Capsaddle 416 first fire on the Dyno

[Kerry j]

This is just a about a minute of break in time when we first fired the 416 Capsaddle FE, I've been building:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLMcEU5Osbw/

I'm a little disappointed in in the HP numbers it made, but the torque comes in strong and peaks at 465 ft. pounds at 3800 RPM, HP peaks at 368 and 4800 RPM. Both torque and HP head south after that. From what I've been reading, seems like the cork in the build is the Tri Power.

The specs are as follows:

.030 over 390 105 block, 428 crank, Capsaddle, C3AE-C heads with CJ sized valves, it makes 10.3-1 static compression, cam is an Oregon Cam Grinders #1475 with 236 @ .050 and 282 @ .020 and .571 lift. Pistons are Diamonds and as I recall a 11 cc dish. Carbs are what came with the TriPower from Ford.

[jayb]

Kerry, I think with that cam it ought to be making more power than that.  On my 410 HP 428CJ with the tripower setup and factory carbs, peak power was at 5200 RPM, and the cam in that engine was about the same size as the cam in yours.  I think there is something else going on.  How did it run on the dyno?  Was it smooth while the power fell off, or did it start to miss or hiccup at all?  Do you have a picture of the HP and torque curves that you can post, or can you show a picture of the dyno data?

Also, when you get the book you ordered (it will go out on Monday) take a look at the dyno data for the tripower in the Appendix.  The tripower isn't the greatest intake Ford ever made, but its not really a cork.  On my 390 stroker engine the tripower setup made 477 HP at 5800 RPM.  Your engine should be making more power.  My first guess would be ignition, but its hard to say without more information...

[Kerry j]

The first few pulls it was breaking up above 4500, we checked and checked and finally changed the Pertronix module and that fixed the problem. It ran smoothly up to 5800 RPM, but the HP and Torque just kept going downhill, so I didn't see any need to push the RPM higher.

Also, the fuel specifics; BSFC were .452 at 3800 where the peak torque was and .461 at 4800 where the peak HP was, from there on up it went richer and richer and were at .517 by 5300 RPM and by then it was ony making 357 HP and 534 Ft. Pounds of torque. I assumed that was because there's a restriction in the airflow.

It runs smooth at RPM, sounds lumpy and great at 750-800 RPM idle and pulls hard up to 4800 then just lays down. We changed the timing around and found it best at 38 degrees advance.

Barry R gave me a list of things to check and I've checked them all, so I don't know what the problem is other than the intake and carbs from what I've read aren't the best for making power.

The 465 ft. pounds of torque at 3800 seems good, but I am concerned that something is amiss because it goes downhill from there; same for the HP numbers.

I have the print out from one of the better pulls, but I need to figure out a way to post a picture of it.

[jayb]

Can you just post the horsepower numbers from 4000 to 5800 RPM?  I want to see what the curve looks like...

[Kerry j]

Sure Jay, here's what I have:

3800 RPM 462.2 Trq 334.4 Pwr
3900 RPM 455.2 Trq 338.0 Pwr
4000 RPM 449.0 Trq 342.0 Pwr
4100 RPM 450.4 Trq 351.6 Pwr
4200 RPM 439.6 Trq 351.5 Pwr
4300 RPM 433.4 Trq 354.9 Pwr
4400 RPM 425.9 Trq 356.8 Pwr
4500 RPM 417.5 Trq 357.7 Pwr
4600 RPM 410.4 Trq 359.5 Pwr
4700 RPM 397.1 Trq 355.4 Pwr
4800 RPM 403.1 Trq 368.4 Pwr
4900 RPM 386.4 Trq 360.5 Pwr
5000 RPM 372.2 Trq 354.3 Pwr
5100 RPM 370.5 Trq 359.7 Pwr
5200 RPM 355.1 Trq 351.5 Pwr
5300 RPM 353.7 Trq 357.0 Pwr

The print out I have here only goes to 5300, but the one that goes to 5800 is the same in how the torque and HP keep dropping.

[jayb]

Kerry, the graph below is your horsepower data.  It goes kind of nonlinear around 4500 RPM or so.  Something is happening that the motor doesn't like at that point.  Could be ignition or valvetrain, or maybe even carbs, although I doubt it since they are mechanically operated.  I assume you checked that you had all three carbs opening all the way on the dyno? 



If its not the carbs, the easiest thing to try would be to put a completely different ignition system on the engine.  Different distributor, coil, MSD or whatever, wires, and plugs.  I suppose its not on the dyno anymore so you can't do a lot of those tests, but once in the car you might focus on that.  If that is not it, I'd be looking at valvesprings.  Is this a hydraulic cam or a solid?

By the way, with the torque you are making, and the cam specs (236 @ .050), I think you should be making at least 400 HP with that engine.

[RP]

Was it a quick sweep test, that just quit pulling,or a methodical, step test?

Since the engine pulled to 5800 no load, it indicates that the springs are likely ok and  the engine has loosened up properly.

The up and down on the power chart indicates an erratic mechanical problem-- either with the engine or less likely, the dyno load.


However, if the Water supply was getting erratic, ie pump running dry from inadequate supply, the dyno operator could have put more load in to control the engine from overspeeding from inability to hold it at the proper load factor.

It is possible to load an engine on the dyno, so that it will not rev past a certain rpm during a step test.
HP is just an arithmetic computation of work being accomplished---extracted from the torque produced at a specific rpm.

