Are you really that thick or just want to argue?
Again what is pushing the other 7 is meaningless the rate of acceleration/stress on rod bolts is rpm.

Do you think the greater rate of acceleration on the jug creates more rod bolt stress vs. the same motor NA? The pistons and rods are basically stopping and reaccelerating twice per revolution anyway and that rate is rpm dependent not rate of rpm increase dependent.

 

I think it is interesting that you think RPM is the ONLY thing that taxes the rod bolts...
Just Slapping the throttle closed at a specific rpm will give an increase in rod bolt stress because of the pressure differential in the intake and the crankcase, its like sucking air though a 1inch pipe and then going to a sonic straw. The highest load the rod bolt will be subjected to is at the highest rpm and then a closed TB. It does matter whether it is closed or not. With this simple FACT, RPM is not the only factor that determines rod bolt stress.
I simply stated that increasing power at a certain rpm also increases rod bolt stress at that same rpm. With him being close to the limit with stock rod bolts it is a factor to ponder. But I apologize to the car god you are...

 

More torque at low RPM is bad for rods.

Can't bring in the boost too soon or things play short rod syndrome.

 

Well, what the hell. I didn't want to clutter the OP's thread any more, but that's already a done deal!
Congratulations, you've started an argument which you can win.
You lost the original one that you started.

 

After I stated vacuum played a role...................
And still do coherent argument about how nitrous use affects rod bolt load.

 

It's always been a good cam when used as intended. If paired with good heads, proper gearing, supporting mods and a good tune it's never really been a bad choice.

I think a lot of the stigma attached to this cam has to do with folks sticking it in stock longblocks with minimal supporting mods and stock 3.42 gearing and half-assed tuning. In those cases, it and any other large hydraulic isn't going to drive particularly well.

 

well heck why not try some theory of tangent loading of the crankshaft. Assuming an engine that is trying to accelerate. The reason the piston is being pulled down is because of two things Correct? Inertia of the crankshaft and the other piston that has just fired causing the entire assembly to twist(Tangential force) against the flywheel. As we know for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So the piston that is adding force tangent to the crankshaft is also increasing force on anything that is trying to slow the crankshaft down(intake stroke of opposing cylinder). Im not saying that it is a huge increase in force actually pretty small in comparison to the inertia of the crankshaft but it still adds.. And the Throttle being closed example just proves that rpm is NOT the ONLY factor that causes rod bolt loading. Thus removing any objection to my input on the basis that rod bolt loading is rpm dependent. By all means use a rpm limit to determine rod bolts but to say i am wrong is bunch of crap. Say it means little you may, but not wrong. heck its pretty easy to just get a different set rods or bolts and then this discussion doesn't really mean crap.

Oh BTW sorry OP I try not to thread-jack but oops....