Build thread......target 2.2 hp w/ EHTTFMF
 

With all the tadoo in the last thread we decided to do a brief build thread witha few pics to highlight what it does and maybe does not require to make a bunch of power. The info provided will be general in nature and we of course will not entertain antagonistic questions nor intentionally distracting posts.

Some have implyed its all luck or whatever. The deal is theres some planning in execution, but as soon as we dyno/find it in the car we have an idea what the engine wants next. For the record we made 1205 @8500 rpm on the last go. We had an idea then what we needed to do to mke more. Rpm is a NA engines best friend when lookin for more. Our cuurent goal is 1240-50 hp. There is always the chance of goals not being met.....we are fairly confident we will meet them.

We will go through the components required/ sometimes not. More to follow as it will go together over the next few days and we will dyno shortly.

Carry on Mike.
Be following thread.

EHTTFMF

1205 @8500 rpm is a nice number to start with, LOL! Good job, Mike and Team members.

Carry On!

Tom V.

Thanks for being willing to share data and ideas. Some will appreciate, some will not, open-minded folks will benefit.

Eric

We all already know who the guys are that will have nothing good to say. This thread is not for them.

Its to share a bit about what a guy is looking at if he wants to try and build something like this. We didn't intend on getting here in the beginning. It just sorta happened as we exploited obvious opportunities to improve what we currently had. we learned a few things along the way. Some of them the hard way.

Subscribed Thanks Mike

Thumbs up for your willingness to share, and best of luck.

Mike,

First congrats on great power achievement with your package, well done on cracking 1200 hp! And thanks for sharing any info you have sir.

Thanks,

Aaron

Mike, thanks greatly for starting this thread. This will help many people in the Pontiac Community/Hobby see the required 'Price of entry' to 1st just to get in the Ball Park, with the Parts and the Combination as a whole, then expanding on that foundation to then go to the next level 2.2hp per CI and beyond.

That is really cool! Both that you already made over 1200 hp NA and the fact that you are willing to share some. Thanks and I look forward to hearing more.

I'm in the building a new engine stage. I have a 469, 455 .60 over with the Ross/Butler pistons & Eagle H-beam rods. So far when they get the pistons the block will be matched to the pistons & decked so I have the pistons at 10ths in the hole. I have E-heads (round port) & there has nothing been done to them yet. The crank is a new Eagle cast 3.25 inch. I'm hoping now that with the info you will be posting I can make a little bit more HP then when I had the SRP .30 pistons in it with a Crane Blue Print RA IV cam. It made 523 HP at the crank with those pistons & cam with the Performance RPM intake & RA exhaust manifolds & a Pertronix ign. with a tricked Q-Jet. I hope watching this thread I'll get some great useful info to make even more.

Thats a great combo and results so far. Great job!

Tough to top the Cast crank pursuit like Vin63 did. huh

1200 HP NA will be an excellent pursuit. Can you cite the RPM for HP, and maximum RPM?

Not sure what your trying to compare a boosted aplication to a naturally aspirated one. When we dyno it will be the baddest naturally aspirated Pontiac engine out there. I know theres one coming that will make more. But we have a plan for that too. There will be another thread before the year is out :)


It made 1205 at 8500. And held on to power past peak we ran it to 8800 on dyno and it only lost a few.

To make our target we will need to increase torque slightly and make it at a slightly higher rpm. I expect to peak at 8600 for power And 7700 for torque. If we do that the 1250 should be no trouble. We NEED rpm. Especially With this little head. We anticipate a 9000 RPM shift point. The goal would be to keep this engine from dropping below 8000 RPM on shift recovery.

I know this makes most people turn inside out. But if you want to make big power you got to get over the RPM. It is an absolute must. Horsepower is calculated, torque times rpm divided by 5250. The farther away from 5250 you are with the same torque, the more horsepower you make.

We have some "common core" math people here that might not get that Mike.

1205 is pretty dang stout and if your predicting more, it just shows what can be done with careful planning, trial, and reflecting on results good and bad. I look forward to the read and good luck with the next step in the game! Thanks for sharing.

Subscribing. I have a future build that will utilize an All Pontiac aftermarket block for my tube chassis car. I will be looking to make power that can stay together for at least a couple hundred passes without having to do scheduled maintenance, if possible? At some point reliability will override power output. My goal will be mid to low 5's half track. I want to be the fastest footbrake car when I roll through the gates. 800 HP should get me there because my chassis car will be light, in the 2200-2300 Lb. range.

I have a IA-IIA block, but I'm not sure what I'm going to use it for. It might end up in a street ride. I have a 4.5" forged scat crank from All Pontiac, but I'm not sure what I'll use it for. I don't even know what heads I'll be using. I am currently running a set of 340ish E heads on a stock block 468 making about 675 HP.

Your lessons learned and shared will help me make decisions on my build. It all trickles down to my level, which is bracket racing.

Hi Mike,
I know you have been waiting for me to post. ;)

Very nice job. Great numbers. :hail:

Another advantage of moving the torque up in the RPM range is the ability to run more rear end gear which gives greater torque multiplication. :)

If you get your HP peak to 8600 and it holds on like you say, I think you will be leaving some et on the table if you only shift at 9000.

