Author Topic: 577" SOHC  (Read 27476 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
577" SOHC
« on: May 11, 2013, 04:27:29 PM »
With all the other stuff I've been trying to get done over the last several months (CVR water pump adapters, clear valve covers, FE intake adapter, 4th CNC axis, FE + Tremec TKO in my '68 Mustang driver, etc.) it has been difficult to make time to work on one of my existing car or engine projects.  I had plans to get the Mach 1's engine back out of the car for further development work, and also to get my 69 Shelby clone rewired for a different EFI system, plus put the engine on the dyno (which I ran out of time to do before Drag Week last year).  Finally I concluded that I really couldn't do both of those cars, so I decided to just try to get the Shelby clone together and get some racing in this summer.  About a month ago I pulled the engine back out of the car, having never fired it after installation, and got to work on some of the modifications I had wanted to do before I ran out of time last year.

First on the list was an improved target for the crank sensor, which I've already finished up.  Next was going to a dry sump setup on this engine.  I'm thinking that this will provide a big benefit on this motor because room for the oil plan is limited due to the front suspension arrangement, and with 577 cubic inches this thing could use some crankcase vacuum and reduced windage inside.  I got in touch with Peterson Oiling Systems and after discussing the project with one of their tech guys, I purchase a six stage dry sump pump and one of their drag race oil tanks.  This weekend I've been working on (among other things) getting the pump mounted on the engine.

Here's a couple pictures of the pump.  The 1" thick aluminum plate next to it came as a 6" long plate that bolted to the tabs on the side of the pump.  The idea is that you can machine or cut this plate however necessary to mount it to the engine.  I figured out how I wanted to mount it and machined it into the shape shown in the pictures:





The first three inlets on the bottom of the pump go to pickups in the oil pan.  I'm going to be modifying the pan I've already got for use with the dry sump, so I bought three of Peterson's pickups along with the pump.  The fourth and fifth inlet are also suction inlets, and one of those will go to each cylinder head.  The sixth inlet is for the pumping section, not a scavenging section, and it gets oil from the oil tank.  When I called Peterson I figured I wanted a five stage pump, which is the usual configuration, with three pickups in the pan, one in the valley, and one for the pressure section.  But for the SOHC there really isn't a bunch of oil in the valley, because there aren't any lifters.  All the oil is up in the heads, and drains back down at the rear of the head or the front, into the timing cover.  So we decided it would be best to scavenge the oil in both heads rather than the valley, and so a six stage pump was needed.

I was going to require a remote oil filter with this setup, so I figured I'd use the factory oil filter bracket mounting location to mount the pump.  Of course there are two holes there, one for the passage from the stock oil pump to the filter adapter, and the other from the filter adapter into the block.  I didn't need to use the passage from the stock pump, but I was figuring I could machine a piece of aluminum that would fit up to the passage into the block, and then use an AN fitting on the aluminum piece to get oil from the dry sump pump into the block.  But as I started working on this it dawned on me that since this is a Shelby block, there is a tapped main oil passage coming out of the side of the block already, and I could just feed the oil in there.  So I decided to seal off the oil filter pad completely with the machined piece of aluminum, which made the machining operations a lot easier.  Here's a photo of this machined block bolted in place on the engine; you can see the pipe plug for the main oil gallery right above it:



The three holes towards the front on the flat part of the block are needed to bolt on one more spacer block just to the inside, to move the pump inboard somewhat.  Originally I hadn't planned on this, but when I mounted the pump to the block as shown it hung out to the side of the engine a little too far.  After making this spacer block I bolted everything together; here's a couple of pictures:





Now that I have this assembled I know the spacing between the pump shaft and the crank, so I can order the HTD pulleys and belts I need from Peterson to get the pump hooked up.  Next step will be to pull the pan and start modifying it for use with the dry sump pump.

