Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

Correction 650/460 was probably 1.30, I've never seen more than 1.32 @ 6400 feet elevation. Do still have the dyno sheets / maybe SFD files? If I understand how SuperFlow correction works. Then 460 UnCorrected HP = 650 Corrected HP with a 1.31 weather correction factor would have had a ME% = 75 Stan

Jon, This is that test and also another test where you made less HP by the peak BMEP was .8 psi higher. Stan ab-565-g_code-HP-TR24-1.gif ab-565-g_code-HP-TR.gif Has that engine really only been running at 100% VE and not more ? The new heads Mummert has done are creating a LOT MORE port speed. In t...

Remember the calculated weather dyno correction factor and what factor is got by dividing Corrected by UnCorreted on a SuperFlow is not the same thing.

Here is what I get from the DTS formula for those weather conditions.

Stan

Jon, That engine was sometime ago. I believe I am using the right numbers. This will show your BMEP. Stan ab-527-g_code-HP.gif Thanks Stan. For a big pump gas engine that 528 is pretty good. If could be much better today. I really couldn't care much about BMEP - not at all. Hp per cubic inch at whe...

Just so there is a way to go back and forth this table show the BMEP for Toque per ci tq_per_ci BMEP 1.20000 180.96 1.22500 184.73 1.25000 188.5 1.27500 192.27 1.30000 196.04 1.32500 199.81 1.35000 203.58 1.37500 207.35 1.40000 211.12 1.42500 214.89 1.45000 218.66 1.47500 222.43 1.50000 226.2 1.5250...

Can you show the whole dyno sheet? I specifically would be looking for the inertia factor to compare it to another test I believe to be very inaccurate. This same dyno test shows 650 HP measured, and 722 HP corrected tested @ 50 feet elevation, but the real problem I have is 7200 RPM power peaks BB...

BMEP is directly proportional to TQ per displacement so it is not more effective at all as evidenced by your equation to me BMEP at peak hp rpm is more useful as the engine may not actually operate down at peak torque much or at all Digger, Those equations allow that very understanding. I never sug...

BMEP is a way more effective comparison tool than torque or hp per displacement. Because HP@ RPM for a displacement claims are more commonly encountered, I founds these simple equations useful. BMEP,psi=(150.8*((5252.11*Crankshaft HP)/RPM))/Displacement CI BMEP,Bar=(170.415*((5252.11*Crankshaft HP)...

The threads intention was to evoke conversation on how far we have come and what has contributed to more than the top 1% of professional engine builders being able to surpass 1.4 ft/lb per cubic inch these days, if in fact the conclusion was more than 1% are doing it. I was hoping guys that have be...

The threads intention was to evoke conversation on how far we have come and what has contributed to more than the top 1% of professional engine builders being able to surpass 1.4 ft/lb per cubic inch these days, if in fact the conclusion was more than 1% are doing it. I was hoping guys that have be...

Not sure how good my memory is. The way I remember it is, Barry R built a Ford FE for the contest. I don't remember where it placed, but after the contest the engine was installed in a car and driven.

Stan

Repeatability

My be Mike Laws will see this thread and join in.

From what I remember about the carb shootout at BLP. They tested the engine with the "house carb" they then tested participant carbs and the retested with the "house carb".

Stan

I keep seeing need to increase VE%

Am seeing something different than others? One think I have seen is a reduction in BSFC or more efficient use of the trapped mass.

Stan

You are flowing the head @ 28" of water? Is that constant at the MCSA?

Stan

Stan Weiss wrote: > Bob, > I was talking engine dynos. Many here are running an automatic trans and > with their loose convertors, I don't think you would get very much useful > information at the low RPM on a chassis dyno. > > Stan There’s a bigger world out there than Turbo400s and lurching high ...