Stan

Hope it works out as your group plans it to.

Iva always heard that torque and horsepower cross at 5252rpm. How does that work, or does it, on an engine like this?

Baddass ride for sure Mike. Thanx for the 'behind the scenes' view.
Kevin

Most engine dynos measure torque, and calcualte HP using what Mike said.

Stan

Horsepower = torque (ft-lbs) x rpm/ 5252.

So when rpm is 5252, then 5252/5252 = 1 and then torque and horsepower have to be equal.

Eric

Maybe I didn't word that right.
Since peaks are at 8600 and 7700 does that affect the 5252? Now that I've been awake awhile and my brains working a little better i realize that it doesn't.
Back to topic

Great Job Mike! LOL if I would have said hey my motor made 1002hp@6100 everyone would've busted balls and said it didn't happen unless you post the dyno sheet....I'll take your word for it.I know how hard you worked at it and I think it showed on the track and if others didn't think so ill just say you were gaining on it!


So I thought this was a build thread. Soooo what bore/stroke?what length rod? Big end size little end size? Pin weight? Piston dome? How much? Was piston in/out of the hole any? Ring gaps? What was the Vacuum? What rocker ratio? Combustion chamber cc per cylinder?Intake and exh runner volume?Int&exh valve sizes? Bearing clearances rod and main? Crank end play? What gen timing belt drive did you use? Piston to wall clearance?What oil modifications did you do?did you do any mods to the bearings? If so what?what Oil pump? What brand parts did you use? What size header tubes did you use? Did you use a merge collector? What size did you choke it down to before it exits? What was the collector size? Did you step the tubes any? Could you at least tell us if you used a 4-7swap or a LS firing order?

You did a kickA$$ job getting to that point! Thanks for being willing to offer up any info. But what I'm asking is HOW DID YOU GET THERE? WHAT IS YOUR PLAN OF ATTACK TO FIND THE EXTRA HP?



And oh yeah GOOD LUCK! Thanks again!

So what is the shift number Stan? I know what my number would be for the shift.

Tom V.

True. Unfortunately we never had a good outing in the car. The runs I made were shifted at 83 to 8500. There's more left.

Trying to control piston speed some. And there's no sense beating the snot out of it when the car was obviously not performing correctly on the starting line. We realize we need to shift higher. We just need a little time.

Oh my goodness Jason. I'll try to tackle your questions I'm sure I will miss some answers along the way. Some answers I may not give, depending on the question and where the answer came from.

I got a lot of cleaning and prep done today. For tonight will mostly concentrate on the short block.

Obviously an aftermarket block is required. Not as obviously Iron blocks make more power than aluminum blocks. It's the way it is. I know there are some that I believe or fantasize about one brand of aftermarket block that makes just as much power in aluminum as Iron blocks do. That's just not going to happen.

Just because an aftermarket bought cost $3000 does not mean it's ready to run for an engine like this. I can tell you to absolutely expect to pay another $2000 in machine work. And the block will need a lot of prep. Big camp tunnels but a big lifters with bushings are required. You're not getting anywhere near this power level without it.

The block I am running has been repaired a couple of times unfortunately. It's all part of the deal though. EVERYONE running at this level has had engine failures for one reason or another. Sometimes parts just break. If you have to save for 10 years to build an engine like this you should probably not build an engine like this. It's going to require maintenance and parts are going to break.
If you're not handy unable to fabricate, weld, use instruments and assemble engines this is going to get extremely expensive. It's time-consuming and tedious work. And the parts are expensive. If you're paying someone else to do that for you expect it to cost a lot.

Theres a couple bearing issues we have had to deal with and find ways of overcoming. The first is when you use a crankshaft with large radius ground into them you can have an issue at the rear main bearing. That's caught us once a couple years ago early and a Dyno session. Basically you want to grind about .030 off the very end/rear section of the main bearing to make sure there's plenty of clearance for the large radius. The second modification is drilling a secondary oiling hall at about 8 o'clock position to deposit more oil. This also requires trenching out behind the main bearing to connect to the oil hole.

The shift RPM maximizes the area under the power curve between gear ranges. The shift rpm changes depending on what ranges are in the trans to maximize the area under the power curve. That is physics and what carries the day, Stan knows that. I really wished we could all get past the childish bs and share some real information within the Pontiac community. It really wears me down and I understand why some capable people avoid the place like the plague. And is the key reason I don't participate much here. I suspect others feel the same.

And Mike thanks again for sharing some real information, it's appreciated! Share some real info with Stan and utilize his math abilities and I suspect we all could learn something. Math and physics don't lye and Stan has it under control. It takes real world experience from the best to calibrate assumptions in the math. Crap in is crap out. There are guys here that can provide good input to the rest. Stan has demonstrated a good ability of math and physics. I think a lot of folks could benefit from partnering with this capability.

PPTTFMF!

Radius area

And as far as crankshafts go. You can try with a Chinese forging. Shorter stroke and less RPM you might get away with it. Good luck if you try.

