414 Dyno results: Missed combo?

-
It's refreshing to see a engine builder post real world builds, full of info to ponder, with the results layed out to see, rather than the typical mega inflated bullsh $t Horsepower claims that seem to be the norm these days...thank you!!!
 
moper said:
I'm still wondering why the rpm is important given it's apparently going in a truck. It's a mismatch, but a usable one...lol. Stop pulling it and let him go use it.
Click to expand...

It's not going in a truck I don't think. Not for me. J.Rob
 
replicaracer43 said:
It's refreshing to see a engine builder post real world builds, full of info to ponder, with the results layed out to see, rather than the typical mega inflated bullsh $t Horsepower claims that seem to be the norm these days...thank you!!!
Click to expand...

Thankyou, and I'm sure you're aware already that those HP claims come with a price. J.Rob
 
Ok RAMM,


I'm sicker than a dog pooping peach seeds and I don't want to go back and see if I missed a post.


I was going to buy the R2C base but the cost has me sniveling a bit, since I have never seen the Moroso base get beat. The other issue I have is my BLP B4X main body does not match the R2C base like I think it should. I don't want to drop the coin on the R2C if a Moroso will beat it.

Also, just like you posted...just because it flows more on the bench doesn't make it make more power. I have worn out a set of teeth saying it. It's a tool. When use properly, it's damn effective. When used for marketing, it's whatever you want it to be.
 
As RAMM said, that's what he thought until......
 
Just for fun and to illustrate things a bit...
a graph showing the 414 and a stock Edelbrock-headed 408 that was recently dynoed at HRM.
Jesse, you built a freaking torque monster. Has more torque than anything I've seen or followed (or traced) in the last years.
I took the liberty to extend the curve on your engine down to 2500rpm for the sake of comparison.

View attachment 1715019835

414_mopar_ramm.jpg
 
Last edited:
I like that approach relatively over headed under cam. Makes for streetable engines
That's why the new Hemis and LS engine do so well. And even look at stock 340 there over headed for factory hp goal that's why cam and headers do so much for these engines.

Everyone always seem worried to kill velocity with too much head but willing to kill driveablity with too much cam. Especially with most people's gear choices.

The only problem with that approach is you know in the back of your head 50 plus hp is only a cam change away :)

Keep up the good work and appreciate the sharing of the results.
 
stixx said:
Just for fun and to illustrate things a bit...
a graph showing the 414 and a stock Edelbrock-headed 408 that was recently dynoed at HRM.
Jesse, you built a freaking torque monster. Has more torque than anything I've seen or followed (or traced) in the last years.
I took the liberty to extend the curve on your engine down to 2500rpm for the sake of comparison.

View attachment 1715019835

View attachment 1715019836
Click to expand...

This is very cool you took the time to do this! To be fair that build in HRM is using unported and I bet unchecked (OOTB) Eddy's and manifold. Even this RPM Air-Gap needed a couple hours of port matching to be useable--I bet HRM didn't touch theirs. Their 408 is also over-cammed IMO which would explain the low tq. I will put a few litres of Av-gas in the tank tomorrow and pull it down to 2500 rpm and we will see how close you are. J.Rob
 
273 said:
I like that approach relatively over headed under cam. Makes for streetable engines
That's why the new Hemis and LS engine do so well. And even look at stock 340 there over headed for factory hp goal that's why cam and headers do so much for these engines.

Everyone always seem worried to kill velocity with too much head but willing to kill driveablity with too much cam. Especially with most people's gear choices.

The only problem with that approach is you know in the back of your head 50 plus hp is only a cam change away :)

Keep up the good work and appreciate the sharing of the results.
Click to expand...

It is ONE of the many reasons the G3 Hemi and LS work so well. The LS heads are 15 deg really well developed ports and the G3 ports are straight up! Couple that with VVT, EFI, MDS, active intakes and well you just have a fantastic engine. It is also why you stick a cam and long tubes on them and pick up 60-80HP. I intentionally pulled way back on the cam in order to ensure a personality that would suit most end users. They want to go racing? Cam and single plane up and watch the power climb the RPM scale in lock step. J.Rob
 
RAMM said:
It is ONE of the many reasons the G3 Hemi and LS work so well. The LS heads are 15 deg really well developed ports and the G3 ports are straight up! Couple that with VVT, EFI, MDS, active intakes and well you just have a fantastic engine. It is also why you stick a cam and long tubes on them and pick up 60-80HP. I intentionally pulled way back on the cam in order to ensure a personality that would suit most end users. They want to go racing? Cam and single plane up and watch the power climb the RPM scale in lock step. J.Rob
Click to expand...

