This is a great deal over here and so many smart guys contribute that it is a wonderful resource. Thank you kindly
Now I have been back reading on the SOHC threads lately and they are real fun. For years I kind of kept a promise to Don and others, to not talk about how his SOHCs did so well, but I don't think he would mind today, since so many nice folks are running them hard again.
So I am going to add something that a lot of people may not have known about Dyno Don's 71 Maverick, which won and won. There was a lot of shared info between him and the Stroppe, then Holman Moody Stroppe gang, and a lot of work on his cars got done at that shop.
I loved this car and I helped Don and so did close pals, then, then later and toward the end. We were real good friends and it was fun to help him run his exhibition car too.
Thanks a million John Kaase and Earl Wade on his last car, and many of his cars. Don was very thankful for their years of help, no doubt.
OK, I am posting because I read a members comment, that Don ran 2 Crane 640 cams. He ran a lot of cams, but those cams were not in the Championship Maverick in 71.
So the idea then, was an idea that might be an interesting thread here.
That dominant Pro Stock only had one Crane cam, and you can guess which one. Can't say everything but let's ponder this if time allows.
It also had a 'Brand X, trick for that era' cam too, and they were not the same. Not really close spec wise.
So I will ask a question, who has run, or raced, or known of a SOHC that had different cams on purpose. I just wondered. I get the feeling, reading a lot over the years that everybody is certain 2 identical cams timed in some way, is the hot tip.
If that is best for the ET of your car, great,but if you are trying to squeaze every bit out of it, consider an old idea maybe.
We were just laughing and laughing about this. His Crew Chief from those 2 years and me worked at Ford racing, and remain good pals. Lot's of fun stories. We are doing some stuff again and had to review past notes and so on recently.
The idea was kind of like this...one made more power lower, one made more power higher. Lets try mixing them, wow, it helped. I am kind of saying this to Jay, and similar max effort SOHC racers to ponder. I love how Jay and pals keep pushing the SOHC envelope with special modern SOHCs. Of course all of you guys are great
The thinking was, then, and Ford had similar thinking, asymetrical volumetric efficiency, to allow 2 SOHC 4's, to 'compliment' eachother in a way, and overlap the others characteristics. Net effect being a faster race car that was consistent. That was huge, a real predictable and consistent combo, that was tuneable for good tracks, and capable of de tuning for less good tracks.
Part of the idea was a more torque style cam on one side, and a more top end on the other, one, pushing the RPM up to allow the higher HP cam get a boost.
The idea, was used in the 50s, and that is what Don and I used to also ponder, the 2 engine cars that did well, with a torque style engine close to a RPM stye engine.
The first car to go 150 and set the NHRA record, had this design
The synergies.
Then the tricks about moving the cams to suit the track and air came in, and also the tune up for the finals. SOHCs are tunable in ways wedges are not, that is an interesting aspect to me too.
This idea, was made faster by other tricks, to launch the car consistantly at a much higher RPM too. Remember, that then, one strong metal asbestos disc and a tough hat, was the hot ticket, and a 2 disc was tried but the discs were too big. There were no powdered metal slipper clutches, or trans brakes then
A really heavy flywheel helped here, like one of a kind heavy. That made sense in that, if you can side step the clutch and leave close to the 'can'(floored), having snapy low end torque was not that big of a concern, carrying a lot of crank shaft momentum and speed was helpful in this example, and a DANA 60 helped there
This cam timing asymetry has been done later, with variable valve event modern engines, and with cylinder sequencing, and cylinders allowed to see less fuel, no fuel,and so on, but I hope that this is an interesting problem or trick to contemplate.
But he did not run 2 640 Nitros, heck, he had the 660s years before in the Paul Harvey car, those are still in a friends car which is nice.
OK, just wanted to clarify that one post by somebody. I can't find it so I did a new thread for fun
Always fun and thanks for the messages and help
It is very nice to be in a civil setting with people who have manners too.
Thank you
