It was the same dyno. Aside from dyno numbers, the car went from running consistent 12.4s to 12.7s. Power was lost, I don't question that one bit.

While I like the discussion, we're kinda crudding up the OPs intent for this thread. My apologies to the OP.

 

No kidding man. This thread is heading in the right direction. Carry on.

 

So much misinformation in this thread it's ridiculous. I/E flow is an indicator of what cam the engine desires/needs. Just like intake tract length, plenum volume, compression, valve size, rod/stroke ratio, displacement, rpm requirement, vehicle weight, car usage, etc. There shouldn't be ANY power in split ratios, unless the lobes you are using require different ratios. Never stop working the intake, no matter how bad the I/E ratio gets... can't remember who told me that, but look at a pro stocker

 

You couldn't be more wrong. The volume of the gas leaving a ton more than the volume that came in. What do you think pushes the piston down?

 

And que the peanut gallery...

 

the peanut gallery.... you mean the incredibly small group of individuals in this section who somehow figured out how to make more than 420rwhp NA with relatively mild combos?

 

Um, probably 350ci/8 worth of gas/fuel, being compressed into a tiny little 54cc........

Yeah I guess I worded that wrong. It happens to be under tremendous pressure and does a hell of a job working it's way out as soon as the valve opens. It doesn't need a huge port or a huge valve or huge flow numbers to do that. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

You do realize that if that was the case the net loss from friction would stop the engine since it takes just as much energy to compress the air on the compression stroke as the energy it gives off on the power stroke.

I'll give you a little hint. Look up what happens to the volume of gasses when the temperature increases. There might even be an equation out there that lets you calculate the change in volume.

 

I thought everyone knew heat makes everything expand..

 

Regardless, you don't need a huge exhaust valve or a huge exhaust port. The cylinder head that I was talking about was at 80% which is damn good.

 

I know with the money I could put down decent power with my car, the principals for making horsepower isn't much different from gen 1 mouses, its just in the tuning, remember, the only things different are the location of the dizzy, reverse flow cooling, and the cam driven wp, I know a lot about making power on old school motors for my old age of 21, good combos, picking parts that work with each other well, picking parts thatt don't compliment each other result in a lazy dog motor, that's with anything.

 

Just to clarify:
Thermochemistry deals with energy, heat and work. Much of what we study deals with static systems in which no change is taking place. But we are not content with an automobile or truck that just sits in the driveway, so this discussion deals with situations undergoing change.

The change in energy of a system that is going through any process is the sum of the heat added TO the system and the work done ON the system.

delta E = delta q + delta w

If heat flows from the system and work is done by the system as in the case of fuel combustion, then both delta q and delta e are negative and delta E is likewise negative. This situation expresses the conversion of the potential or stored energy of the fuel converted to heat and kinetic energy and transferred from the system to its surroundings.

Consider one cylinder of that Dodge RAM truck outside. In one ignition in which a small amount of fuel is injected into the cylinder, is compressed to a smaller volume and ignited with a spark in the presence of air, we see both the heat and work that results. The engine gets hot and the cylinder moves back down and the resulting work drives the truck. Heat is added to the system and work is done by the system - the energy of the system - the engine - changes.

Where did the energy come from? What was the origin of both heat and work. The ignition of the gasoline in the cylinder caused a rapid chemical reaction with the conversion of the hydrocarbon fuel in the presence of oxygen to carbon dioxide and water with the release of energy. The standard for the measurement of energy - different from the methods of using energy - is called standard enthalpy. Standard enthalpy is the heat given off or required for a chemical reaction carried out on one mole of the substance under standard conditions - that is 25 degrees Celsius and one atmosphere pressure.

Thus for octane - one component of the mixture of hydrocarbons called gasoline, the combustion of one mole - about 114g - follows the equation below and the standard enthalpy of combustion is -1307kcal/mol.

C8H18 + 12.5O2 --> 8CO2 + 9H2O delta Hc = -1307kcal/mole

Please understand this standard enthalpy is a measurement of the energy available. No more no less. But this is confusing, isn't it? We said energy was the sum of heat given off and work done. How then can we measure energy by determining heat effects and ignoring the work. The reason is that we define work as a force acting over a distance.

 

Well Johnny you spoke too soon. This is going down the *******. Not one damn thing on this page has to do with Cam Motion.

 

Fixed.
That's what she said.
Unfortunately it looks that way.

 

I don't own anything Ai dumbfuck, and never will. I'm not a nuthugger in any way, but when you have clueless people babbling about I/E ratios and split ratio rockers, I'll tell it how it is.

 

or 500+rwhp throu an auto?? lol nah we wouldn't know anything about that would we wicked? lol

^agreed minus the owning AI stuff thing lol.........



and as for the rest of this thread.......i agree......first off there is no way in hell you guys can base a decision on whether a cam is good or bad off of just a .050 duration number, a lift number and an ICL LSA number. That tells you virtually nothing about the cam.

Second.....I agree answer the dudes original question......I'm not going to attempt to make any reccomendations to this but I can say it is agggrivating when you ask a question on here and everybody deviates off with random crap........stick to the OP's question!!!!

 

I agree. It's far better to have misleading information posted up and not corrected. Damn peanut gallery! Damn them to hell!

 

as they say ignorance is bliss!

 

Flow numbers can be decieving. Was that exhaust flowed with a pipe? That's an easy way to an artifical increase very quickly.

Why do you think, no matter what the head setup is, that cams like the CC305, 306, GM846 and 847, and most of the custom cams running around (that I've been privy to the specs on) perform so well. They're ALL running in the area of a 10-12* split on the duration in favor of the exhaust. Cams like the 224/230 and 230/236 are pushing the split envelope on the low side IMO. I've never seen an LT1 that's overly happy and performing like I thought it should with a single pattern. The LT1 likes a biased duration to the exhaust side, just look at the numbers and what cam is in the car.

 

In the performance world, no it's not.