Applying the DV 128 formula on a Supercharged engine

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

X2.

This thread reminds me of another.. “The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education”
SMW is simply being a clown!

For years Mike Jones has posted excellent FULL CAM recommendations based from just a few simple details from the OP.
Pipemax 4 is also very excellent.
FACTS.

You have just agreed with what I have been recommending.
Both Jones software and Pipemax are based on computation of physics.
Both require the information required to do the computation.

Thanks!

[Geoff2]

SMW,
In your haste to denigrate DV at every turn, you forgot, or never knew, that 128 was an approximation for the hotrodder. It is a starting point number that covers some engines & some compression ratios. It saves the hotrodder from the phone jockey at Comp, Crane, XYZ from recommending a cam from the computer listed shelf grinds.
At least DV has shown some examples via HP curves that give credence to his ideas.

From you, we have had no examples, just mumbo-jumbo. I will take your advice when I see some examples.

[digger]

The fanboys forget the DV oversold it from the start

[mt-engines]

SMW,
In your haste to denigrate DV at every turn, you forgot, or never knew, that 128 was an approximation for the hotrodder. It is a starting point number that covers some engines & some compression ratios. It saves the hotrodder from the phone jockey at Comp, Crane, XYZ from recommending a cam from the computer listed shelf grinds.
At least DV has shown some examples via HP curves that give credence to his ideas.

From you, we have had no examples, just mumbo-jumbo. I will take your advice when I see some examples.

Its funny how whenever any professional in this industry disagrees with DV, all the Kool-aid drinkers come out.

For the last time, his theoretical formula is just that. Try using it on some 10, 12,15 degree heads. way off from what i know it needs. anytime you have to manipuate a formula to get an answer, it is no longer a formula.

LSA has no meaning, especially if you dont know the shape of the intake and exhaust lobes.

i run some pretty tight lobe seps compared to many with boosted engines. i\I also run way more compression than some.

Call a cam company who knows their lobes and you will be in the ballpark.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

SMW,
In your haste to denigrate DV at every turn, you forgot, or never knew, that 128 was an approximation for the hotrodder. It is a starting point number that covers some engines & some compression ratios. It saves the hotrodder from the phone jockey at Comp, Crane, XYZ from recommending a cam from the computer listed shelf grinds.
At least DV has shown some examples via HP curves that give credence to his ideas.

From you, we have had no examples, just mumbo-jumbo. I will take your advice when I see some examples.

I know exactly what 128 is.

Your premise that your only alternative is phone jockeys is false.

Pastry Chef pointed out 2 superior options in this thread.

[F-BIRD'88]

The "128" number is for a 23 deg sbc head.
A 10° or 12° or 15° head will need a very different number.
Same as DV's big block cantered valve head number "131-133" is different ..

Not looking to call a cam company.
If I wanted a cam spec'ed I'd call Mike Jones (Cam King)
He's pretty good.
Or get DV to run it thru COS-CAM.

[mt-engines]

The "128" number is for a 23 deg sbc head.
A 10° or 12° or 15° head will need a very different number.
Same as DV's big block cantered valve head number "131-133" is different ..

Not looking to call a cam company.
If I wanted a cam spec'ed I'd call Mike Jones (Cam King)
He's pretty good.
Or get DV to run it thru COS-CAM.

Thats what im getting at.. now try it with a 270cc 23 degree head.. you will have to change it again

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

If you narrow down the range of engines that 128 is supposed to be applicable to.
What is the highest and lowest value that it returns?

Is it right for all exhaust systems?
Is it right for both automatic and manual?
Is it right for all driving environments?
Is it right for all driving abilities?

Of course not, because those parameters are not inputs to the formula.

Even when customers can see the measured dyno charts of engines, they never choose the one they like best when double-blind test-driving them.

[F-BIRD'88]

If you think a "270 cc 23° head is different (maybe it is) present your data VS a typical stock near stock sbc head.

Not here to prove nor dis-prove DV's 128 formula..

(I don't have the data to do so)
Just looking to create a variation based on boost added
on crappy near stock typical sbc head engines to get more torque than a generic 112-114 lsa dual pattern "blower cam" Keep it simple.. Keep it relevent to these engines.

Lots of "experts" with lots to say knocking the 128 formula but yet NOT A SPEC OF DATA FROM ANYONE.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

If you think a "270 cc 23° head is different (maybe it is) present your data VS a typical stock near stock sbc head.

Not here to prove nor dis-prove DV's 128 formula..
Just looking to create a variation based on boost added
on crappy near stock typical sbc head engines to get more torque than a generic 112-114 lsa dual pattern "blower cam" Keep it simple.. Keep it relevent to these engines.

How much drive-ability is the owner willing to give up?
Most people will be happier with the 114 cam, even though they will choose something else in the dyno room.

Why would you chose to build on a crappy, incomplete foundation (128)?

BTW, why are you even considering a non inter-cooled supercharger in 2020?

[gmrocket]

If you think a "270 cc 23° head is different (maybe it is) present your data VS a typical stock near stock sbc head.

Not here to prove nor dis-prove DV's 128 formula..

(I don't have the data to do so)
Just looking to create a variation based on boost added
on crappy near stock typical sbc head engines to get more torque than a generic 112-114 lsa dual pattern "blower cam" Keep it simple.. Keep it relevent to these engines.

Lots of "experts" with lots to say knocking the 128 formula but yet NOT A SPEC OF DATA FROM ANYONE.

Yet you don’t have any track or dyno data which prove yours, but on the street you know it’s better?

You prep the street to get consistent butt feel?

Let’s meet at the track and check out your blower build to get some numbers,, I was there Friday getting some baseline numbers on a project before I change it...I’m not into street racing or testing

[F-BIRD'88]

If you think a "270 cc 23° head is different (maybe it is) present your data VS a typical stock near stock sbc head.

Not here to prove nor dis-prove DV's 128 formula..

(I don't have the data to do so)
Just looking to create a variation based on boost added
on crappy near stock typical sbc head engines to get more torque than a generic 112-114 lsa dual pattern "blower cam" Keep it simple.. Keep it relevent to these engines.

Lots of "experts" with lots to say knocking the 128 formula but yet NOT A SPEC OF DATA FROM ANYONE.

Yet you don’t have any track or dyno data which prove yours, but on the street you know it’s better?

You prep the street to get consistent butt feel?

Let’s meet at the track and check out your blower build to get some numbers,, I was there Friday getting some baseline numbers on a project before I change it...I’m not into street racing or testing

You're just dieing to learn all my secrets, aren't you GMRocket... HA HA HA... just ribbin ya.

Not ready . Still looking for a car..

[RevTheory]

If you narrow down the range of engines that 128 is supposed to be applicable to.
What is the highest and lowest value that it returns?

Is it right for all exhaust systems?
Is it right for both automatic and manual?
Is it right for all driving environments?
Is it right for all driving abilities?

Of course not, because those parameters are not inputs to the formula.

Even when customers can see the measured dyno charts of engines, they never choose the one they like best when double-blind test-driving them.

Yeah, that makes complete sense because those are the exact parameters that were laid out in the initial post.

[F-BIRD'88]

This is why SMW is simply the wrong guy for the job.
He wants to turn a $300 problem on a $1200 engine
in A $3000-$4000 car into a $45 million project requiring NASA type analysis.

[RevTheory]

This is why SMW is simply the wrong guy for the job.
He wants to turn a $300 problem on a $1200 engine
in A $3000-$4000 car into a $45 million project requiring NASA type analysis.

Only to present computer-generated findings in a nice packet that only say that you can't get there from here and pretend like you deserve a "good game" pat on the ass.