'm pretty sure I toasted the trans last time out.

I have a tall block (long rod?) 87 2.5 in old Matchbox.....I would love to switch over to a hybrid 2.4 head, then set it up with a 350 cfm Holley 4 barrel in place of my non-feedback 5220 on a modified, adaptered intake.
:thumb:

BadAssPerformance
04-20-2008, 09:41 AM
Please, do tell!:D what did you do to get it to spin that high?

bernie

2.2L like to rev out a little nicer than the 2.5L, with a good flowing head and stiffer valve springs you can run that high on a stock cam. 7500 rpm won't help though unless you got a large enough turbo to flow well up there :thumb:


I have a tall block (long rod?) 87 2.5 in old Matchbox.....I would love to switch over to a hybrid 2.4 head, then set it up with a 350 cfm Holley 4 barrel in place of my non-feedback 5220 on a modified, adaptered intake.
:thumb:

So it can keep up with a stock Turbo I? :D Weren'y you looking for a T-II motor to put in it?

GLHNSLHT2
04-20-2008, 12:07 PM
Carbs are so Old School Angelo. Time to get off the SDML and step up to the times. The new n/a setup is to just install a whole 2.4 and run megasquirt fuel Injection in your Omni :)

The Pope
04-21-2008, 10:59 AM
Carbs are so Old School Angelo. Time to get off the SDML and step up to the times. The new n/a setup is to just install a whole 2.4 and run megasquirt fuel Injection in your Omni :)

I bet if Angelo does it in an L body it won't run mid 16s slower than 8v engine though :thumb:

BF/STOCKER SPIRIT
04-21-2008, 11:37 PM
Huh!!! We Know Your Bigger Cams,make More Horse Power, But In Some Racing,like Nhra,stock Class Racing, We Have To Use, Stock,lift Type Cams,unless Ya Gonna Start ,buzin The 4 Banger To 7 Grand,

MiniMopar
04-22-2008, 01:48 AM
So with all that said, whatever it means, what is the status on these lifters, Cindy? :D

The Pope
04-26-2008, 12:57 PM
Huh!!! We Know Your Bigger Cams,make More Horse Power, But In Some Racing,like Nhra,stock Class Racing, We Have To Use, Stock,lift Type Cams,unless Ya Gonna Start ,buzin The 4 Banger To 7 Grand,

You guys need a cheater cam with stock lift and 260 duration. A custom cam would need to be cut for racing classes, wonder if anyone plans to make racing cams? Many other types of racing other than NHRA still require stock lift.

gti_7
04-28-2008, 09:56 AM
2.2L like to rev out a little nicer than the 2.5L, with a good flowing head and stiffer valve springs you can run that high on a stock cam. 7500 rpm won't help though unless you got a large enough turbo to flow well up there :thumb:

Excellent! i remember over reving the motor in my t2 once to 6500 and was convinced i had broken something. Then i checked and everything was fine and realized, hey, this is fun ;) What sort of port work and springs do you recommend? How about Turbo Size? I am taking a stab and guessing a .63 a/r at minimum? With a Taft series Stage II i imagine it would be easier to attain over a stock cam. Thanks for your reply! :nod: very encouraging! :D

bernie

gti_7
04-28-2008, 09:58 AM
Carbs are so Old School Angelo. Time to get off the SDML and step up to the times. The new n/a setup is to just install a whole 2.4 and run megasquirt fuel Injection in your Omni :)

True, they are old schrool, but they are a hell of a lot of fun and easier to manage than having to fight with computers along with this sensor and that sensor.. set the fuel and air and hear that motor sing! :thumb: my opinion.

bernie

The Pope
04-29-2008, 12:38 PM
True, they are old schrool, but they are a hell of a lot of fun and easier to manage than having to fight with computers along with this sensor and that sensor.. set the fuel and air and hear that motor sing! :thumb: my opinion.

