Rotella or Delo are both fantastic oils for the money.  Delo is a little better these days, based on our oil analysis lab at work.  Threads on the Bobistheoilguy forum seems to reflect similar results. When comparing/trying to choose between two similar motor oils, a really big clue comes right under the cap.  Typically, if quality control/oil purity is a primary concern, you will find an air tight seal on the container you have to peel off.  Delo has one.  Rotella does not.  For your purposes, either would be fine.  Since your cam/lifters have already "mated", you are not really at risk for damage here unless you run some vegetable oil or something like that.  Another commonly overlooked tip:  SHAKE the oil jug before adding all of its contents.  Additives will settle out and rest on the bottom of the jug, rather than making it to the inside of your motor.  We "turn over" our bulk oil tanks on our large equipment quarterly in an effort to extend reliability/MTBR (mean time between repair).

I realize the thread is kind of old, but should this turn up in a search for someone else later - had to add some info.  I run Delo in everything I own.  Motorcycles, lawn mowers, hot rods... everything.

I'm not on Yellow Bullet, but I'm guessing Monte is Monte Smith? Sadly Monte passed away about a year and a half ago.

Monte Smith helped Dave Schroeder tune his Nitrous assisted Corvette, which Dave took to a sentimental Drag Week win in 2017 after Monte's passing. There is also a long running Monte Smith Nitrous thread on the Moparts forum that they have saved. I haven't been through it, but likely some good info there too.

Yes sir, that would be him.  That is indeed very sad, and quite a loss.  It's rare to find people with the qualities he seemed to have.  I really appreciate how consistently generous he was with fellow racers/car guys, simply because he loved what he did and wanted to help others enjoy it too.  I've been "out of the game" for several years, so I would not have known that he passed. 

That's a really cool story about Schroeder's vette.  Always enjoy seeing stuff that like that go down, especially when those involved are still grieving...  I still can't shake this solemn feeling myself though.  Thank you for the heads up.

And, you asked for pics so..  This is my plate, and product engineering fuel supply/plumbing etc from the last time I used this thing.  Been a minute..

Corey---

I'd like very much to explore further your research and its results. I'm in the start of a project that'll take me into the middle of next year to reach the fruition stage. I'm waiting in line for hard parts at the moment and likely won't have them in hand until into the new year. In the mean time, I'm looking into some of the details. Your comments awaken substantial interest. More soon?

KS

I don't have a whole lot of technical data beyond what I already said.  There is instrumentation that can measure that sort of thing but I definitely don't own any.  Wish I could be more help.  I was more or less tossing the concept out, as I found it to be quite captivating myself.  It has been close to 3 years since I built my custom carb for the FE, I really don't remember exactly where I found the hard numbers.  Google different word combos around fuel droplet size and torque production and you'll eventually stumble across the same.  Again, sorry.  If I had that kind of time I'd go back and dig it up - really was just throwing it in to expand other's thought process.  The hard numbers I do have from this are simply gains in top speed mph in a race boat that I built custom carburetors for.  Not exactly an FE... We do weird crazy things down here in southeast Texas, like build tiller handle boats that run 80 mph in 660'.  No bullshit, but that's what it was on.  3 cylinder Yamaha, 69 cubic inch.  My carbs picked up 2 mph, which at that level is like going from a 9.20 @ 155 to an 8.90 @ 162.  We were thrilled. I had that droplet size concept in mind though as I went along, and modified the emulsion tube to make larger droplets but still respond as needed.  Honestly, I took an educated guess and got lucky, but damn it was fun.  Same jetting, same throat and butterfly went slightly slower on more highly atomized fuel. Same day testing. Swapped parts on a sand bar. Probably didn't help at all, but I wasn't going to leave you hanging.  I don't work at Koenigsegg or anything like that. I just like a challenge.

Joey - have you considered fabbing a common plenum among all eight cylinders, with the injectors on a common rail running right down the middle?  Maybe two rails? If you're having trouble picturing what i'm trying to describe, google "formula one common rail".  Several examples will pop up... not only would it potentially dress up the appearance of OEM throttle bodies, I bet it would be worth some power too. I've done some back to back testing on a different engine platform I used to race - plenum in place between throttle bodies vs throttle bodies standing as individual stacks - I always made more power with the plenum in place.  Just throwing an idea.  I love what you have going on already, as-is.  Seemed you were open and still trying to choose your final direction.  I think something F1'ish would be awfully hard to beat, especially if you mimicked occupying most of the area between the valve covers. 

The reason you want the injectors up high is to maximize the time the fuel has to atomize and cool the incoming air/fuel mixture; a lot of carb guys point to this as the reason why they can (or think they can) make more power with a carburetor. 