I've also recently acquired some new cams for this engine.  I've been working with the guys at Comp Cams on a custom grind, because I think even their largest cams are a little small for this engine.  It took several weeks to get this done, but finally the cams arrived on Thursday this week.  Thursday night I set one of them up in the right head, and checked piston to valve clearance and ran a profile on the grind to compare it with my existing cams.  Here's a photo of the checking setup:



These cams will give about 5 more degrees of duration and .030" lift than my current set of cams, at the cost of reducing the base circle size of the cam.  Reducing the size of the base circle is something you never really want to do if you can avoid it, but since my high ratio SOHC rocker arms look like they are a long way off at this point, this was the best I could do to get a little more out of the valvetrain.  We will see how it performs on the dyno, when I get there.  Just to check out the new cams with the existing springs I've got, I'm going to send a test head and cam to Bill Conley so he can wring them out on his Spintron machine.  I'm looking forward to seeing some good video, and hopefully these cams will run to 8000 RPM with the springs I've got.  We will see...
« Last Edit: May 11, 2013, 09:24:05 PM by jayb »
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2013, 06:06:41 PM »
Drooool!  That is going to be awesome with the six-stage pump.  I never thought to use suction pumps to pull oil out of the heads like that.  After seeing how much oil flows into the heads (using the spin test machine) though, it will be a great thing.
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2013, 06:26:21 PM »
With all the other stuff I've been trying to get done over the last several months

I don't know how you do it.
Drool is right. :)
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


cjetmech

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2013, 05:27:27 PM »
Jay are you going to try and get to drag week with this car this year?
67 Fairlane GT 428
93 Mustang Coupe 331

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2013, 06:20:32 PM »
Jay are you going to try and get to drag week with this car this year?

I don't think so.  I've got too much to do with the intake adapters and the other projects to think about Drag Week this year...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3854
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2013, 09:09:38 PM »
Wow, 8,000+ rpm with that long stroke. Jay, you have a pair for sure......LOL!
Bob Maag

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2013, 10:54:27 PM »
I didn't say I'd take it there LOL!  In this engine's last incarnation I had the rev limiter set at 7600.  But knowing that the valvetrain will go to 8000 RPM without problems adds some confidence at the track...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

sixty9cobra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2013, 08:20:43 PM »
did you ever find out what blewin the Galaxy?

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2013, 10:56:30 PM »
Haven't touched it since last fall, Harry, so no post mortem yet...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2013, 08:28:28 PM »
Damn that is an expensive piece of hardware to have fail,   is a cammer that much of a HP advantage? Or is it more the eye candy appeal? I have never really seen a  convincing benefit over a conventional head.....Jon

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2013, 08:47:07 PM »
The SOHC head walks away from other FE heads in flow.  Here is my best SOHC head compared to my best wedge head, for intake port flow.  The wedge head is a Blue Thunder high riser and is the only wedge FE head I've ever had that hits 400 cfm on the intake side.  Both heads use 2.300" intake valves.  Notice that the SOHC head just clobbers the wedge head in the midrange, especially.  410 cfm at .500" lift for the SOHC head!

Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fetorino

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
  • Tunnelport Cobra
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2013, 10:33:45 PM »

Maybe a dumb question but it would seem very hard to mimic the quick ramps of a modern wedge cam/rocker combo with a Cammer because of the small rocker ratio.


With the rocker arm ratio limitations of the Cammer how much does that effect the benefit of the flow?

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2013, 08:07:23 AM »
I was just wondering because all the pro teams use a twisted wedge or raised runner head....Jon

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2013, 09:39:17 AM »

Maybe a dumb question but it would seem very hard to mimic the quick ramps of a modern wedge cam/rocker combo with a Cammer because of the small rocker ratio.


With the rocker arm ratio limitations of the Cammer how much does that effect the benefit of the flow?

Modern cam profiles are indeed available for the cammer.  The only thing you're limited to is about 0.700" lift, because the cam lobe gets too close to the rocker body. 

I recently changed out a set of big "old school" regrind cams in a customer's cammer Cobra.  The car was hard-idling and fouled plugs like crazy.  You had to feather the clutch while taking off to avoid stalling the thing.  Of course in the high rpm range it got scary fast!