My personal engine is going to be a VERY unique G3. Smaller cubic inch, solid flat tappet!, light light light bob-weight, high dynamic--shooting for 550-600HP @ 7500-7800RPM no bigger than 370 inch. The G3 is probably one of the best engines ever designed--We get amazing aluminum heads, RACE quality block (I've sonic checked a few and they were all .200"-.220" thick cylinders) right from the wrecking yard. J.Rob
 
so what is the hot filter element for a Moroso 14" unit, getting time to replace the old K+N, was looking at AEM
 
273, I agree. The problem with the posts about loss of velocity is well founded mostly due to a poorly put together combo or a wacky drive train set up like 296 gears on 30 inch tires followed by a fully ported head and mid to low cam spec. This is a wildly terrible combo. Extreme in the example but often a case seen being sought after.
 
RAMM said:
My personal engine is going to be a VERY unique G3. Smaller cubic inch, solid flat tappet!, light light light bob-weight, high dynamic--shooting for 550-600HP @ 7500-7800RPM no bigger than 370 inch. The G3 is probably one of the best engines ever designed--We get amazing aluminum heads, RACE quality block (I've sonic checked a few and they were all .200"-.220" thick cylinders) right from the wrecking yard. J.Rob
Click to expand...
I recently got a free G3 and I'm considering using it instead of an LS. Are there any good forums out there with real G3 knowledge? Most of the G3 info I find is from "bolt on" idiots who've never seen the inside of an engine. I'm very familiar with G3's in stock configuration and their flaws (ring lands, oiling, valve train slop, ect). I would like to learn more about fixing these issues as the G3 does have more potential than any Mopar engine ever built.
 
Pascamp said:
I recently got a free G3 and I'm considering using it instead of an LS. Are there any good forums out there with real G3 knowledge? Most of the G3 info I find is from "bolt on" idiots who've never seen the inside of an engine. I'm very familiar with G3's in stock configuration and their flaws (ring lands, oiling, valve train slop, ect). I would like to learn more about fixing these issues as the G3 does have more potential than any Mopar engine ever built.
Click to expand...

Not sure of any good forums although over on Moparts there is a dedicated G3 sub-forum that you may glean some info from. J.Rob
 
stixx said:
Just for fun and to illustrate things a bit...
a graph showing the 414 and a stock Edelbrock-headed 408 that was recently dynoed at HRM.
Jesse, you built a freaking torque monster. Has more torque than anything I've seen or followed (or traced) in the last years.
I took the liberty to extend the curve on your engine down to 2500rpm for the sake of comparison.

View attachment 1715019835

View attachment 1715019836
Click to expand...

I was a little worried I would be able to crank total timing to 36 and see an increase in torque @ 3500 but was relieved to see a slight loss. Very happy about this. 31-32 total seems to be the sweet spot. 29-30 knocks 4-5 HP off the top with no change to the bottom or mid range. Once I established these trends I wasn't afraid to test down @ 2500 rpm. We'll see how Stixx's graph looks compared to actual. New peaks of 553 tq and 488 hp after 27 tests. J.Rob

IMG_20170221_103843.JPG
 
RAMM said:
Not sure of any good forums although over on Moparts there is a dedicated G3 sub-forum that you may glean some info from. J.Rob
Click to expand...
Thanks. I've been lurking over there a bit. I notice that David Barton is over there. They're only a couple hours from me so I'll probably use them for machine work if they're not too obscenely priced.

The engine I have is an early 5.7. I'm leaning towards a K1/Molnar 392 rotating assembly, head work, cam, Drag Pak/Ritter intake, and TBI. Nothing fancy. Just fix the factory problems and feed it air and fuel.
 
RAMM said:
We'll see how Stixx's graph looks compared to actual. New peaks of 553 tq and 488 hp after 27 tests.
Click to expand...
Great result! Hope you didn't waste your good AV gas just to, err, confirm my graph. But actually you made even more torque at 2500rpm than my assumption. Thumbs up. You can alter the rotation of the earth with that thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top