Wouldn't you think there's more to it than that?
Lots of work on the intake as shown but out of the box heads? CNC'd or otherwise from Dart, you'd think someone would get in there and massage them a little.
Something doesn't seem right.
It'd be interesting to know the cam spec's and follow the Torque Master program to see how it how it played out.
Sure their is, BUT once you enter a engine building contest, don't you think you would build it to the BEST of your abilities for the given rule's! Not just enter for the sake of it...............money and EGO'S are up for the taking....lol.
But in the last 10 years his health and other problem's have not gone his way, the technology in the last 10 years has changed also, and i don't think he has done the testing like he did 20-30 years ago. It just come's across as he is the only one that can spec a cam, and his way is the right way.
And I can agree to that as well.
All of that and maybe more so than lately.
Do you think his tech is any less relevant though? Given what I'm talking about that's the basic formula for good old hot rod 350 in a race car. Maybe a street car too.
Bigchief632 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 1:37 pm
2nd to last. But the last place guy dnf'd but made more power.
Please cite your sources Bigchief. I could find little about the results since it's inception in 2018 (but that may be wrong as well). I found plenty of video and description but lacking in the entry list and results department.
You look to have an inside track on that so that's why I'm asking.
Thanks.
skinny z wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:03 am
And I can agree to that as well.
All of that and maybe more so than lately.
Do you think his tech is any less relevant though? Given what I'm talking about that's the basic formula for good old hot rod 350 in a race car. Maybe a street car too.
That’s the way I see it too. It gives those guys confidence and ownership over their choice of cam in their personal build. If I’m reading it right he’s taking his years of testing, noticed the similarities of the best results and derived a formula from those. The good ‘ol hot rod guys and performance street builds will then be guided toward what made those test successful over the years. The formula has rules for its inputs so it’s corralling you towards a result, which is fine because that’s its intention. Below is what I mean by input rules from an old thread:
David Vizard wrote:
The 128 #
Now before it becomes a subject of posting questions let me say that the ‘128’ number is for parallel 2 valve engines such as SB Chevy’s, Fords and Chryslers with typical (average) discharge co-efficient’s in the 0.000 to about 0. 200 thou valve lift range. It is also for a base 10.5/1 CR engine but I will explain that and how to cater for other CR’s later.
This means it is not for Hemi’s,
DV
I’m a Street/Strip guy..... like to think outside the quadrilateral parallelogram.
bob460 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 7:32 pm
So his Cam design's work real well to come 2nd last.......
Difference between winning and losing can be two events that happen 7 days and 1670km apart each other. Add 130km and you're home.
Not to mention my service car is 1983 MB, but the point is i also finished the first event where i money shifted and clutch came off between the engine and tires... I had a really fast intake port though, but im not talking been on a dyno competition.
-juhana
A balanced person dares to stagger, and modify ports bigger
bob460 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 7:32 pm
So his Cam design's work real well to come 2nd last.......
Difference between winning and losing can be two events that happen 7 days and 1670km apart each other. Add 130km and you're home.
Not to mention my service car is 1983 MB, but the point is i also finished the first event where i money shifted and clutch came off between the engine and tires... I had a really fast intake port though, but im not talking been on a dyno competition.
Made me thinking, if i was a wise man. I could just enter a dyno competition using a race engine and compare how good it really is against the dyno engines.
A balanced person dares to stagger, and modify ports bigger
Difference between winning and losing can be two events that happen 7 days and 1670km apart each other. Add 130km and you're home.
Not to mention my service car is 1983 MB, but the point is i also finished the first event where i money shifted and clutch came off between the engine and tires... I had a really fast intake port though, but im not talking been on a dyno competition.
-juhana
Okily Dokily!.........WTF!
Sorry i remembered wrong. The first one was on sunday and the second was the following friday, so the two events were within 5 days. Its funny that it also happened in 2019.. Route traveled with a trailer was Rovaniemi - Nokia - Rovaniemi - Isosyöte - Rovaniemi.
Just speaking for myself, ive never had a problem in losing There are things you can't see on a flow bench, that are hard to spot on the dyno, but you'll see a different time in a clock, so who "cares" about the dyno and especially from one dyno race!
-juhana
A balanced person dares to stagger, and modify ports bigger
skinny z wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:03 am
And I can agree to that as well.
All of that and maybe more so than lately.
Do you think his tech is any less relevant though? Given what I'm talking about that's the basic formula for good old hot rod 350 in a race car. Maybe a street car too.
