Advanced Induction 416 ci, HR, L92, Vic Jr - 714hp *NA*
10-19-2010, 09:30 AM
#1
Advanced Induction 416 ci, HR, L92, Vic Jr - 714hp *NA* Here are some results and videos of my most recent engine build. Ai made the following post with some test data for the Gen 4 Internal Forum, but I thought it would be nice to share here too.
700+ hp wasn't so hard when you factor in knowledge, quality, and the right parts. I'm going to run this setup for a season and then send it back for some power numbers that start with an 8XX. I think a bit of track tuning will push the numbers up a bit more.
700+ hp wasn't so hard when you factor in knowledge, quality, and the right parts. I'm going to run this setup for a season and then send it back for some power numbers that start with an 8XX. I think a bit of track tuning will push the numbers up a bit more.
Gents,
On occasion we like to build test engines to document both the potential of our products, as well as to collect data. Sometimes we are fortunate enough that our need for data coincides with a customer's need for a similar powerplant. I thought we'd share a little data on an engine that was built recently for a friend/customer - Tireburnin/Sean. Beyond data collection, our goal was to put together a low maintenance package that could essentially do it all - cruise, drag race, and tolerate a few hundred hp worth of n2o should the need arise. Sean was looking for ~650hp on pump fuel, which is typically easily attainable with the common 400cid+ engines. As a departure from the norm, we decided to give a carbureted 13:1 E85 setup a try. Our motivation was largely attributable to the prevalence of E85 in SOCAL, his familiarity with carburetion, and fueling consistency if he decided to bracket race the car. As an added benefit, this helped maintain a clean and simple look, so as to arouse minimal suspicion at the local races.
The Basics:
Block: GM LS3
Crank: Compstar 4" Stroke
Rods: Compstar H-Beam
Pistons: JE 4.070"
Rings: Total Seal
Heads: Ai 267cc CNC'd L92
Manifold: Victor Jr. - As Cast
Valve Train: Ai HR, Comp 1.7 Rockers, 3/8" PR, Morel HR Lifters
Oiling: GM OEM pump, pan, and pickup w/ 15w-50 Gibbs BR Oil
Water Pump: GM OEM
As with most of our setups, our primary focus is reliability and efficiency. To that end we are particularly over insured in regard to valve train on Sean's setup. Though we are running lobes that we can control with a beehive, we wanted to step it up a bit in the event Sean decided to have us revise the top-end for more power. With Ferrea valves, Morel HR lifters, Comp shaft mounts, and our custom Ti-17 retainers on PSI dual HR springs we're in a position to either move to something aggressive like an LSL, LSK, etc., or raise the operating range if so inclined. For now, due to concerns about drive train breakage leading to over revs, we decided to stick with something we can control to ~8000rpm.
The manifold was chosen simply because we were wanting to do some testing with it. As cast the Victor Jr. should easily support ~700hp, and running our smallest L92/LS3 CNC option, there was little reason to invest time in modifying it for this go 'round. For carburetion we ran two carbs from a known good supplier - Pro Systems. Both are 940-950cfm 4150 carbs, one for gas & one for E85.
As we're mostly using shelf parts, the valve train came together largely without issue. The head and valve covers both required minimal clearancing for the rocker system & pushrods, but that is not uncommon. Having done various mockups, we can now simply CNC the appropriate clearance into L92/LS3's for various shaft systems.
Rocker Mockup
Testing
For safety's sake we started on a known good non-oxygenated 108 octane fuel for break in and testing before going to E85 pump fuel. Timing was handled by an MSD 6LS box using GM LS1 coils. As we exceeded our goals, we were not inclined to push the limits on either fuel for the sake of dyno racing. We ran 34deg max on the 108, which consistently made 710-715 depending on temps. While E85 may often allow more timing, we backed it down 4-6deg through the entire curve. We're covered with high nickel content exhaust valves for n2o use, and were more concerned about possible issues on the pump fuel than the slightly higher EGT's. During pump fuel pulls the objective was to simply verify that it would run safely on E85 under load, not so much to determine what is possible with it since the load will vary slightly in real life vs. controlled dyno testing. Additionally, even with little timing, we wanted to collect #'s from low in the RPM range vs. the 108 octane testing which focused on the RPM range Sean will actually use it in. Once it is under the load range it will operate within, we will begin creeping up on it and fatten the low/mid curves on E85.
Dyno on 108
Dyno on E85 w/ less timing
Dyno Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYM2Fws8Qrc
Hope you guys like it! If I can dig up any other photos etc. I'll share them. In the future we'll make collecting build photos and video more than an afterthought so there's a little more eye candy to go along with the results.
