449 stroker

[Sand hauler]

We're going to get it figured out, one step at time. Still have tweeking and tuning to do.  Figured I'd go ahead and show what we got going on even though it's a work in progress, for a old full size street truck,lol

[Stangman]

Well good luck you’ve got a good start I would be happy with that HP on my 486 keep us informed.

[Sand hauler]

Will do, and thank you

[Barry_R]

Looks cool.  I'd agree that the data is suspect.  Torque at 1.4+ per cubic inch is really high but achievable in a very well refined build.  But couple that number with the obvious instability at high RPM, and what you were hearing on dyno - and I would be questioning things.  Once the engine goes unstable, all the data and A/F ratio stuff goes out the proverbial window.

I have successfully run solid roller FE engines past 7500 RPM with 230ish seat and just over 600 open, with cam lifts in the low/middle .700s.  But Jones stuff has a reputation for being pretty aggressive and probably needs more spring than that.  Those .080 wall pushrods are a definite potential issue.  I had a solid roller build that ran customer supplied pushrods which turned out to measure .047 (!) and - after bending a couple - it gained 40ish HP with a set of .135 wall ones.

[Sand hauler]

Looks cool.  I'd agree that the data is suspect.  Torque at 1.4+ per cubic inch is really high but achievable in a very well refined build.  But couple that number with the obvious instability at high RPM, and what you were hearing on dyno - and I would be questioning things.  Once the engine goes unstable, all the data and A/F ratio stuff goes out the proverbial window.

I have successfully run solid roller FE engines past 7500 RPM with 230ish seat and just over 600 open, with cam lifts in the low/middle .700s.  But Jones stuff has a reputation for being pretty aggressive and probably needs more spring than that.  Those .080 wall pushrods are a definite potential issue.  I had a solid roller build that ran customer supplied pushrods which turned out to measure .047 (!) and - after bending a couple - it gained 40ish HP with a set of .135 wall ones.

Yes sir, I am wondering about that as well. Thank you sir for all the help and support and providing the stroker kit for me

[blykins]

But Jones stuff has a reputation for being pretty aggressive and probably needs more spring than that.

That’s been my experience as well as the experience of some others I know, including Joe Craine.  I used a Jones hydraulic roller in a 445 Windsor back in 2008 that could not be controlled even with significant spring loads.  Joe had a Jones cam in a Y block EMC engine that would loft the valves and could not be controlled.  Joe thought part of the problem was that the cam was ground with an incorrect lifter angle. 

From what I’ve tried with my own stuff, you can sneak up on the lobe aggression, but you have to lighten the valvetrain weight to help out with things. 

I also agree that 230-250 lb seat should be sufficient, but you never can tell. 

[Joe-JDC]

My experience with Jones mechanical lifter camshaft was that the engine would pull cleanly to 6600 rpm, and crash.  It was supposedly designed to pull to 7200 rpm for the EMC competition build.  I had 1.94/1.56 light weight 5/16" valve stems, titanium retainers, LS beehive springs, Smith Brother's chromoly push rods, Trend Lifters, and Harland Sharp 1.6 roller rocker shaft mounted rocker arms.  I had three sets of heads ported, with all the light weight parts mentioned for each of them, and we tested 5 different sets of valve springs all with the same results that the engine would "pop" at 6600 rpm and nose dive.  I upped the seat pressure from 135# to 167# keeping the over the nose at a safe pressure of 430#.  After upping the seat pressure to 167#, the engine would pull to 6900 rpm and crash.  We entered the engine in that configuration and was able to make three successful pulls to 7100 rpm with the "pop" and roll over on the top end.  After the EMC, back at the shop, we installed a new Isky camshaft that was ordered but did not make it in time for dyno testing before the competition, and the engine responded with clean pulls to 7400 rpm without a single "pop" and picked up 12 horsepower.  Everything was just exactly as it was for the EMC except the camshaft.  Same Trend Lifters, everything.  We(Ted Eaton and I) did a degree wheel check of every lobe on the Jones camshaft and if you advanced or retarded it any from straight up, the lobes were all over the place with none of them falling into line with the cam card.  #1 was only correct at straight up, all the other cylinders were off as much as 8*+/-. 
When I questioned Mike about the results, he asked me a bunch of questions about the build, and then the lifter angle for the Y.  He ASSUMED the camshaft lobes were the same as the SBC, and they are not.  There is 3* difference between the lifter bore angles in the Y from the SBC.  He corrected his information, cut me two new camshafts, and I am going to test one of them in the next few days.  When I degreed it, I went ahead and checked #6 against #1, and it was spot on, correct.  We shall see.   Joe-JDC

[Sand hauler]

Thanks Joe for the heads up and info on that y block cam. This one only liked being straight up as well, but no pop or laying over . Going to get a MSD ordered next week for it then back to testing.