That’s the way I see it too. It gives those guys confidence and ownership over their choice of cam in their personal build. If I’m reading it right he’s taking his years of testing, noticed the similarities of the best results and derived a formula from those. The good ‘ol hot rod guys and performance street builds will then be guided toward what made those test successful over the years. The formula has rules for its inputs so it’s corralling you towards a result, which is fine because that’s its intention. Below is what I mean by input rules from an old thread:
David Vizard wrote:
The 128 #
Now before it becomes a subject of posting questions let me say that the ‘128’ number is for parallel 2 valve engines such as SB Chevy’s, Fords and Chryslers with typical (average) discharge co-efficient’s in the 0.000 to about 0. 200 thou valve lift range. It is also for a base 10.5/1 CR engine but I will explain that and how to cater for other CR’s later.
This means it is not for Hemi’s,
DV
This is why it suits me as this is what I'm presently putting together.
We'll see what comes out the woodwork here when I lay those TM results out on the table and compare them with other recommendations.
skinny z wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:03 am
And I can agree to that as well.
All of that and maybe more so than lately.
Do you think his tech is any less relevant though? Given what I'm talking about that's the basic formula for good old hot rod 350 in a race car. Maybe a street car too.
That’s the way I see it too. It gives those guys confidence and ownership over their choice of cam in their personal build. If I’m reading it right he’s taking his years of testing, noticed the similarities of the best results and derived a formula from those. The good ‘ol hot rod guys and performance street builds will then be guided toward what made those test successful over the years. The formula has rules for its inputs so it’s corralling you towards a result, which is fine because that’s its intention. Below is what I mean by input rules from an old thread:
David Vizard wrote:
The 128 #
Now before it becomes a subject of posting questions let me say that the ‘128’ number is for parallel 2 valve engines such as SB Chevy’s, Fords and Chryslers with typical (average) discharge co-efficient’s in the 0.000 to about 0. 200 thou valve lift range. It is also for a base 10.5/1 CR engine but I will explain that and how to cater for other CR’s later.
This means it is not for Hemi’s,
DV
This is why it suits me as this is what I'm presently putting together.
We'll see what comes out the woodwork here when I lay those TM results out on the table and compare them with other recommendations.
Why not call Mike Jones who actually designs cams, has real experience with countless race teams and racers, and actually grinds the cams, just don't understand why anyone wouldn't do that. Or call Bullet, or LSM, or Erson, or Howards etc. But Mike's cams work well, he knows what you need, and why wouldn't you support the guy who saved this site, and keeps it going.
That’s the way I see it too. It gives those guys confidence and ownership over their choice of cam in their personal build. If I’m reading it right he’s taking his years of testing, noticed the similarities of the best results and derived a formula from those. The good ‘ol hot rod guys and performance street builds will then be guided toward what made those test successful over the years. The formula has rules for its inputs so it’s corralling you towards a result, which is fine because that’s its intention. Below is what I mean by input rules from an old thread:
This is why it suits me as this is what I'm presently putting together.
We'll see what comes out the woodwork here when I lay those TM results out on the table and compare them with other recommendations.
Why not call Mike Jones who actually designs cams, has real experience with countless race teams and racers, and actually grinds the cams, just don't understand why anyone wouldn't do that. Or call Bullet, or LSM, or Erson, or Howards etc. But Mike's cams work well, he knows what you need, and why wouldn't you support the guy who saved this site, and keeps it going.
Yes sir. I agree. This is something I've already done regarding a past project.
Two recommendations from Jones for two potential build directions. Another from Bullet. Plus suggestions from other forum members who've gone down this route. As well as TM. All very different.
Once this latest SBC is measured up to confirm the final CR, it'll be another round of cam recommendation forms to fill out.
I'm liking Jones Cams because he offers excellent support. Plus his stuff is all USA made.
This is why it suits me as this is what I'm presently putting together.
We'll see what comes out the woodwork here when I lay those TM results out on the table and compare them with other recommendations.
Why not call Mike Jones who actually designs cams, has real experience with countless race teams and racers, and actually grinds the cams, just don't understand why anyone wouldn't do that. Or call Bullet, or LSM, or Erson, or Howards etc. But Mike's cams work well, he knows what you need, and why wouldn't you support the guy who saved this site, and keeps it going.
Yes sir. I agree. This is something I've already done regarding a past project.
Two recommendations from Jones for two potential build directions. Another from Bullet. Plus suggestions from other forum members who've gone down this route. As well as TM. All very different.
Once this latest SBC is measured up to confirm the final CR, it'll be another round of cam recommendation forms to fill out.
I'm liking Jones Cams because he offers excellent support. Plus his stuff is all USA made.
Bigchief632 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:03 pm
Just curios, what's the combo?
SBC, iron heads (175cc, 255@.550"), 10-10.5:1, carb, open headers, drag racing, RPM ceiling of 6500 (proposed 6200 shift with auto and 4000 stall converter).
Third iteration of basically the same engine but now with ported heads. New converter and transmission as well.
Chassis specifics aren't set but a baseline is in place.
There are things you can't see on a flow bench, that are hard to spot on the dyno, but you'll see a different time in a clock, so who "cares" about the dyno and especially from one dyno race! 