After a new set of Comp mid-range cams, the car became a whole different animal.  It idles nicely at 800 rpm, and pulls off-idle like a Cobra Jet.  No more plug fouling because there's actually some port velocity at idle now.  Plugging both sets of cams into Engine Analyzer Pro shows only about 20 HP lost up top.  Down low there's over 100 ft-lbs more torque where you need it the most.  Amazing transformation!

So... yes, you can take advantage of modern cam grinds with a cammer :-) 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 09:41:15 AM by WConley »
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2013, 04:55:28 PM »
Hmm so what blocks will a SOHC head fit? Maybe I am chasing down the wrong rabbit hole for my Comet? I  going toward a small block to save weight and make room. The 390 is so tight that the towers need to be cut for decent exhaust flow and a lot of parts are custom to make the FE fit and not tear the frame apart. Parts are scarce for performance chassis parts. I pretty much have to make stuff fit as I go. I wanted 800 HP but as I delve into the ford 60s cars there are a huge amount of unseen variables to make that happen. My first mistake is I started with the wrong block.  It was all perpetual from there.....Jon

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2013, 06:33:19 PM »
The SOHC heads will fit any FE block, but if it is not an original SOHC block you will have to run an external oil line from each head down to the pain for drainage.  No big deal.  Also a 390 block will have to be notched a little for valve clearance, but again that is no big deal.  Lots of people have put SOHC heads on 390 blocks.  The big issue will be fitting it in the car.  The SOHC engine is 31" wide at its widest point.  You will need serious shock tower surgery to fit it in your Comet.  A lot of people convert to a Mustang II front end and cut the shock towers completely out...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2013, 07:40:28 PM »
I already have decided to go 427 or 428 on my next build. I definitely will stay Ford on my front end as the Chevy stuff is way to heavy. Or possibly go with a new front sub frame all together I can go tubular arms that way and avoid a lot of current headaches I am dealing with now. Handling is definitely a priority  there........Jon

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #17 on: May 24, 2013, 08:15:42 PM »
You need the full 4.23" bore 427 FE block (factory or aftermarket).  You can go bigger, but any smaller and the valves won't fit.

Cammers ain't cheap!!
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #18 on: May 24, 2013, 08:41:58 PM »
Gotta disagree on that one, Bill.  I have a good friend running the SOHC heads on a .040" over 390 block.  The bores had to be seriously notched, but it all fits...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #19 on: May 25, 2013, 07:38:58 AM »
I am not a believer in notching cylinder walls, besides affecting the integrity of the deck and wall it also does not help the top ring any either. I have seen too much go wrong there when you start getting crazy. Saw an example of that on a supercharged Ford 460 a couple weeks ago. Walls gave out, Ford racing block trashed......Jon

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #20 on: May 25, 2013, 02:53:11 PM »
Color me surprised!!  Are the valves standard size?  Does the cylinder wall even reach the chamber wall on the head?

I have never heard of such a thing.
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #21 on: May 25, 2013, 04:22:43 PM »
Valves are 2.25 and 1.90 if I recall correctly.  I'm sure the chamber does not meet the cylinder bore walls.  He is running a 4.25" crank and 6.700" rods, and the biggest concern was notching the bores enough for valve clearance but not so far down into the cylinder that the notch went into where the top ring is at its highest.  I didn't see the engine in short block form, but I'll bet the notch extends down at least 0.200".  Just doing the math, the .040" over 390 bore at 4.09 is 0.140" smaller in diameter than the 427 bore.  That means that from the top the bore would have to be notched 0.070" to clear the valve, and of course the notch gets shallower as you go down the bore, since the valve angle is working for you.
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #22 on: May 25, 2013, 05:04:07 PM »
Hey Jay
Are there any standards to look for in a block that you would do this to?
Such as a minimum wall thickness.
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #23 on: May 25, 2013, 06:06:37 PM »
I don't think so.  The deck of the block casting is at least a half inch thick around the bores, so notching the bores for the SOHC valves should not be an issue in any FE block.  Depending on the piston the top ring may come up to within .300" or so of the deck, which is the real concern, I think.
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #24 on: May 25, 2013, 06:19:57 PM »
Kinda makes me horny thinkin' about it ???
I've got a '66 with a mustang II front end and no engine.
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #25 on: May 25, 2013, 07:06:36 PM »
Sheesh!  I would have thought you'd need to at least start with a 428. 

