Shooting for the magical 700HP, I think you may eclipse it.
70 dart 470 ci drag car build.
- Thread starter MOPARMAGA
- Start date
-
I think if I would have just fixed the intake manifold I might have gotten it, since everything your not supposed to do is what I did because I was in a hurry.
For me, my best results don't usually come with my first attempt.
Well, timing chains suck when they're used.
I had newbomb over to show me a different method of getting the cam in. It came out to 108.5 icl. We didn't move it from the last time I had 106.75 so it's just not very accurate but it's close and it's getting sent as is.
Next year I'll treat the engine to a milodon gear drive.
Sorry no pictures, just words.
I had newbomb over to show me a different method of getting the cam in. It came out to 108.5 icl. We didn't move it from the last time I had 106.75 so it's just not very accurate but it's close and it's getting sent as is.
Next year I'll treat the engine to a milodon gear drive.
Sorry no pictures, just words.
What are the two methods used and how do they differ?
What set are you using.
The method I was using finding icl at lifters peak lobe lift then backing off the lobe .050 both ways.
He showed me a different way with a different tool, it fit into the lifter bore.
Find base circle of the cam then go up to whatever lift you want, pick a number and then find that number on the other side of the lobe & that's how we did it today.
Maybe @Newbomb Turk can explain it better.
It was a little more confusing to me but it took out the guess work of the 10 degrees on top of the lobe where the dial indicator didn't move.
Cloyes 9 way. I think the dowel pin hole is off by just a tad bit.
Were I had the cam in at 2 advanced 108.5 we tried advanced 4 degrees and it came out to 103, should have been 106.5.
It will probably be retarded 2 degrees after Dyno testing lol
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
I don’t try and find the center of the lobe by getting to max lift and reading the indicator.
MOPARMAGA’s cam has .440 lobe lift. I pick a number (something that is at least ending in 0 or 5 and is .050 (minimum) or greater LESS that max lobe lift and I read the degree wheel there.
That means on his cam I zeroed the indicator on the base circle and turned the crank until I reached .350 lobe lift (which is GREATER than .050 LESS than max lobe lift) and then I took a reading on the degree wheel.
Then I turned the crank until I went over the nose past max lift and down to .350 lift on the closing side. Then o read the degree wheel.
Add the two together, divide by two and that’s the ICL.
Then for fun we checked IVO and IVC at .050 lift at that ICL.
Then to really go down the rabbit hole we checked number 6 for ICL, IVO and IVC.
Then to really go down the rabbit hole we looked at number 6 ECL, EVO and EVC.
If I was totally nuts we’d do that for every lobe on the cam. I’ve done it before but unless your name is Greg Anderson or someone like that you won’t ever get the cam replaced if it’s off by much anywhere.
I haven’t checked all 16 lobes since 2002. It was a Cam Motion cam and it was very close.
The issue is proving it’s the cam that’s off and not the lifter bank angles.
You don’t have to be off much on the LBA to affect cam timing.
PRH
Well-Known Member
With many of the cam lobes used today being asymmetrical, checking for the theoretical center line up near full lift, or down near .050 lift will usually show a difference in installed position of 1-2 degrees, or even more(depending on how asymmetrical the lobe is).
PRH
Well-Known Member
I wonder in MM’s build here, which item of roughly the same price would yield a higher power gain……..
The Milodon gear drive………. Or the Indy TR??
The Milodon gear drive………. Or the Indy TR??
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
A Jesel belt would.
I think he should buy both, the Indy, belt and throw in one of Andy's fancy timing covers.
You should talk to him.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
A belt drive isn’t as accurate as a gear drive.
Accurate enough to where you probably couldn't see it before a winter freshen up. Fact is I know you wouldn't.
Besides a gear drive is a power killer. lol
You can talk to me lol
Those fn belt drives cost as much as the shocks I gotta get
lol
I just mentioned it because I knew he'd come back with something. lol
He always looking to secure that 10th of a degree of timing.
He didn't get the boot too lol
Oh, so he's paranoid is he. lol
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Damn right. I can run tighter piston to valve clearance than a belt and much tighter than a chain.
