j par
Well-hung Member
View attachment 20150613_203903.jpgDid you or 318willrun post up either of your own time slips?
Check the original post for a couple new rules
View attachment 20150613_203903.jpgDid you or 318willrun post up either of your own time slips?
valve size depends on the bore size not the stroke ...a 4.030 bore can run the same size valve whether it has a 3.58 stroke or 4 inch stroke.
Patently false...high RPM capability is based on stability of parts used (much of it being in the valvetrain)...not stroke length. If that were true (and since we're stuck on SBs) MRL's 408s wouldn't be able to turn the RPMs they do...
As to the rest of your comment, breathing isn't solely dependent on the valve size...no doubt a large contributing factor, but a big valve can be screwed over by poorly executed port and bowl work.
I'm not saying it's critical "oh no my engine can't rev above 5000 cause it's stroked" kind of thing, but get that stroke long enough it's going to start having effect. As for the second part, yes valves are as much as part of the breathing as... about the whole engine. So a big valve can be ruined be other bad parts as much as a drivetrain can be ruined with a bad tranny or rear-end. If we are going that deep into hypotheticals, a good stroker can be ruined by a bad crank... just in case that wasnt considered
No time slips yet ? ?!!
Stock stroke 10.31 :cheers:dont need no stinking time slips...I got video...
couple of mild stock stroke 360....10.5 compression...flat tappet cams...
dart ran 10.31....duster ran 10.69 in this video but have another video with the 10.65.....Pretty sure the Duster in Bakersfield now would run 10.50s...or faster...as it has run 10.78 out here in Vegas...
So step up to the plate..
bakerboth 01 01 - YouTube
Regardless of what was or wasn't [hypothetically] considered, you made an assertion that a longer stroke engine cannot rev as high...I replied that your statement is simply inaccurate. I never paraphrased what you said.
The effects of stroke length in regard to RPM are rod ratio piston speed and dynamic CR...the RPM limits imposed by an increased stroke--all else being equal--would be a lowered peak power RPM...but that still doesn't mean the engine cannot *reach* the same RPM as a shorter stroke engine...hypothetically speaking.
You're making hyperbole of what I said when it comes to the valve size bit. If improving flow that greatly were simply a matter of hogging out the seats for bigger valves, the first and only thing people would do with a set of J heads would be to drop in some 2.08s/1.65s...it's not that simple, and that's the point I was driving home. You can indeed do that, but the ports will still stall out long before .500" lift on the top end, and it wouldn't do a great deal to improve the low/mid lift numbers which is where the all that "under the curve" bit comes from. Peak flow is nice, but if you can't boost the low/mid lift numbers, the peak doesn't help much--especially if the top end of lift is stalling out the port.
dont need no stinking time slips...I got video...
couple of mild stock stroke 360....10.5 compression...flat tappet cams...
dart ran 10.31....duster ran 10.69 in this video but have another video with the 10.65.....Pretty sure the Duster in Bakersfield now would run 10.50s...or faster...as it has run 10.78 out here in Vegas...
So step up to the plate......I read about big HP numbers from Dynos....but never seen any time slips....
bakerboth 01 01 - YouTube
Stock stroke 10.31 :cheers:
(by the way, i'm not against strokers, just when stroker owners call "fish" stories to stock stroke motors getting it done)
If I'm the judge this post has first place so far! LolIf you stroke too much...
View attachment 1714825606
Check the original post for a couple new rules
Not me vs YOU, but stroker E.T's and stock stroke E.T.'s, and your loosing 11.88 vs. 10.31Time slips please ! ??? YOUR OWN ! ???
lol
Noted-what lane were you?
11.83 or have you been stroking too? They say it's bad for your eyesight! LolNot me vs YOU, but stroker E.T's and stock stroke E.T.'s, and your loosing 11.88 vs. 10.31
11.83 ....
Keep tweek'n. Lots' of E.T. left in it! I would think that 2700 lbs dual quad stroker super shift'n Duster could beat that 11.38 thermoquad, cast intake, .444 lift, 3650 pound, wind snagg'n pickup I posted of a picture of..... LOL :boxing:
Naw, I like your project. I like the old sckool dual quads & 4 speed. I also like your mph.... means your making some power along the way.^^^ ya it's well known my suspension sucks = 1.76 60ft time. Please, I've seen molasses pour out of a jar faster! I've gotten a long way from the shell I brought home on a u haul trailer 14 months ago. Give me 14 more and I'll see if I can't clean that time slip up a little.
^^^ i bought this truck 3 years ago for $800. I wish i still had it to enter you friendly race. Worthless to haul a load but lots of fun to drive. I had to sell it as I had no room for a truck i couldn't make money with.
I know that my combo is not near the fastest, but for the combo I run with the class rules, it runs pretty good. I imagine it would go quite a bit quicker if I could get off the line under full power. 427 cu in. , goes through the traps around 7000-7200rpm. Should reset the record this fall. So far 10.79 w/ best mph 125.5mph