You're looking at a $3000 plus crankshaft. Its probably going to need some additional prep work. Just saying.

As far as oil clearance goes we are running .0033- .0034 mains and rods. We tried running les to control oil more. The engine did not like it. So we increased clearance.

This crank is a Bryant. It has A Micro polished finish.

As far as connecting rods go, obviously steel or aluminum are the choices. At least for us normal people.

These rods are Carrillo customs. Where most people go wrong is they think they can just run a shelf part and save money. That is likely all they will accomplish, saving money. The rod should be configured as long as possible for an application like this. these steel rods weigh the same as the aluminum rods we used to run. Double the cost for five times the life.

We also feel these rods are worth some power in our application. As with all the parts Scott Brown specified and worked with Carrillo on the design for this application.

And yes those are coated pins. Try not to get it all over yourself Stan. It's one of the few places there are coatings in this engine.

I appreciate what you're saying Aaron. But I think were pretty good on our math and physics over here. We seem to manage OK.

And that is exactly what I'm talking about.

I really appreciate the data you are willing to share. Thank you sir, it's appreciated in the Pontiac community.

I had never seen that configuration of sides of the big ends. Is the main purpose to increase lube flow out of the journal/bearing to carry away heat better? Can you run less side clearance because of it? Does this design have much of a "track record" of success? Thanks.

Lighter and carries heat out with lighter oils. Pro-stock and comp. parts like these i would not have were it not for my good friend scotty brown. Hes a bad dude with lots of connections.

Aaron, Both Stan and I deal in Physics and Math every day. I would not be surprised a bit if our numbers were very close on the additional rpm needed.

Physics and the basic formulas for math do not change, no matter what the engine.
And as you said in other words, garbage in is garbage out.

As far as quoting me in your comment, maybe you should study the equations a bit yourself and then you could also partner in the threads.

If I remember correctly, I have been pretty close on the HP numbers a few times with my physics and math calculations. Keep posting Mike, looks like a great thread.

Tom V.

I noticed the second hole in the first picture posted. Would you post a picture of the trench that connects the oil feed holes?

scott speced out a cam for my new shortblock using my heads as they are. if we do anything further with this engine in the future, I plan on working with scott.

Crank is in. But i have some old bearings

Thanks for taking the time to post this info! You definitely have one badass Pontiac!

Sounds like you trenched the backside of the bearing? Not the block.

We did some Bearing/Rod testing one time, Jack, in our "Components Lab" with full instrumentation of the connecting rod bearing and the oil flow.

It was truly amazing how the bearing temp number "grew" as the RPM the bearing saw increased. The oil and temp at the bearing surface massively increased for a doubling bearing journal speed.

We tried the different oil feed locations in the bearing and found that once you had the hydrodynamic film established it was just a matter of keeping the flow volume proper as the rpm increased.

Allowing the hot oil out of the rod bearing was studied and spacers similar to the rod mods Mike has made helped remove the oil both between the rods and on the side closest to the crank fillets. You could remove the oil on both sides of the rod (even with a "paired rod" set-up). I like your Carrillo rod mods better than our spacer deal.

Nice Job, Mike. You are making a lot of good decisions here obviously.

Tom V.

We did the block side. But you can see a shadow on the back side of the bearing

Another oiling mod to add to file. ��
Both the trench and big end treatment.
Even for a week end warrior.
Thanks Mike.

There is a thread started by JC You in the forum dated 09-21-2008, 09:45 AM about bearing spacers and oiling.

Quote: "I did some bearing testing on a special rig at Ford about 4 years ago and was amazed at the RAPID INCREASE in bearing temperature from just going from 1000 crankshaft rpm to 3000 crankshaft rpm.
We are talking a lot of heat that the bearing has to carry away quickly. A larger bearing diameter means more heat at the bearing." (so about 2004 time frame, 12 years ago)

In Mike's case he would be 7500+ rpm initially and go from there so you can see that lubrication and Heat is a major concern for his efforts.

Tom V.

ps Our rig would have been dangerous to spin at higher than 3000 crank rpm in a open cell with engineers monitoring data. The physics stays the same.

Mike,
Since the talk is about RPM and oil temperature (I may have missed it). Have you done anything to your journal diameters to reduce bearing speed?

Stan

No. There is not enough money in my wallet to do anything with the mains. And the rod is 2.2 per the recommendations of Bryant. We chose rigidity over small journals. The last crank was wiggling around a bit. Plus Crank throw overlap. If we were to say 2.5 inches on the main and Honda journal on the crank, The rod pin would be completely divorced from the main pin on the crank. This was deemed to be a bigger problem at our power level than bearing temp

Mike, did you eventually go with a dry sump system like John M or are you still using a Luhn Oil Pump? The reason I ask is there is a lot more oil volume with the dry sump so it takes a bit longer to raise the entire volume of the oil (that you might read on a oil temp gage in the pan or gallery) but the bearing oil temp is still the same. Very HOT!

Tom V.

My questions will be based on the engine's ability to live at 1200+ hp and 9000 rpm and your solutions. Thanks Very Much, Mike!