[1968galaxie]

The ignition system upgrades should certainly help.
Keep us posted if you get this back on the dyno.
1.5 + hp/cu inch is certainly possible.
The CNC'd BBM heads and well above average combustion chamber (low 30 degree timing)
should lead to well above average power output.

Well done!
Thanks for posting.

[Sand hauler]

Will definitely do,thank you sir

[JC-427Stroker]

Looks cool.  I'd agree that the data is suspect.  Torque at 1.4+ per cubic inch is really high but achievable in a very well refined build.  But couple that number with the obvious instability at high RPM, and what you were hearing on dyno - and I would be questioning things.  Once the engine goes unstable, all the data and A/F ratio stuff goes out the proverbial window.

I have successfully run solid roller FE engines past 7500 RPM with 230ish seat and just over 600 open, with cam lifts in the low/middle .700s.  But Jones stuff has a reputation for being pretty aggressive and probably needs more spring than that.  Those .080 wall pushrods are a definite potential issue.  I had a solid roller build that ran customer supplied pushrods which turned out to measure .047 (!) and - after bending a couple - it gained 40ish HP with a set of .135 wall ones.

Great info

[JC-427Stroker]

My experience with Jones mechanical lifter camshaft was that the engine would pull cleanly to 6600 rpm, and crash.  It was supposedly designed to pull to 7200 rpm for the EMC competition build.  I had 1.94/1.56 light weight 5/16" valve stems, titanium retainers, LS beehive springs, Smith Brother's chromoly push rods, Trend Lifters, and Harland Sharp 1.6 roller rocker shaft mounted rocker arms.  I had three sets of heads ported, with all the light weight parts mentioned for each of them, and we tested 5 different sets of valve springs all with the same results that the engine would "pop" at 6600 rpm and nose dive.  I upped the seat pressure from 135# to 167# keeping the over the nose at a safe pressure of 430#.  After upping the seat pressure to 167#, the engine would pull to 6900 rpm and crash.  We entered the engine in that configuration and was able to make three successful pulls to 7100 rpm with the "pop" and roll over on the top end.  After the EMC, back at the shop, we installed a new Isky camshaft that was ordered but did not make it in time for dyno testing before the competition, and the engine responded with clean pulls to 7400 rpm without a single "pop" and picked up 12 horsepower.  Everything was just exactly as it was for the EMC except the camshaft.  Same Trend Lifters, everything.  We(Ted Eaton and I) did a degree wheel check of every lobe on the Jones camshaft and if you advanced or retarded it any from straight up, the lobes were all over the place with none of them falling into line with the cam card.  #1 was only correct at straight up, all the other cylinders were off as much as 8*+/-. 
When I questioned Mike about the results, he asked me a bunch of questions about the build, and then the lifter angle for the Y.  He ASSUMED the camshaft lobes were the same as the SBC, and they are not.  There is 3* difference between the lifter bore angles in the Y from the SBC.  He corrected his information, cut me two new camshafts, and I am going to test one of them in the next few days.  When I degreed it, I went ahead and checked #6 against #1, and it was spot on, correct.  We shall see.   Joe-JDC

Great info ... Good luck with the new test.

[Sand hauler]

Just an update, got the miss problem fixed. Ended up being not enough voltage feeding the the coil and the distributor module . Ran a switched 12 volt wire from the battery straight to the module and problem solved. Didn't beat on it after that and ran it with the 850 demon carb with a 1" spacer instead of the dominator. Made 640 at 6500 and was still making power and no sign of detonation or float
. Still has more to give with the other carb but was time to take her home and installed.

[1968galaxie]

Thanks for the update.
Not always valve float. Carb and ignition issues will also show up on dyno testing.
Glad you sorted this out.

[Sand hauler]

Thank you sir I appreciate it