[wovenweb]

Originally Posted by Skip Fix

Heck "old technology" Top fuelers with barely out of the 7s and just over 200 mph when all of this "old technology" was new! Pro stockers were barely in the 9s with tunnel rams, acid dipped bodies. How many Pontiac guys now are in the 9s using some "new" technology? Bet more than there were in the 70s!

"Old" can work but "new" is not bad and slower.

I agree with your premise, but we're in the street section where I think the general point of this thread is that an "old" grind cam, iron headed street vehicle can still take you into the 11's(competitive with the fastest production vehicles made today) on today's pump gas.

Does it take a lot of work and tuning, yes.

[Skip Fix]

Originally Posted by wovenweb

I agree with your premise, but we're in the street section where I think the general point of this thread is that an "old" grind cam, iron headed street vehicle can still take you into the 11's(competitive with the fastest production vehicles made today) on today's pump gas.

Does it take a lot of work and tuning, yes.

Even in a "street car" (what is the exact premise? working PB, A/C-different thing to different folks)-My point was how many of them(11 second cars iron heads 041 or similar HFT) are out there vs very "similar" combinations that are in the 12s/13s? Walk through the pits at any big Pontiac race and I bet in the staging lanes the mid to low 11s car with iron heads and an 041 are very very few. Yes there are some like Jim and a few others that are there but a whole lot more in that 12-13 second class lane.

And if "new technology" is not as good why are so many guys running good even with iron heads and HR or "hybrid combination like Cliff's? I guess we need to kick Cliff and many of Dave Bisshop's combinations out of the discussion since they use that HR "new" technology. I'll bet 50 years ago they weren't using the coating Cliff is talking about experimenting with for a flat tappet try again either.

And for what it's worth my 78 TA raced in the old NMCA classes with first a 455 then a 400 with iron heads and the 400 had 4 cams some degreed in different spots , different carbs, intakes and header sizes and ran PB ,PS and A/C with most of the combinations and most were "modern" Ultradyne cams. So a lot of combination dialing in.

[TCSGTO]

I ran the RAIV/Rhoades deal for a long time and it is a really sweet running set up you could drive everyday, and I did eventually get into the 11.90's with it but I don't think the OP cares about ET. For his purposes it would do everything he wanted. You can even keep the stock stamped 1.5 rockers with decent replacement valve springs and limit RPMs to 5500 or less which is all you need.

Not everyone gets carried away like me and a lot of us do, but if the OP gets bored with the RAIV /Rhoades he won't have a ton of cash tied up in it if he decides to move up to a roller valve train.

[ponyakr]

"...And if "new technology" is not as good why are so many guys running good even with iron heads and HR or "hybrid combination like Cliff's? I guess we need to kick Cliff and many of Dave Bisshop's combinations out of the discussion since they use that HR "new" technology..."



I think one of the problems we may be having here is that some guys are talkin about max horsepower and lowest ET's, with streetable ROLLER cams, and some are talkin about daily driver type, or street / strip type HYDRAULIC FLAT TAPPET cams.

To me these are two totally different apps. I think maybe we need to compare apples to apples, as they say. So, compare the HFT cams to other HFT cams, and roller cams to other roller cams.

Is this reasonable or ridiculous ?