bernie

Then pump about 3 gallons through it to get it to start when it's cold, drowning the engine with fuel contaminating the oil and adding excessive ring ware. Then comes BS with the floats and the needle / seat POS. My new Edelbrock on my truck started running richer and richer than just started flooding the engine. The float got a hole in it and sunk. Other fun with carbs, shutting them off on a hot day and the fuel boils and floods the engine with fuel. Thats sweet, the thing is flooded and the compression is gone from washed rings. I have owned over 15 Dodge trucks with many different carb types, which truck do I want to drive? My Cummins. I've had 2 Challengers, still have a R/T SE in the garage. I've had 3 Darts and other muscle cars over time. Also have worked on them for other people for many years. You get real sick of spending hours trying to get a 340 running just because it sat and the choke doesn't work. Currently My Challenger is going to an 8-71, with twin 900 CFM 85 lb injector TBI units. The Holley 950 is like an adjustible old TD computer. I'll have spark and fuel curve control with a 2 bar and a hall effect dist. The right AF all the time and spark retard. O and don't for get knock sensor support that pulls timing with bad fuel. Carb vesion? You have to drill holes in the carbs to out source the vac to the intake. Then you have to try different power valves to match the blower, which means pig rich at cruize. Better hope you sealed the vac tubes right or even more fuel. Then comes the sepperate dial-a-spark POS with a knob you have to adjust, with no knock support. Carbs are for cavemen that like to tune with a hammer, I'm still beating on a couple left :thumb:

gti_7
04-30-2008, 10:27 AM
Then pump about 3 gallons through it to get it to start when it's cold, drowning the engine with fuel contaminating the oil and adding excessive ring ware. Then comes BS with the floats and the needle / seat POS. My new Edelbrock on my truck started running richer and richer than just started flooding the engine. The float got a hole in it and sunk. Other fun with carbs, shutting them off on a hot day and the fuel boils and floods the engine with fuel. Thats sweet, the thing is flooded and the compression is gone from washed rings. I have owned over 15 Dodge trucks with many different carb types, which truck do I want to drive? My Cummins. I've had 2 Challengers, still have a R/T SE in the garage. I've had 3 Darts and other muscle cars over time. Also have worked on them for other people for many years. You get real sick of spending hours trying to get a 340 running just because it sat and the choke doesn't work. Currently My Challenger is going to an 8-71, with twin 900 CFM 85 lb injector TBI units. The Holley 950 is like an adjustible old TD computer. I'll have spark and fuel curve control with a 2 bar and a hall effect dist. The right AF all the time and spark retard. O and don't for get knock sensor support that pulls timing with bad fuel. Carb vesion? You have to drill holes in the carbs to out source the vac to the intake. Then you have to try different power valves to match the blower, which means pig rich at cruize. Better hope you sealed the vac tubes right or even more fuel. Then comes the sepperate dial-a-spark POS with a knob you have to adjust, with no knock support. Carbs are for cavemen that like to tune with a hammer, I'm still beating on a couple left :thumb:

Granted they have issues, fuel injection isn't without its own gremlins, but at the end of the day, carbs are fun. You don't have to deal with wire harnesses and other electronic mumbo jumbo. but again this is my opinion. What about Nascar? Are those engines from the Caveman era? 750+ Hp on a v8 that sustains a near constant 9000 rpms sure seems modern to me. :D

bernie

JamesL
04-30-2008, 10:55 AM
Granted they have issues, fuel injection isn't without its own gremlins, but at the end of the day, carbs are fun. You don't have to deal with wire harnesses and other electronic mumbo jumbo. but again this is my opinion. What about Nascar? Are those engines from the Caveman era? 750+ Hp on a v8 that sustains a near constant 9000 rpms sure seems modern to me. :D

bernie

Both have their prospective pros and cons. I have a 780 Holley on my Boss 302 which is NA. I plan to Turbo it at which point I will switch to a fuel injection system for the tune ability. Properly setup carbs with floats that don't sink and heat shields to keep fuel from boiling etc.. are a perfectly acceptable and proven method of fuel delivery, especially for NA cars. Additionally their relative mechanical simplicity makes it easy for most anyone to deal with. Fuel injections systems with computers, sensors, wiring and so on provide a higher level of tune ability, especially needed in a super charged or turbo application at the "cost" of a higher level of sophistication.

BTW Angelo, I want a rematch of Topeka. I still have nightmares about not hitting the brake at the end of the qtr to take the first place bracket win. When I passed you I had just enough time to lift but I failed to hit the brakes. That's twice you got me like that.

The Pope
05-07-2008, 01:02 AM
Granted they have issues, fuel injection isn't without its own gremlins, but at the end of the day, carbs are fun. You don't have to deal with wire harnesses and other electronic mumbo jumbo. but again this is my opinion. What about Nascar? Are those engines from the Caveman era? 750+ Hp on a v8 that sustains a near constant 9000 rpms sure seems modern to me. :D

bernie

it is against NASCAR rules to run FI, you don't see carbs on Indy cars do you?:hail:

The Pope
05-07-2008, 01:07 AM
Both have their prospective pros and cons. I have a 780 Holley on my Boss 302 which is NA.

In high school I was running 13.1 @ 109 as a junior with the out of the box rebuilt TQ carb for a 400 (on my 360). I was told by many back in the 80s that the way to go fast was to have a custom 780 made to match my engine with tuning plates and so on. After all of the tuning the best the 780 could muster was 13.55 @ 105, the first and last time I ran a Holley. The "new" Holley I run now is the Demon, takes ten time longer to tune than D cal but works good. I don't know why but Mopars love Carters, but they also seem to like being run more lean on a dyno as well.

Oops, forgot to mention the gas mileage on my muscle cars was 14-16 MPG and dropped to 4-6 MPG with the Holley as well. As a kid I couldn't afford it. :D

gti_7
05-09-2008, 12:16 AM
it is against NASCAR rules to run FI, you don't see carbs on Indy cars do you?:hail:

no, no you dont.. nor do i see anyone watching that sport either.:D


bernie

t3rse
05-09-2008, 10:18 AM
Granted they have issues, fuel injection isn't without its own gremlins, but at the end of the day, carbs are fun. You don't have to deal with wire harnesses and other electronic mumbo jumbo. but again this is my opinion. What about Nascar? Are those engines from the Caveman era? 750+ Hp on a v8 that sustains a near constant 9000 rpms sure seems modern to me. :D

bernie

yes, nascar engines are for cavemen....

how about formula? us short attention span Americans can't stand to have the cars disappear from sight but the rest of the world watches formula racing, and last I checked those engines don't run carbs....

this thread is turning out to be pretty dang funny!

gti_7
05-09-2008, 06:04 PM
Caveman sports are more fun. F1? They just reinstated the removal of traction control to get the "fun" back in the sport. No one wants to watch 20 perfect cars run perfectly around a track with no incidents. I also think a 358 Nascar motor is a far greater technological feat than what you find in F1. For what these engine builders have to contend with, its far above what has been achieved with f1 motors.

Sure the RPMS are high due to their shorter stroke, and they make just about as much power as a Nascar 358, but to achieve 9000 rpms+ and run it over 3 hours like that with a carb on a restrictor plate, to me, is phenominal.. its racing in its truest forms. No computers doing all the work for you like in F1.. but we will see as they start to restrict the computers in F1 and see how it goes. But again, who really watches F1? Indy? WRC! now theres something worth watching!

bernie

The Pope
06-03-2008, 12:26 AM
Caveman sports are more fun. F1? They just reinstated the removal of traction control to get the "fun" back in the sport. No one wants to watch 20 perfect cars run perfectly around a track with no incidents. I also think a 358 Nascar motor is a far greater technological feat than what you find in F1. For what these engine builders have to contend with, its far above what has been achieved with f1 motors.

Sure the RPMS are high due to their shorter stroke, and they make just about as much power as a Nascar 358, but to achieve 9000 rpms+ and run it over 3 hours like that with a carb on a restrictor plate, to me, is phenominal.. its racing in its truest forms. No computers doing all the work for you like in F1.. but we will see as they start to restrict the computers in F1 and see how it goes. But again, who really watches F1? Indy? WRC! now theres something worth watching!

bernie

http://www.danicaracing.com/

That's why I watch F1 :love:

But hey NFL is kind of gay to watch anymore, they took the fun out of it. I would rather watch a bunch of cave men with clubs duke it out:lol: Nascar is lame, they still run carbs. They all run the same body. None of them sell cars with the engines they run, there all custom engines made for Nascar. What made the sport great is not even remotely what they are to day, stock cars. They have one tiny glimore of light, they said they want to run a new stock car class with the new muscle cars. Run the challenger, new Camero and the Mustang with the engines you can buy them with. Back to F1 I would have liked to hold down that punk that pitched his car into danica and took her out of the 500. Then let Danica kick the snot out of him. He actually thinks that it was ok to jerk the wheel while flooring the indy car while leaving the pits and not yielding to pit traffic :mad: The only woman that needs to be taken out of a race is Hillary. Other than that there is nothing hotter than smart woman in her fast car.

GLHNSLHT2
06-03-2008, 12:57 AM
Caveman sports are more fun. F1? They just reinstated the removal of traction control to get the "fun" back in the sport. No one wants to watch 20 perfect cars run perfectly around a track with no incidents. I also think a 358 Nascar motor is a far greater technological feat than what you find in F1. For what these engine builders have to contend with, its far above what has been achieved with f1 motors.