Just got back in from the garage - working on a pretty ratty Dove aluminum SOHC head.  Yeah the valves look bigger than stock, but man it's hard to believe that thing could work on a 4.09" bore!

I had success once running a set of 427 Low Riser heads on a .030" over 390.  I had to notch the exhaust side about 1/4" down the bore.  laid it out with modeling clay, and it ran just fine.

- Bill
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #26 on: May 25, 2013, 07:31:04 PM »
The valves in that head are actually 2.35", I think.  It is a pretty ratty head, having been the one on my big SOHC when the T&D rocker seized on the shaft and hung the exhaust valve open.  Valve kissed piston, head came off, bounced around in the chamber, etc.  But, its only a Dove head ;D
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #27 on: May 25, 2013, 08:36:09 PM »
The example I saw in the 460 block was  without heads, just a short block but there was a lot of material missing there and not tapered or canted. Must have been a big .800 solid roller cam or something. Lots of boost too, the pistons had a huge dish. I have a buddy that does race chassis, engines and paint so he gets some not so well thought out engineering thrown his way to fix....Jon

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #28 on: May 25, 2013, 08:43:15 PM »
460 Jon?
Sorry went back and caught it.
But are the two different blocks the same thickness at the top o' the cylinder?
« Last Edit: May 25, 2013, 08:51:43 PM by turbohunter »
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #29 on: May 25, 2013, 09:13:32 PM »
Yes but I only saw half the mess, the part that was beyond repair. I have seen this happen a lot when I worked for Performance Auto Machine back in the 90s, usually with nitrous or turbo where pressure and, heat is high. Of course any wall can  fail if pushed like a case of pop cans left in a hot car at Disney all day LOL. I actually saw that, pretty funny a whole case at once of grape soda inside a mini van ROTFL looked like Barney exploded.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #30 on: June 02, 2013, 10:58:08 AM »
A big tip of the hat to Bill Conley, for the following test results.  I sent Bill an SOHC cylinder head with one of my new cams installed, to see how it looked on his spintron machine.  Bill's machine, which he built by himself, can spin the cams up to high engine speeds and video the results in slow motion.  So, you can see exactly what the valvetrain is doing at high speeds, and determine if it is solid for performance use. 

The head I sent to Bill is set up with the same valves and springs as what I wanted to use on this engine, and I want to run it 7500 RPM.  So far Bill has found that the valvetrain is stable at 7000 RPM, but not at 8000.  He also has noticed the onset of smoke from the rocker adjuster tip to valve tip interface is sooner with this cam than it was with the previous set of cams (which Bill also tested).

http://youtu.be/Di4_aBUssnA

The smoke is not really a big concern for me because the amount of time that the engine will spend at these high speeds is very limited in a drag application.  But the valvetrain instability at 8000 RPM is a problem; my old cams were stable with this spring/valve setup at 8000 RPM.  So the reduced base circle of this cam definitely has hurt RPM performance.  I may need to look at increasing the spring rate or seat pressure to compensate...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3854
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #31 on: June 02, 2013, 01:04:50 PM »
Bill's machine is a great thing to have! I would not have thought that a reduced base circle would limit rpm. Kudos to Bill for dynamic engine testing with admittedly a very low volume engine design now 48+ years old!

Hey Jay! Are you going to do a special 50th anniversary birthday party for the SOHC in 2015?

 ;D
LOL!
Bob Maag

rcodecj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #32 on: June 02, 2013, 07:12:29 PM »
A big tip of the hat to Bill Conley, for the following test results.  I sent Bill an SOHC cylinder head with one of my new cams installed, to see how it looked on his spintron machine.  Bill's machine, which he built by himself, can spin the cams up to high engine speeds and video the results in slow motion.  So, you can see exactly what the valvetrain is doing at high speeds, and determine if it is solid for performance use. 