Thanks guys!
-Phil
On occasion we like to build test engines to document both the potential of our products, as well as to collect data. Sometimes we are fortunate enough that our need for data coincides with a customer's need for a similar powerplant. I thought we'd share a little data on an engine that was built recently for a friend/customer - Tireburnin/Sean. Beyond data collection, our goal was to put together a low maintenance package that could essentially do it all - cruise, drag race, and tolerate a few hundred hp worth of n2o should the need arise. Sean was looking for ~650hp on pump fuel, which is typically easily attainable with the common 400cid+ engines. As a departure from the norm, we decided to give a carbureted 13:1 E85 setup a try. Our motivation was largely attributable to the prevalence of E85 in SOCAL, his familiarity with carburetion, and fueling consistency if he decided to bracket race the car. As an added benefit, this helped maintain a clean and simple look, so as to arouse minimal suspicion at the local races.
The Basics:
Block: GM LS3
Crank: Compstar 4" Stroke
Rods: Compstar H-Beam
Pistons: JE 4.070"
Rings: Total Seal
Heads: Ai 267cc CNC'd L92
Manifold: Victor Jr. - As Cast
Valve Train: Ai HR, Comp 1.7 Rockers, 3/8" PR, Morel HR Lifters
Oiling: GM OEM pump, pan, and pickup w/ 15w-50 Gibbs BR Oil
Water Pump: GM OEM
As with most of our setups, our primary focus is reliability and efficiency. To that end we are particularly over insured in regard to valve train on Sean's setup. Though we are running lobes that we can control with a beehive, we wanted to step it up a bit in the event Sean decided to have us revise the top-end for more power. With Ferrea valves, Morel HR lifters, Comp shaft mounts, and our custom Ti-17 retainers on PSI dual HR springs we're in a position to either move to something aggressive like an LSL, LSK, etc., or raise the operating range if so inclined. For now, due to concerns about drive train breakage leading to over revs, we decided to stick with something we can control to ~8000rpm.
The manifold was chosen simply because we were wanting to do some testing with it. As cast the Victor Jr. should easily support ~700hp, and running our smallest L92/LS3 CNC option, there was little reason to invest time in modifying it for this go 'round. For carburetion we ran two carbs from a known good supplier - Pro Systems. Both are 940-950cfm 4150 carbs, one for gas & one for E85.
As we're mostly using shelf parts, the valve train came together largely without issue. The head and valve covers both required minimal clearancing for the rocker system & pushrods, but that is not uncommon. Having done various mockups, we can now simply CNC the appropriate clearance into L92/LS3's for various shaft systems.
Rocker Mockup
Testing
For safety's sake we started on a known good non-oxygenated 108 octane fuel for break in and testing before going to E85 pump fuel. Timing was handled by an MSD 6LS box using GM LS1 coils. As we exceeded our goals, we were not inclined to push the limits on either fuel for the sake of dyno racing. We ran 34deg max on the 108, which consistently made 710-715 depending on temps. While E85 may often allow more timing, we backed it down 4-6deg through the entire curve. We're covered with high nickel content exhaust valves for n2o use, and were more concerned about possible issues on the pump fuel than the slightly higher EGT's. During pump fuel pulls the objective was to simply verify that it would run safely on E85 under load, not so much to determine what is possible with it since the load will vary slightly in real life vs. controlled dyno testing. Additionally, even with little timing, we wanted to collect #'s from low in the RPM range vs. the 108 octane testing which focused on the RPM range Sean will actually use it in. Once it is under the load range it will operate within, we will begin creeping up on it and fatten the low/mid curves on E85.
Dyno on 108
Dyno on E85 w/ less timing
Dyno Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYM2Fws8Qrc
Hope you guys like it! If I can dig up any other photos etc. I'll share them. In the future we'll make collecting build photos and video more than an afterthought so there's a little more eye candy to go along with the results.
Thanks guys!
-Phil
Last edited by Tireburnin; 10-19-2010 at 10:51 AM.
10-19-2010, 11:07 AM
#3
So Sean, What is the compression ratio of this motor?
I also noticed you did not provide cam specs, which I'm fine with, would you mind providing just the total overlap at .050. My new 418 also recently came off the dyno TQ and HP peaking right about where yours does. Curious to know how similar our overlaps are.
I also noticed you did not provide cam specs, which I'm fine with, would you mind providing just the total overlap at .050. My new 418 also recently came off the dyno TQ and HP peaking right about where yours does. Curious to know how similar our overlaps are.
10-19-2010, 12:20 PM
#5
So Sean, What is the compression ratio of this motor?
