400M Engine Masters Winner - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-07-2010, 09:31 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think it means .500" thick- to allow for thermal distortion.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 07:08 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Amarillo TX
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Go to google and type in Engine Masters Challenge teardown. The 460 based motor that KAASE ran for nearly 3 years ran a 1/2 thick head gasket to accomodate the stroke set up. they were also a small runner, high velocity head with 27 cc combustion chambers with a dish piston. I'll post the link later, and get verification on the extreme low tention ring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 08:49 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Amarillo TX
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbolover
I think it means .500" thick- to allow for thermal distortion.
.500 is 1/2 inch. http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...emc/index.html

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic...96dab&start=15
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 09:18 AM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I never found the .500" head gasket. It was probably a plate used to raise the deck with sleeves installed through it- not that uncommon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 10:21 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Amarillo TX
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbolover
I never found the .500" head gasket. It was probably a plate used to raise the deck with sleeves installed through it- not that uncommon.


"Jon Kaase is no stranger to the world of ultra high performance engine building and the incredibly slick Ford 408 Cleveland he brought this year was by far the most exotic mill in attendance. With its Australian CH1 Cleveland heads, AMC six-cylinder main bearings and .5-inch thick copper head spacers, it was number one qualifier with peak readings of 698.2 hp, 619.6 lb.-ft, average power readings of 485.9 hp and 557.3 lb.-ft. and a staggering 1,043.2 points."

copper Spacers no sleeves...... That was this year, I sent you to the wrong article. Sorry... The ring land is moved WAY down the piston... again not a stock shelf piston or ring. The head gasket/copper spacer was used to accomodate the HUGE 4.2 stroke, since long rod small bore applications are know for withstanding detonation. This along him to run a huge CI motor with a small bore and large stroke... they have to run on pump gas.
Like Ive said these are not simple head, cam, intake deseigns with off the shelf stuff. Withought getting into the math he used a high velocity intake head runner deseign to accomodate the huge stroke... the amount of air needed to fill the cyl in these motors is beyond incredible. They use bores and larger bore cams to increase their centerline angle, and extreme aggressive ramps. The rocker arm ratios get up in to the 2.3 ranges.... There is nothing simple of streetable about these motors for real world applications. Everything is taken to the edge of light, lessfriction, rotating mass, lift, and velocity.

Thank you guys for having a decsent converstion with me... I have missed that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 10:35 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
The engine he ran was about 400 cid.

From Post #2:
  • A "short" 5.965" rod length, w/a 2.350-inch compression height piston that used a low-drag ring package of .043"/.032" compression rings and a 3mm oil ring.

If the stroke is correctly said to be 4.2", that gives a rod/stroke ratio of 1.42. That would also put the bore at <4", somewhere close to 3.9" or so.

I will readily agree that these winning (or placing/showing) engines are not "run of the mill" (ha-ha).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 10:38 AM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I wonder why he chose copper... That is a unique piston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 10:42 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbolover
I wonder why he chose copper... That is a unique piston.
Well, it would be a breeze to machine. It would seem at first blush that there'd be issue w/thermal expansion and thus sealing, but who knows what goes on w/him.

The cam was about to take a dump (2.2:1 ratio rockers and all) so the idea of longevity of this engine wasn't a priority- perhaps the copper lasts long enough to get the required pulls before going terminal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 11:12 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Amarillo TX
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt327
Well, it would be a breeze to machine. It would seem at first blush that there'd be issue w/thermal expansion and thus sealing, but who knows what goes on w/him.

The cam was about to take a dump (2.2:1 ratio rockers and all) so the idea of longevity of this engine wasn't a priority- perhaps the copper lasts long enough to get the required pulls before going terminal.

Thats what I would think as well. They only plan to build to the amount of use...LOL.. The stroke may be off as well, I was just going by the tear down article.

Donnie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 11:25 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by onebadolds
Thats what I would think as well. They only plan to build to the amount of use...LOL.. The stroke may be off as well, I was just going by the tear down article.

Donnie
I'm not doubting you on the stroke, Don- it just goes to illustrate that this whole "long rod good/short rod bad" theory has a LOT more to it than meets the eye.

Drag race/max output engines use less rod length than many guys realize, I believe. Endurance engines maybe less so. The exact engine requirements will possibly favor one over the other- but there's no "magic bullet" to be found in rod length, IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 11:31 AM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rods, are like carbs. Any rod can work, but some work a little better depending on the application. Sometimes smaller has a slight advantage sometimes bigger. Understanding why is something very few people get.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 11:43 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
My position is this:

IF you are in that 1/10 of one percent of builders that are needing everything available that can be had- and that's STILL not enough- look for that small edge w/rod ratio (and everything else possible, as well).

For the other 99.9%- whose engine will never see a dyno, and whose tune is 85%-90% AT BEST- rod length/ratio means nada.

Only until the fuel/air ratio is spot on, the timing curve and total timing is optimized, that ALL the other variables have been recognized and taken into account will a rod length other than what is readily available (i.e. 5.7" or 6" for a SBC) be worth anything, output-wise. The change in output wouldn't even be measureable

Because a 6" rod engine can be built for about the same coin as a 5.7" engine, I can say, "Why not?". But if it cost even a small percentage more, I would recommend against it unless there was a lot more to the build and tune than the average Joe.

The only exception to this is w/a 3-3/4" stroke SBC- they should get at least a 5.7" rod instead of the OEM 5.565" rod.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2010, 12:09 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I just think if you have to buy some rods, the cost between the 3 common lengths is negligible, hell even the cost to run 6.125 or 6.25" rods can be negligible in some cases, so know how the length affects your combo and pick the best one.

If you don't need rods run what you have, people do that on many other items that have a larger effect than rods (reusing carbs, intakes, pistons, even cams).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
setting points on sb chevy frackster66 Electrical 23 01-07-2014 06:50 PM
the history of chevy v8's savman1 Hotrodders' Lounge 43 03-02-2012 07:57 PM
Knowledge base Dave57210 Hotrodders Site Suggestions and Help 2 12-20-2009 08:06 PM
1985 C-6 truck tranny, no engine braking effect fast68 Transmission - Rearend 40 02-04-2008 06:55 PM
Engine Master's Challenge SBF cylinder heads 2wld4u Engine 5 06-16-2005 11:28 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.