The head I sent to Bill is set up with the same valves and springs as what I wanted to use on this engine, and I want to run it 7500 RPM.  So far Bill has found that the valvetrain is stable at 7000 RPM, but not at 8000.  He also has noticed the onset of smoke from the rocker adjuster tip to valve tip interface is sooner with this cam than it was with the previous set of cams (which Bill also tested).

http://youtu.be/Di4_aBUssnA

The smoke is not really a big concern for me because the amount of time that the engine will spend at these high speeds is very limited in a drag application.  But the valvetrain instability at 8000 RPM is a problem; my old cams were stable with this spring/valve setup at 8000 RPM.  So the reduced base circle of this cam definitely has hurt RPM performance.  I may need to look at increasing the spring rate or seat pressure to compensate...

At what rpm did you have smoke with the previous cams and what rpm did you spin it to?

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #33 on: June 02, 2013, 07:36:39 PM »

At what rpm did you have smoke with the previous cams and what rpm did you spin it to?


With the standard base circle and maximum lifts around 0.700", I saw the oil start to smoke around 7,500 - 8,000 rpm.

With this setup, smoke started around 6,000 rpm.  This is due to the increased adjuster scrubbing from the higher lift.

Given the obvious heating going on, I didn't dare exceed Jay's requested test rpm of 8,000.  In previous tests running sustained in oil smoking conditions, I have repeatedly burned up the adjuster and valve stem, to the point of shooting the broken valve at high velocity out the side of the machine ;-)    For this test I only kept it at these speeds for a few seconds.


Note that this oil smoking problem only occurs with the elephant foot adjustable rocker.  Non-adjustable rockers have a curved shoe surface that keeps feeding fresh oil to the interface.  I've also run a double roller rocker that Barry R. developed.  With these setups I have exceeded 11,000 rpm with no heating or smoking issues.

« Last Edit: June 02, 2013, 07:39:22 PM by WConley »
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #34 on: June 02, 2013, 11:36:12 PM »
Holy crap 11000 that is  like modified motorcycle rpm, a  big block v8 must sound crazy spinning that fast.....Jon

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #35 on: June 03, 2013, 12:29:48 AM »
Holy crap 11000 that is  like modified motorcycle rpm, a  big block v8 must sound crazy spinning that fast.....Jon


A while back Jay sent me some HONKIN' valve springs to test.  10,000 rpm with with so much pressure over the nose can contribute to bad things:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXrQw8cXEiI

Note that this is with the double roller rocker.  No smoke at the valve stem tip!
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

cdmbill2

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #36 on: June 12, 2013, 12:03:56 AM »
So assuming the roller tip rockers aren't usable for this application (you'll tell us why I hope) what about using the equivilent of valvespring oilers for that rocker to valve tip location. The over spray would cool the spring in any event. As that appeared to be a front cylinder I wouldn't think torsional flex would cause the instabilty; is a different lobe profile in order?

I now know what a dropped Ti intake does, and its not pretty, so more frequent spring replacement and valvespring oilers are on my Drag Week 2014 short list. The cylinder wall damage has forced me to 598" which I'll need to stay within shouting distance of your rides Jay. I'm going on the Fox body diet for 2014 to try and keep up.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #37 on: June 12, 2013, 11:41:02 AM »
Bill, I have to admit I'm disappointed to hear that you will be going Fox.  Makes perfect sense, of course, but the 60s and early 70s cars are the ones I prefer, despite their disadvantages.  I have always admired the prom queen's ride...

On the rocker arm thing, the issue with the SOHC is that a roller tip rocker will require lash caps of varying thicknesses to lash the valves.  This is fine if you are close to stock geometry, but with the variations in the SOHC cams that I have (including my new one with the reduced base circle), the thickness of lash caps can get excessive.  Besides, I don't have any of the roller tip rockers, and they run $2K per set  :o

I have run the adjustable rockers since I started with the SOHC, and have never had an issue up to this point.  I think this is because the engine spends such limited time at high RPM; only a few seconds here and there on the drag strip.  Nevertheless your idea of oilers for the valve tips has a lot of merit, and I will consider adding something like that to this build...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

Barry_R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1918
    • View Profile
    • Survival Motorsports
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #38 on: June 13, 2013, 10:35:07 AM »
Its not all that hard - just a pain in the checkbook and the calendar to set up.