I also noticed you did not provide cam specs, which I'm fine with, would you mind providing just the total overlap at .050. My new 418 also recently came off the dyno TQ and HP peaking right about where yours does. Curious to know how similar our overlaps are.
I also noticed you did not provide cam specs, which I'm fine with, would you mind providing just the total overlap at .050. My new 418 also recently came off the dyno TQ and HP peaking right about where yours does. Curious to know how similar our overlaps are.
I will leave cam specs up to the builder to post. I didn't involve myself in those aspects of the build and they may desire to keep them private. The cam isn't crazy big and the lift is reasonable due to maintenance and reliability concerns.
I'm happy with the results though considering some of the stock parts and parameters I required. I think an EWP, no alternator, and possibly porting the intake would have added to the bottom line.
10-19-2010, 03:44 PM
#6
I figured compresion was up there a bit if you were starting off with race gas then moving over to E85.
I can respect the wishes of not giving up cam details. That is why I asked my question the way I did, as it would not give away exact valve events or even speculate duration or lift. Not looking to mimic the cam, only to compare one aspect of it. If the builder does not want to comment on it, I'm perfectly fine with that.
Those are good numbers for sure and obviously a well thought out package.
I can respect the wishes of not giving up cam details. That is why I asked my question the way I did, as it would not give away exact valve events or even speculate duration or lift. Not looking to mimic the cam, only to compare one aspect of it. If the builder does not want to comment on it, I'm perfectly fine with that.
Those are good numbers for sure and obviously a well thought out package.
Trending Topics
10-26-2010, 07:51 AM
#12
I can respect the wishes of not giving up cam details. That is why I asked my question the way I did, as it would not give away exact valve events or even speculate duration or lift. Not looking to mimic the cam, only to compare one aspect of it. If the builder does not want to comment on it, I'm perfectly fine with that.
Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you guys like it. Now I tend to think we should have held on to it and did the common no alt, electric WP, normal oil, etc. to see if it'd go 740 or so. Maybe next time.
-Phil
10-26-2010, 05:59 PM
#14
11 Second Club
iTrader: (35)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NW Chicago burbs
Posts: 2,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks. I have 2 weeks and then I will find out how she does. Not too concerned with Dyno numbers as I am with track times. I hope to hit the one goal I set before this whole project began.
10-27-2010, 03:28 PM
#15
Phil,
It apsolutely does.. If you go back and look at what I actually asked and the reason, you would understand I'm not A) looking to copy the cam B) Only wanting to compare overlap. I wasn't even asking for .050 duration numbers, lift, intake center, LSA or any of the other things that someone else might.
I was mearley wanting to look at overlap in general, where things are peaking RPM wise. Both of us are running 415+ ci, single plain intakes, and both motors peak with in 50-100 rpm of each other as far as TQ and HP.
Again, if total overlap at .050" does not want to be discussed, great, no problem. I also understand a 230/270 cam could have the same overlap as a 220/230 cam.. The ICL/LSA's might look a bit funny though
10-29-2010, 07:52 AM
#17
Phil,
It apsolutely does.. If you go back and look at what I actually asked and the reason, you would understand I'm not A) looking to copy the cam B) Only wanting to compare overlap. I wasn't even asking for .050 duration numbers, lift, intake center, LSA or any of the other things that someone else might.
I was mearley wanting to look at overlap in general, where things are peaking RPM wise. Both of us are running 415+ ci, single plain intakes, and both motors peak with in 50-100 rpm of each other as far as TQ and HP.
Again, if total overlap at .050" does not want to be discussed, great, no problem. I also understand a 230/270 cam could have the same overlap as a 220/230 cam.. The ICL/LSA's might look a bit funny though
It apsolutely does.. If you go back and look at what I actually asked and the reason, you would understand I'm not A) looking to copy the cam B) Only wanting to compare overlap. I wasn't even asking for .050 duration numbers, lift, intake center, LSA or any of the other things that someone else might.
I was mearley wanting to look at overlap in general, where things are peaking RPM wise. Both of us are running 415+ ci, single plain intakes, and both motors peak with in 50-100 rpm of each other as far as TQ and HP.
Again, if total overlap at .050" does not want to be discussed, great, no problem. I also understand a 230/270 cam could have the same overlap as a 220/230 cam.. The ICL/LSA's might look a bit funny though
I'd not posted a # initially because 1. I didn't recall offhand (37deg), and 2. the .050" overlap doesn't accurately define how much overlap the cam has. It will be significantly affected by what style of lobe is run, lash, etc. Though it doesn't take into account deflection, plunger movement/lash, etc. here is a graph to illustrate what I am getting at. These two cams have the same .050" overlap:
