[lhmurphy]

Originally Posted by techinspector1

With ~10.6:1 static compression ratio and that 12-600-8 camshaft, dynamic compression ratio will be 9.31:1. GOOD LUCK!
12-600-8 - Thumpr
Intake valve closes at 35.5 degrees ABDC @0.050" tappet lift.

So you are saying that .2 compression is enough to kill my engine? Since the cam calls for 9.5 to 1?? I doubt it but I'm interested to hear what you have to say

[techinspector1]

Originally Posted by lhmurphy

So you are saying that .2 compression is enough to kill my engine? Since the cam calls for 9.5 to 1?? I doubt it but I'm interested to hear what you have to say

You're mistaken. Comp does not call for 9.5:1 minimum static compression ratio until you get to the 299THR7. Please get your stuff together before you try to correct me. See this page from Comp....
COMP Cams: Chevy 262-400 c.i. 8 Cyl '55-'98
Static compression ratio and intake valve closing point are tied hand in hand with each other. If you don't know your exact static compression ratio, then you have no business trying to choose a camshaft out of thin air. If you don't know how to match up a cam with a given motor, call the grinder for a recommendation.

With 10.6:1 static compression ratio and that short cam, the motor will rattle like a coffee can full of marbles from detonation and I doubt it'll live for 15 minutes before it breaks all the ring lands or holes a piston or 3.

[lhmurphy]

The kit I bought was said to have a static compression of 10.3:1 with 64cc combustion chambers but that's not the issue...I just want to know how you think it will run...using the six inch rod moves the piston higher in the bore for when my cam closes so I don't lose as much of a stroke

[lhmurphy]

And also mister this motor has been running pretty good for the last 3 years and I never hear any pinging...I just posted so I could see how accurate these forums are and if I would really wanna join...so that's why I posted this to see how many people would chime in about compression and say it wouldn't run 15 minutes or idle smooth...looks like my test is done

[techinspector1]

Originally Posted by lhmurphy

using the six inch rod moves the piston higher in the bore for when my cam closes so I don't lose as much of a stroke

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Thanks for wasting my time, jerk.

[vinniekq2]

Originally Posted by lhmurphy

I have a friend pushing 440 horse with a 400 sbc and he has a 670 street avenger...that's why I don't think the carb is too small

Im sorry,I thought you were building a high out put engine

[lhmurphy]

Well last time I check 440hp double what any jeep wrangler comes out of the factory with so I think it can be at least "mild horsepower"

[lhmurphy]

Originally Posted by techinspector1

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Thanks for wasting my time, jerk.

No time wasted...I feel like you know what you are talking about and I didn't mean to come off that I was correcting you when I said 9.5:1 compression earlier

[vinniekq2]

I will make a mathematical statement:
440 horse power is possible with a 670 cfm carb but highly unlikely.If the engine dyno tests at 440 horse power and the carb actually flows 670 CFM then that engine is close to perfect tune.
As far as that small cam working in your engine,it too is possible if all the other specs you gave are accurate then your total timing has to be very low and or your fuel is very good quality.
If you have very good fuel then that engine would make power at a very low RPM and it would build the power very quickly,,,tire melter

[lhmurphy]

Originally Posted by vinniekq2

Im sorry,I thought you were building a high out put engine

And if 440 isn't "high output" then neither is the 2012 camaro ss (426) hp or the 2012 mustang gt (412) hp

[lhmurphy]

Originally Posted by vinniekq2

I will make a mathematical statement:
440 horse power is possible with a 670 cfm carb but highly unlikely.If the engine dyno tests at 440 horse power and the carb actually flows 670 CFM then that engine is close to perfect tune.
As far as that small cam working in your engine,it too is possible if all the other specs you gave are accurate then your total timing has to be very low and or your fuel is very good quality.
If you have very good fuel then that engine would make power at a very low RPM and it would build the power very quickly,,,tire melter

I appreciate the post man! and I usually run 93 octane and my timing is 36* all in by 3000

[ap72]

Originally Posted by vinniekq2

Im sorry,I thought you were building a high out put engine

Don't bother wasting your time on this thread, as TI found out, this guy has NFC.

[vinniekq2]

AP72,you make me laugh and sometimes I feel like Im around my oldest boy.I did not know many internet acronyms before reading your posts. I figured some out,the rest I had to google

[lhmurphy]

Are you two dating?

[lhmurphy]

All joking aside, you guys really think this build is junk?