You first need to spend a small fortune on rockers - not much more than the normal ones from T&D - but still....

Then you mock up the cam and use a pair of "normal" valves to determine the length you really need.

Then you get valves made with a shorter OAL or tip length to accommodate a .080 lash cap - making sure they are at least a few thou too long to allow some adjustment.

Then you adjust each valve by trimming the stem and/or lash cap to hit your cold target during assembly - it only takes forever.

It works really well until somebody gets the wrong cam and negates all of the effort....not that that has ever happened...

cdmbill2

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #39 on: June 13, 2013, 01:01:48 PM »
Jay, the Fox deal was my last choice, but as you better than anybody know the somewhat arbitrary rules regarding front suspension modifications leave us Ford guys at a susbstantial disadvantage to the GM and more specifically Chevy, Nova, Camaro with their bolt on front clips. My theory is kill the class for one year and get parity for our traditional muscle car platforms after all the chevy guy whinning subsides. I'm dying to do a 66-67 Fairlane or a 65-66 fastback Mustang.

Then its time for parity in the Gasser and Hot Rod classes. One of yours or Barry's SOHC's in a stretched nose 65 fastback would be ideal in my view.

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3854
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2013, 01:38:38 PM »
« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 02:05:39 PM by machoneman »
Bob Maag

cdmbill2

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2013, 04:07:07 PM »
Exactly, especially the "Batcar" approach with a steel unibody as the starting point.

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #42 on: June 14, 2013, 12:02:14 AM »
Man, you guys are really getting me horny to fill this.


Sorry don't mean to hijack or anything.
Just having to much fun.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 07:06:58 PM by turbohunter »
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2013, 07:59:20 PM »
Looks like a perfect spot for cammer to me...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

turbohunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #44 on: June 14, 2013, 08:02:11 PM »
Oh you are evil :)
Marc
'61 F100 292Y
'66 Mustang Injected 428
'66 Q code Country Squire wagon


fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2013, 10:43:50 PM »
How about a 900 cube 385 with a 871 on top. LOL

482supersnake

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #46 on: June 26, 2013, 02:15:50 PM »
This would be cool on a set of SOHC heads. http://www.wimp.com/combustionengine/

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #47 on: June 27, 2013, 09:10:16 PM »
I am thinking I am soon or later going to absolutely need a SOHC engine so I will do as I did with the  455. One part at a time...Jon
.

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #48 on: July 11, 2013, 08:33:44 PM »
Did you ever get the cammer running Jay? Just wondering as the season is half over already. I like to also hear about the improvements you engineered in. I will never have anything that big but a solid Genesis iron based engine would go nicely in my Comet Rodder. BTW how much heavier than the stock 390 would that be with an iron Genesis and scammer goodies? There certainly is a lot more whirling gadgets there LOL.....Jon

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #49 on: July 11, 2013, 09:42:40 PM »
Not yet, I'm actually still waiting for some spintron data from Bill C.  I've asked Bill to swap on a different valve spring for the test, but he has had some issues with his valve spring checker which has delayed things.  Not a big deal for me, because I've been buried in the intake adapter project.  But that will be finishing up pretty quick, and Bill is getting close with getting the spring set up, so I'm guessing I'll get my new cam back and be able to get going on the engine again within a couple of weeks...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #50 on: July 12, 2013, 06:27:23 PM »
I can smell the flying rubber snots already LOL. Hey try not to wrinkle the track buddy we just finished paving it from your last visit HE HE......Jon

WConley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • No longer walking funny!
    • View Profile
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #51 on: July 13, 2013, 10:53:41 AM »
I should be able to get that spring data early in the week.  Then I'll get the head set back up and finished ASAP!

- Bill
A careful study of failure will yield the ingredients for success.

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #52 on: July 14, 2013, 03:32:58 PM »
Thanks Bill, I appreciate all your hard work on this - Jay
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7406
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: 577" SOHC
« Reply #53 on: May 04, 2014, 12:49:47 PM »
FYI, further updates on this build will appear in the Road to Drag Week 2014 board.  Thanks, Jay
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC