Digging into an engine project and will need a LOT of parts washing.  I have a parts washer I’ve actually never used, mostly because I can’t decide what solvent to use.  I’m not too keen on running mineral spirits as I’m in a tight space and do a lot of grinding near the washer, is there any non-flammable fluid that actually works? 

Looking for a Streetmaster or similar small single plane.  Reply here or PM with anything available

I’m sure most have seen this, but in case not, the mid engine corvette was unveiled.  Any mention of Chevrolet usually brings derision to the board, but the way I see it, the US manufacturers are all on the same team nowadays and need all the help they can get.  This is a big leap forward for GMs halo car.  Buddy at work has a C7 stingray, it’s too small to be comfortable and he drives like a ninny, but I will say that the car hauls ass and seems pretty livable.  The new vette is 495hp for the standard model, should be a screamer

https://youtu.be/fA2QoObAzDY

Now that it's April, I'll start digging out parts that I can bring to the FE Reunion if anyone is interested.  Will get pics tonight. 

1) Pair of C5AE Medium Risers, rebuilt with stainless valves.  One is a '65 casting, one is a '70, some thumbprint left.  These are in excellent shape, some port work done on intake of one head.  $1500
2) Set of adjustable rockers, nice shape $250
3) Pair of C8OE-N CJ heads.  Cut for positive valve seals, one exhaust ear repair.  $400 - SOLD
4) Rotating assembly to make a 416".  Autotec pistons, Eagle rods, factory 3.98" crank turned .020" (may need polishing). $1000

Saw a news clip that the 7.3L gas engine is now official for super duty trucks.  No hp/tq figures were given so not much value there.  I think it’s a good move, think plenty of guys want a 3/4 ton for towing but pause at the expense and complexity of the newer diesels.

Thinking out loud, one would think it’d have to be a decent step up from the Ecoboost to make it a differentiator, interesting to see what they come up with. 

13.85 at 102mph

83* and 65% humidity so not great air.  Online calculator said 103mph so seems about right.  Car is 4290 with driver

Short time was 2.20, still running open rear so lots of pedaling in 1-2

I’m fairly happy, it’s either running out of fuel or floating valves at top of fourth, just flattened out last 200ft or so

 Lots of oil downs so been a slow night

63 merc, 390 with BBM heads 224/230 .563 hydraulic roller with 9.2:1, performer rpm and 750dp.  1 3/4 tri us into crush bent 2.5” exhaust.  Tremec TKO 500 with 4.10 gear

103mph is enough to hit 12’s I believe so power seems ok

I did a search and found some hits on Pipemax but the content was directed mostly to header design (as is the intent of the program). 

I'm fiddling around now trying to iron out some requirements for the 416ci build I'm working on.   I'd already roughed in the intake port work when I got curious about trying to optimize CSA and throat diameter and port speed.  I should have done this before starting the port work, but I sort of stumbled on the info as I went.  Originally I was just looking to knock out the ugly bits in the ports. 

Anyway, I started using Pipemax to try to model airflow requirements, airspeed, minimum CSA, etc.  It just seems odd to me that you don't input any airflow for the program, it just uses VE at a certain displacement and RPM and delivers Tq/HP, and computes the airflow requirement. 

Every time I model a combo, seems that the airflow requirements are very low unless I crank up the VE to "race engine" type numbers 105-110%.  I realize that full optimized combos can pull 550hp out of 250cfm of intake flow, but from what I've seen, that's a really optimized combo that would usually use a good bit of cam and compression.  The program takes cam and compression into consideration, though.  I do understand that the program is taking carb and intake flow into consideration as well, which I don't have any way of guessing/measuring right now.   I want to see, for instance, how power would be impacted by going from say 275cfm to 300cfm at .600" valve lift, but basically there's no way in Pipemax to do that, as I see it.  You can fudge the VE numbers and then that will adjust the airflow requirements so I suppose that's a way to back into it. 

So, am I on the right track here, or missing some function in the program where you can input flow numbers? 

I will say, I plugged in a build I had dyno'd years ago, and it hit the hp and tq numbers to 1%.  The heads flowed quite a bit more than the airflow requirement shown in the program, but there again it's assuming airflow through carb and intake. 

To recap, 390 in my Merc needed to be cleaned up as years of leaks/spills/etc had it looking pretty ratty.  Stumbled on a deal for BBMs and a hydraulic roller that matched my needs so decided to update the motor while I was at it. 

Old combo:
Holley 750DP
Performer RPM (untouched)
270H (224/224 .519/.519 110LA in at 102ICA)
1 3/4" Tri Ys
9.1:1 CR
Edelbrocks with bowl and port entry cleanup and good valve job

Engine ran well, plenty of lowend, did 300rwhp with good AFR and 37* timing.  Ran "OK" but honestly for the parts involved, never felt it was that strong.  I thought maybe there was an issue with the combo, but Barry tested basically this same exact combo and made ~365hp on his dyno which jives pretty well with what mine made in the car so figured there wasn't much more to squeeze out of the combo with tuning or easy parts changes. 

New Combo:
Holley 750dp
Performer RPM (plenum entry rolled, port matched, bullnosed the plenum partition)
Survival hydraulic roller 224/230 .563/.563 110LSA 104ICA
1 3/4" Tri Ys
9.2:1 CR
BBMs with 2.09/1.65 and light seat blend

Finally got it in the car and ran it last night.  Obviously the cam is similar, but audibly and driving it gently around town, I basically can't tell a difference.  It may be a bit crisper down low at part throttle which is impressive as the car always had tons of lowend.  Also the valvetrain is quieter, can't say for certain this is cam/lifters as I spent more time setting valve geometry, but it's definitely quieter.

Punch it from a dead stop, better response, not exponentially but it now has traction problems whereas before it would dead hook.  Midrange, honestly, feels about the same.  4000rpm and up, definitely pulls harder and seems to easily pull to 6000.  Previously it would flatten over 4500, and sort of labor to 5400 or so.  It's not a wholesale change, but just pulls cleaner up top now. 

Here's the interesting point, I had both sets of heads flowed on the same bench.  I'm apprehensive to do this because the numbers are low compared to full database of what I have for similar heads and guys are going to just look at the numbers....all I care about is the difference between the two ON THIS BENCH.  It's a Superflow 600 bench, but both heads I had done were down ~15-20cfm in the .400-.600 range compared to other records.  The BBMs were done by Brent, my Edelbrocks were done by a very competent builder in PA and this wasn't extensive work on either, and plenty of comparisons for each head so I'm confident that this is just a case of that particular bench being conservative.

My  BBM Cyl1  2.09                
71   58
148   105
204   141
240   170
258   189
277   208
291   216
AVE 212.7   171.5

My Ebrocks   
79   69
148   114
180   155
218   185
248   206
255   211
257   217
197.9   165.3

The Edelbrocks are more extensively ported than the BBMs. 

Should be interesting to get it on the chassis dyno and see how the curves compare, I'm guessing about the same until 4000rpm, then the BBM combo maybe 30hp stronger at peak and carrying much better past peak.   Need to get it to the track in the Fall and see how it does, hoping low 13s but not sure I'd be confident it will get there.