Bingo.  To add a slightly altered viewpoint - I think it has less to do with how atomized the fuel may or may not be, and more for the latent heat of vaporization as the fuel transitions from liquid to vapor.  So, in 100% agreement about cooling the incoming air/fuel charge, and giving as much allowable time for this as possible.  *BUT* I've seen some very compelling data that shot "more atomization is better" straight in the face.  Apparently, especially as it goes for torque production, you can over atomize the fuel charge.  Give the same engine the exact same volume of fuel, but alter the droplet size as it approaches the intake valve, and prepare to throw several paradigms in the trash.  Conventional wisdom is always good to a point, but seems there is usually more waiting to be found if you're nerdy enough to search for it.  The general summary and conclusion is that the droplet size/torque relationship is tied to density (but kind of think "weight" too), temperature of the air fuel charge, surface area of fuel vs. available oxygen, and the fact that there is always a gradient for liquid to be moving to vapor, which comes into play all the way up to the point the spark plug lights off.  If fuel is introduced as an already fine mist, you end up losing out on each of those in one way or another.  Every engine will want something different, based on several variables - not the least of which, is the distance between fuel introduction to intake valve, and velocity between those two points.  The more efficient the engine, the larger the droplet size it tends to want at entry.  That's why a F1 fuel nozzle spray pattern looks worse than factory GM TBI stuff from the 90s.  That's why a high compression high winding N/A small block will make less power with an annular booster than a simple "stepped" booster of identical physical dimensions.  Crazy.  If F1 wanted to, they'd have the fuel rolling out of there like a mosquito fogger if that's what worked best.  Just sharing, because I found all of the above to be very interesting, and turned most of what I "thought I knew" on its head.  **My F1 references are to the N/A engines of the past. Current, DI setups are an entirely different creature altogether**

Something Vizard said in one of his books, coupled with something similar a guy named Gordon Jennings said in one of his, tipped me off to the concept of fuel droplet size being specific to maximizing power production... eventually that turned into a miniature research project, and ultimately ended up in me building several of my own carburetors.  (One was for my FE  )  If you look hard enough, there are some very interesting reads.  In a few cases, some relatively lofty names actually share hard data.

Quote from: Coreyc619 on August 20, 2018, 06:49:51 PM

...me being younger (so I must therefore also be clueless )

[c.eastwood]

"Well now, I think that if you stay mindful of the above, and keep it real close-like to your heart, you might make it through this in one piece."

[/c.eastwood]

Quote

Your posts are what made me think I could get away with being equally sarcastic and half cocked.

You gotta earn that, boah, I mean, bruh. Familiarity ain't awarded just cuz you freakin' signed up to this forum. So don't blame your impetuous insolence on me, whippasnappah. Be mindful of the status quo.

You know, Jay has a valid point in pursuing a maintained code of conduct.  Many a good forum have been ruined by the comments of one horses.. Rear?  Corral.net ruined by KATO ENGINEERING.  HardcoreLS1 by SStrokerAce.  Yellowbullet is immune, I think because everyone knows what they're getting into beforehand... I could go on and on... Anyway, in light of that, and the fact that from the first thread I saw on network 54 some 20+ years ago... Jay is one of several that I look up to and respect. I won't be giving him any trouble.  I enjoy this forum, in part for it not being like most of the rest. You can do what you want... As long as it doesn't include enjoying the deluded idea that you "taught that young punk a lesson" using a condescending tone that didn't go unnoticed. Come on man.  I can think of 15,426,378 reasons why I won't be adding any further clutter to Brent's thread. You see what I did there? Do you even FE bro?

Quote from: Barry_R on August 20, 2018, 07:32:17 AM

Quote from: cjshaker on August 18, 2018, 06:53:32 PM

Really? And here I thought 60 year old passenger car engine technology was still the top rung on the ladder.

How many miles and how many passes do you now have on the 60 year old technology engine in the Mach?
Best ET?
I have a feeling that it hangs pretty well with some fairly expensive new stuff...

Well, 2 Drag Weeks and 2 FE Reunions, plus 2000+ street miles, so that'd be about 4000 miles and about 40 trips down the strip in about 2 1/2 years. My best ET so far is 12.1 here at home, but it should be in the 11's, if it had a better driver   I keep wittling away at that 60' time. Still, not to shameful for a stock block, stock crank, unported heads, stock intake, factory carbs and 60 year old buggy technology.

No sir.  Absolutely was not referring to your car as a buggy, covered wagon, etc.  That's a beautiful car. My comment was just random sarcasm, engaging in what I thought was playful banter surrounding me being younger (so I must therefore also be clueless ).. No disrespect intended for you personally, or your car.