Until I see some sign of “harmonics” transfer from the gear drive I’ll keep using them.
Here’s a fun one for the books.
I was watching a video of some dude at Reher-Morrison assembling a BBC.
When he got to timing the cam, he blows the belt drive so hard…use your imagination.
Then, then the dude says “besides the nasty harmonics the gear drives cause, the idler gear forces the cam gear UP and INTO the top of the cam bearings”!
I said WTF? That makes zero sense.
Being the prick I am, and knowing I don’t know everything I pick up the phone and call RM.
I get a dude on the phone and I ask him about the harmonics. He says oh yeah, we’ve tested them when engines come in with them and they make (insert some absurd hp gain) more on the belt drive every time.
So I say on bracket engines? He says we’ve tested them on everything but a Pro Stock engine.
Surely they’d have some actual dyno sheets to prove it. You’d think they’d keep copies so when morons like me call they could shut us up.
I ask for dyno sheets. He says we don’t keep stuff like that! Got it.
Then he says “you know, if you search the web you’ll find tons of testing done on all the gear drives.
I say I’ve looked and the ONLY tests I’ve found are chains and belts against dual idler GD’s. So how about you google it up right quick and send me a link.
He actually starts looking. 10 minutes later he says I can’t find anything but the dual idler stuff. But it’s in SAE papers and everyone know that.
Short story is neither that dude or anyone else has shown me an SAE paper or any other technical paper has ever been produced to prove the claim.
Then told him what the dude said about the idler gear forcing the cam up into the the top of the cam bearing.
He says oh yeah, we’ve seen that too.
So I ask him were these flat tappet engines that had it happen. He says oh hell no. We don’t build those ever.
So I said how the hell does the gear drive have enough force to overcome the downward pressure of valve springs that probably have no less that 320 on the seat and 850 over the nose as that’s a lot of load.
His answer was I don’t know how it works but I know it happens.
This jack *** had zero proof of either claim yet he pumps out that bullshit like it’s fact.
I’m open to reading or even buying ANY study from SAE, NACA or any other competent testing that proves the harmonics claims.
Yet I never get them. I called out a guy on speedtalk about it and he posted a link to (IIRC) a test by Roush that used a dual idler gear drive but not a three gear fixed idler drive.
The other claim the RM dude made about the gear forcing the cam up is so farcical I’d believe the cow jumped over the moon and the dish corn holed the spoon before I bought that ****.
Now that I’m on full prick I’ll also say that as smart as David Reher is he is one arrogant dude.
I watched him at a seminar (I saw it on the web but, not live) and when he was asked about rod length he said it doesn’t matter and then he said Smokey was wrong about using the longest rod that fits and that he didn’t know what he didn’t know.
If Reher was correct in that he would NEVER build an engine where the oil ring goes around the wrist pin. EVER.
He could easily make the rod .100 or even .200 shorter and not do it. But he does.
And he’s doing exactly what Smokey said to do back in ‘78 or whatever year it was he wrote the book.
For him to even privately make that claim while doing exactly what he says doesn’t matter is hypocritical.
Making a public statement like that is beyond arrogant.
So I stand by the gear drive as the most effective, cheapest way to drive a cam there is. And the most accurate.
It’s only drawback is you can’t change cam timing on the dyno nearly as fast as a belt drive. Other than that the GD wins hands down.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
BULLSHIT. I got slow rolled or something. I couldn’t get on here for several days.
In fact, I showed you last night what it did.
When I got home it was magically working, just like a 15 dollar coil.
In fact, I wanted you to try and login on your phone but you can’t remember your password lol.
Of course I thought about biting one of my new logins I haven’t used yet but I decided not to.
Of course the last paragraph is total horse crap. I don’t have any saved up logins…
I never said it wasn't, only a fool would say otherwise.
I'm only a fool on some things and this ain't one of them. lol
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
I just hope someone will post a link to testing that shows the GD faults.
Then I’d change my tune and publicly apologize for giving bad advice.
I’m going to dig out my Taylor books and see if he covers it.
I’ve read both books cover to cover and I don’t think he talked about it.
Snowflake melter was fisherman67 idea lol
-