[jayb]

Since the engine pulled to 5800 no load, it indicates that the springs are likely ok and  the engine has loosened up properly.

Not sure I agree with that statement.  I've seen engines run smoothly on the dyno all the way up the curve, but the horsepower data betrays a problem.  Here's an example on the dyno data portion of the web site:

http://www.fepower.net/Dyno%20Results/dyno_results_8.html

The engine in the link above sounded smooth and seemed to run fine with the original springs, but power output suffered.  I saw the same thing with the hydraulic vs. solid lifter comparison detailed in my book; although the engine ran fine to 5800 RPM, the switch to solid lifters made a big power difference from 5300 on up.

Your other points are all valid and deserve investigation.  However, I kind of doubt that the load from the dyno is holding the engine back; its only a 350-400 HP engine, well within what you would normally see most dynos adjusted to.  The dyno would have had to been pretty out of whack to start choking off the engine at that power level.  JMO - Jay

[RP]

Those "w's in the curve!!!  Uggh.

The run seems to start dying at 4000, like it has a stock cam, and except for the later "w"s, you'd assume it was so. W's= something wrong for sure.
The torque peak was certainly pretty much correct.

I remember from the video that there is a bit of clanking I can hear, like a loose rocker??

The torque produced is as you say, about what a healthy chevy should produce, so the dyno operator should have a good feel for things.

Should have been nearly 400 hp for sure.

[Kerry j]

Was it a quick sweep test, that just quit pulling,or a methodical, step test?

Since the engine pulled to 5800 no load, it indicates that the springs are likely ok and  the engine has loosened up properly.

The up and down on the power chart indicates an erratic mechanical problem-- either with the engine or less likely, the dyno load.


However, if the Water supply was getting erratic, ie pump running dry from inadequate supply, the dyno operator could have put more load in to control the engine from overspeeding from inability to hold it at the proper load factor.

It is possible to load an engine on the dyno, so that it will not rev past a certain rpm during a step test.
HP is just an arithmetic computation of work being accomplished---extracted from the torque produced at a specific rpm.

Found the problem and it's almost to embarrassing to tell.... The timing was about 10 degrees retarded from where we thought it was. And it was set that way because I put the timing pointer on upside down. Sounds like a bone headed thing to do; I know. But, what happened was that I installed a Professional Products Harmonic balancer because the factory ones I had all looked a bit sketchy, the rubber had some cracks etc. When I did that, I didn't really notice that the new balancer was bigger than the stock one was and the only way the pointer would fit was the way I installed it. Besides that, I had a timing cover off a 427 Sideoiler I had and it was installed that way too; but I didn't notice that the point had also been modified to make it read accurately.

I saw a picture of a timing cover on eBay and it was installed correctly and that's what clued me in to check it.

Since the engine was still on the Dyno, I modified the pointer and changed it to indicate correctly, re-timed to 38 degrees advance and it turned in 393 HP at 5500 RPM and 480 ft. lbs. of torque at 3800 RPM. Still a little lower than I had hoped for, but in the range of what I expected.

Here's the pull: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRg3Cc3BsYQ

I'll tell ya what, it was LOUD in that test cell room!

[jayb]

Hey Kerry, that's great news!  That is an easy mistake to make, and in fact if you read the dyno mule chapter of my book, concerning my brother's 428 (428 Tbird engine), you will see that he had a similar problem.  We had to figure that one out on the dyno too.

Given the use of an aftermarket harmonic balancer, I think it would be worth your while to put a piston stop in #1 and try to determine if you are really at TDC when the pointer says you are.  Alternatively, you can just keep advancing the timing and see if you get more power.  If you run race gas in the engine, say 110 octane, you can overadvance the timing and you won't hurt the engine, it will just stop making more power.  So you might think about advancing the timing even more, in 2 degree increments, and see if you pick up a little more power yet.  If not, then go back to 38, but if you do pick up power, your timing pointer might not be at 0 when the engine is at TDC.  Based on your combination, I think there's more there, so it would be worth some more experimenting...

[Kerry j]

We did check to make sure the 0 degree mark was TDC and it was, we also tried some different timing settings and 38 was what made the most power.

The other thing I did, that I won't ever do again is install the cam without degreeing it. The cam is an Oregon Cams regrind and since it's not the grind I ordered, it may not even be what the box says it is. The lift seems to be there, but we didn't measure the duration, where it's installed and lobe separation. I don't know and neither did the Dyno guy how to measure those things without tearing the motor down.

Also, the deck isn't very even and one of the pistons came out of the hole by .015. so I used a .050 Cometic gasket to get the clearance for that piston. I'm thinking the compression may be a bit less than I thought it was because of that thick gasket. And the C3AE-C heads are stock, with CJ size valves; probably should have cleaned up the chambers and runners to get a little more flow.

The 61 Liner it's going in has a very tired 352 in it now, so I'm sure this is going to make it seem like a whole different car. I'll get it installed and then mess around with it and see if I can get any more seat of the pants power out of it.

[RP]

I'm impressed! 393 hp and great torque. Great street unit!

The lack of timing at upper rpm makes sense. Dyno work is a lot differerent up close and personal-- as your case demonstrates. Dumb stuff happens a lot more than people realize.

Hard to believe that we sit MUCH closer to those roaring beasts in real life, than when in the armored dyno cell!