Really? The technology has been so impressive the cars are as fast or faster than the cars 2 seasons ago with a 2.4l V8 versus the 3.0l v10's.
TC hasn't been banned to make the cars more "fun" to watch they're trying to slow the cars down. That's why they went to grooved tires, limiting the size of the wings, etc. But the teams keep going faster and faster every year. That's the joy of F1, to see how they get around the rules to go fast. And not just turning left. At Indy it took the last turn on the oval to get up to full speed of 200mph drag limited. It takes a NASCAR 4 LAPS to hit that speed.


Sure the RPMS are high due to their shorter stroke, and they make just about as much power as a Nascar 358, but to achieve 9000 rpms+ and run it over 3 hours like that with a carb on a restrictor plate, to me, is phenominal.. its racing in its truest forms. No computers doing all the work for you like in F1.. but we will see as they start to restrict the computers in F1 and see how it goes. But again, who really watches F1? Indy? WRC! now theres something worth watching!

bernie

Obviously you don't watch F1. Engines have to last 2 sessions of knockout qualifying and 2 races before they can be changed. That's a whole hell of a lot of reliability and tech when you're turning 19k rpms and cranking 700+hp out of 2.4 liters. And 19k only because the FIA is trying to slow the cars down again. Otherwise this year they would of been pushing 22k rpms. And the engines accelerate and decelerate unlike just sitting at a constant rpm. That's about 6hrs of runtime on the engines before they can be changed.

F1 is like a stealth aircraft. But with four wheels on the ground you don't fall out of the sky if they take away some of the options.

sorry but Nascar is old --- tech. Tube frame chassis car that is heavy with too small of tires and no downforce until this year which caught up to the ricers in aero tech. A pushrod v8 isn't high tech. Sure you can implement a few new tricks and get some better flow out of the heads maybe. But you're still stuck in the 60's for the most part.


Also For THE POPE, DANICA IS NOT Forumla1 She's indy car which is just a bunch of Honda's running around since they suck at F1 they had to have their own series to tout up :)

The Pope
06-03-2008, 01:20 AM
Also For THE POPE, DANICA IS NOT Forumla1 She's indy car which is just a bunch of Honda's running around since they suck at F1 they had to have their own series to tout up :)

To listen to the reporters on her is funny, as far as they are conserned Dancia getting forth a few years ago and winning a month ago has done more for the series than anything. Then there is talk of her going to Nascar, Indy must be licking her toes begging her not too leave LMAO.

But hey Hondas need there own place to race, thats why you see things like the NDRA. Import lovers have said for years that they wouldn't race NHRA because it is all V8s. What a crock, I've seen comp classes in NHRA for years. Even today you see mini vans going in for tech inspection for winning hehe :thumb: Didn't Honda cheat in F1 or Indy and lose a title not long ago?:confused:

WLKivett
06-03-2008, 08:05 AM
To listen to the reporters on her is funny, as far as they are conserned Dancia getting forth a few years ago and winning a month ago has done more for the series than anything. Then there is talk of her going to Nascar, Indy must be licking her toes begging her not too leave LMAO.

But hey Hondas need there own place to race, thats why you see things like the NDRA. Import lovers have said for years that they wouldn't race NHRA because it is all V8s. What a crock, I've seen comp classes in NHRA for years. Even today you see mini vans going in for tech inspection for winning hehe :thumb: Didn't Honda cheat in F1 or Indy and lose a title not long ago?:confused:

If thats televised I'm going to start watching Indy races!:eyebrows:

JamesL
06-03-2008, 09:46 AM
If thats televised I'm going to start watching Indy races!:eyebrows:

I'd be first in line.:D

GLHNSLHT2
06-03-2008, 07:36 PM
Flat as a 2x4.

shellboy
07-14-2008, 04:03 PM
so whats the latest on these lifters?

badandy
07-14-2008, 04:30 PM
Flat as a 2x4.

That's what aftermarket accessories are for :hail:

shellboy
07-16-2008, 08:12 PM
huh???

WLKivett
07-16-2008, 09:23 PM
enhancments

tps25pentium
07-16-2008, 11:21 PM
Sorry to go off topic again... but I've grown up on F1 since the 80's and couldn't believe my eyes when I saw somebody in the TD group who watches it too. Tha'ts awesome. To think somebody is trying to argue about some other car being technologically superior. hahaha.. gotta show this post to my friends.

