360 build for guys that like dyno numbers
- Thread starter pittsburghracer
- Start date
-
a great build from RAMM .
My biggest question is head flow and very limited info was given on that area.
It says hydraulic roller. Is it a hydraulic roller or solid roller cam. Curious why the horsepower numbers start falling so early on a stock stroke 360.
Budget? What's that? Compared to what?
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
Thank you
@RAMM can answer these questions.
I believe since the heads are said to be used box stock, the limited head flow and port window are the problem you see.
gzig5
Well-Known Member
I believe that these heads were worked on based on his comment in the article. Not stock flow.
"I had the heads flowing around 300 cfm, and with the intake on it the intake port flow dropped to around 230 cfm.
Thanks Gzig
I only read runner extensions and not porting.
But as Gzig has corrected me…. For not reading all the way through….
RedB.
Well-Known Member
Maybe RAMM can comment on the questions asked.
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
300 cfm on those heads would take some monumental porting etc * u agree ?
justinp61
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,056
- Reaction score
- 4,039
RAMM
Well-Known Member
A decade old-lol J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
The bowls were shaped on a 3 axis CNC in an ovalized venturi shape and the intake ports were knocked out on the same machine about an inch deep. All of the ports were hand worked after that and all of the ports were flowed and balanced on the flowbench until they were as consistent as they could be. This took the better part of a month-some ports took several attempts even though they looked and measured the same. All ports flowed from lowest to highest of 292 cfm-298.5cfm @ 600"-.650" . Manley 2.08"/1.60" valves in a 5.220-5.250" length were used. J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
I didn't write the article and never said it was a hydro roller--the SP-TK and HRR lobes tell you its a SERIOUS solid. The numbers start falling so early because the name of the game is average power in that contest and packing the most amount of torque in early is what builds a solid score. You'll notice in the chart it doesn't exhibit the dreaded "dip" coming off the brake at all. I don't know but 495 lbs of torque out of a stock stroke .060" 360 is pretty stout to me even still. I've seen some 408's with some good components fall short of that. J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
Again lost in translation is what happens so often when giving the interview over the phone. When I baselined the unported manifold 230cfm is all that it could support. The manifold was highly ported and I had welded runner extensions into the plenum in an attempt to best the 510-513 ft/lbs I was seeing prior to the runner extensions--it didn't work and I cut them out little by little until I got back almost to where I started. The trickest part of the manifold was the .250" thick Teflon intake gaskets and the heat shield welded to the bottom of the intake. J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
I don't know if I'd call it monumental but it was a very serious effort that took a lot of time. J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
The waterpump center section was from our big block build in 2009 and I figured a simple plate machined the way it is would work--it did and I still have it and use it on some dyno sessions. J.Rob
K.O. SWINGER
Meeting in the alley since 1976
Wow Ram I have always been impressed by that build! One of my favorite small block builds actually. I have looked back on it many times and is the inspiration for my 340/3.58 stroke build. You make a lot of good points about head capabilities along with my personal feelings about side loading and piston speeds it's a great combined For what I need/ want . Thanks for all the hard work!
RAMM
Well-Known Member
Wow Ram I have always been impressed by that build! One of my favorite small block builds actually. I have looked back on it many times and is the inspiration for my 340/3.58 stroke build. You make a lot of good points about head capabilities along with my personal feelings about side loading and piston speeds it's a great combined For what I need/ want . Thanks for all the hard work!
Thanks for the kind words, that build was probably my fave for a multitude of reasons but that shortblock actually spent the summer in a circletrack car with W2's on it and I didn't get my hands on the engine until the first week of September--for those that don't know the contest was always the first week of October. I would have loved to have had fresh bores with some really trick pistons/rings etc... Fun times though. Eventually the heads went on a 417 that I felt underperformed all things considered--555hp/539tq. J.Rob
Do the always reward torque over horsepower on these contest builds. I hear you about the talking on the phone and getting things messed up. But then again some of these editors would mess it up during a face to face interview. Thanks for setting us straight and keep up the good work.
My brother did an interview about a super clean low mile survivor 67 Tempest Sprint six he had a few year back . When the article came out there were outright fabrications inserted . Same thing happened to his buddy when Hotrod did a write up on his 69 9.8 sec Vette that was stock appearing.
-