Ayrton Senna #1 forever!!!

gti_7
07-19-2008, 11:37 PM
Sorry to go off topic again... but I've grown up on F1 since the 80's and couldn't believe my eyes when I saw somebody in the TD group who watches it too. Tha'ts awesome. To think somebody is trying to argue about some other car being technologically superior. hahaha.. gotta show this post to my friends.

Ayrton Senna #1 forever!!!


You do realize the joking around going on in the "duel" between the two racing types right? The dispute wasnt that one was better than the other but more of an argument that one series's ability to make power with less technology was more of a technical achievement that the other with the lastest of technology. for instance [snip from wiki] "the 2006 2.4 litre Toyota RVX-06 V8 engine produces 552 kW (740 bhp, 751 PS) at 19,000 rpm and outputs 274 N·m (202 ft·lbf)". and that these motors have a 1.6" stroke.

I wonder how much power these F1 v8s would make with a proper :D 3.5 inch stroke .. but anyway.. it was all light hearted banter.. i really dont care either was as i watch neither.

bernie

GLHNSLHT2
07-19-2008, 11:52 PM
I wonder how much power they'd make if they were 355 CI...... Considering they were making 900+hp at 3.0 and they're now d'sized to 2.4 to try and slow them down and are back up to around the 900hp level again at a stupid 19k limited rpm is damn impressive. Oh and they're faster than they were. F1 is technically superior in all ways. The n/a 900hp cars are way faster around a track than the 1500hp 1.5l turbo F1 cars they had in the 80's. The more the FIA tries to slow them the faster they go :) That's why I like F1, The more rules applied to them the more they find ways around it.


Unfortunately "The Pope" thinks anything with open wheels is Formula 1. Sorry.

The Pope
07-22-2008, 01:36 PM
I wonder how much power they'd make if they were 355 CI...... Considering they were making 900+hp at 3.0 and they're now d'sized to 2.4 to try and slow them down and are back up to around the 900hp level again at a stupid 19k limited rpm is damn impressive. Oh and they're faster than they were. F1 is technically superior in all ways. The n/a 900hp cars are way faster around a track than the 1500hp 1.5l turbo F1 cars they had in the 80's. The more the FIA tries to slow them the faster they go :) That's why I like F1, The more rules applied to them the more they find ways around it.


Unfortunately "The Pope" thinks anything with open wheels is Formula 1. Sorry.

They are still considered the "minor leagues" and the better drivers go to NASCAR.

Yeah I still don't notice a difference when I see a nation series and a bush series NASCAR either, WAH. There is a TINY difference between the 2 cars, only the rules really make the difference. If you paint them all white and took a big picture of the group you wouldn't be able to tell, you would have to pop the hood. By having the 2 race groups they are dilluting that type of racing and one group by it self can't promote the racing well enough. I time F1 and CART will die out like Boxing..

GLHNSLHT2
07-22-2008, 09:17 PM
F1 is THEE most spectated sport in the world. It's not going anywhere anytime soon. The Difference between Indy and F1 is that an F1 will blow by the Indy car like it's a n/a 4 banger.

WLKivett
07-24-2008, 08:34 AM
But there are cat fights at Indy races

GLHNSLHT2
07-24-2008, 10:15 PM
yea heard about that. Funny but not why i watch racing.

amoparacer
11-30-2008, 02:10 PM
What about the lifter cindy??? I mostly drag race but am considering road racing??

Reeves
02-19-2009, 02:14 PM
Nascar is for wussies.....

How about that lifter Cindy or James? How's it going with that?

Any one running solid lifters?

glhs727
02-19-2009, 04:06 PM
reeves,
call me.......
later,
Cindy

Reeves
02-19-2009, 11:05 PM
I did! Thanks!

Did you get my two emails?

Reaper1
02-20-2009, 01:30 AM
I'd like to know more about the lifters as well...I've got a head they can go in and am trying to sell stuff off to make enough money to build my new engine!

moparman76_69
04-13-2011, 07:44 PM
Zombie thread alert!

Are these the "High-RPM lifters" listed on the website?

glhs727
04-13-2011, 08:59 PM
no, these are not our current high rpm lifters...

moparman76_69
04-13-2011, 09:05 PM
no, these are not our current high rpm lifters...

Are the current high rpm lifters stock length?

glhs727
04-13-2011, 09:53 PM
yes, the high rpm lifters are stock length...