Author Topic: 428 CJ  (Read 13470 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #45 on: November 10, 2018, 12:30:39 PM »
To me, LSA is just a number used to order the cam grind, but Werby is still 100% right, less overlap gives up power.

To me, on a relatively stock FE, I'd be adding some split to whatever cam put me where I wanted to be, and use LSA to control overlap as required.   Although I use both single pattern and dual pattern cams, a CJ almost always likes a bit more exhaust

I am running into the overlap choice decision on a 461 CJ right now, I have lots of room on the build, except for a single thing, power brakes.  It is forcing me to go wider than I would normally prefer, but it's a very rare car and adding vacuum pumps or cans to the car is not an option.

I forgot what Brent used, but it was likely a very sharp choice.
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

falcongeorge

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #46 on: November 10, 2018, 12:57:19 PM »
To me, LSA is just a number used to order the cam grind, but Werby is still 100% right, less overlap gives up power.

To me, on a relatively stock FE, I'd be adding some split to whatever cam put me where I wanted to be, and use LSA to control overlap as required.   Although I use both single pattern and dual pattern cams, a CJ almost always likes a bit more exhaust

I am running into the overlap choice decision on a 461 CJ right now, I have lots of room on the build, except for a single thing, power brakes.  It is forcing me to go wider than I would normally prefer, but it's a very rare car and adding vacuum pumps or cans to the car is not an option.

I forgot what Brent used, but it was likely a very sharp choice.
The whole spurious argument that got started on Speedtalk over whether valve events should be discussed in terms of overlap or duration/LSA is arguing over semantics, the numbers come out the same., I have zero interest in debating semantics, I'm interested in numbers.

If we want to argue over the semantics, what we should do is go back to describing cams in terms IO, IC, EO, and EC, like they used to do.  That would sure narrow down the number of guys posting on cam threads in a hurry. ;) ;D
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 01:24:57 PM by falcongeorge »

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #47 on: November 10, 2018, 01:30:25 PM »
To me, LSA is just a number used to order the cam grind, but Werby is still 100% right, less overlap gives up power.

To me, on a relatively stock FE, I'd be adding some split to whatever cam put me where I wanted to be, and use LSA to control overlap as required.   Although I use both single pattern and dual pattern cams, a CJ almost always likes a bit more exhaust

I am running into the overlap choice decision on a 461 CJ right now, I have lots of room on the build, except for a single thing, power brakes.  It is forcing me to go wider than I would normally prefer, but it's a very rare car and adding vacuum pumps or cans to the car is not an option.

I forgot what Brent used, but it was likely a very sharp choice.
The whole spurious argument that got started on Speedtalk over whether valve events should be discussed in terms of overlap or duration/LSA is arguing over semantics, the numbers come out the same., I have zero interest in debating semantics, I'm interested in numbers.

If we want to argue over the semantics, what we should do is go back to describing cams in terms IO, IC, EO, and EC, like they used to do.  That would sure narrow down the number of guys posting on cam threads in a hurry.

I promise I am not that guy, and I don't enter those fights....and wasn't my intent, but happy to discuss cams however you want.  Heck, I am the guy talking oil ring math on Speedtalk right now and can't get anyone to engage

My only point is that if I give advice, I have to talk valve events and the effects of those events.  LSA doesn't let me, I have to back into it.  Heck, I am having a hard time managing overlap with a 114 LSA cam causing me fits for the stroker to get it where I want. 

So if someone wants to talk cam behavior with me, I have to get to cam events, even if we push it back to LSA when done.  However, now it sounds like I am discussing semantics again. :)  Forums are a tough place, in the end, I really really REALLY don't care about anyone else's semantics, I promise!

In the end, you likely know me well enough from this forum that I don't have any desire to argue with anyone, so I sure won't pick a fight.  I am the "love and respect everyone" guy LOL  If it sounded any different, I apologize
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 01:32:21 PM by My427stang »
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

falcongeorge

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #48 on: November 10, 2018, 01:44:12 PM »
Speedtalk was an awesome place back then, with a LOT of very knowedgable guys way above my pay grade, but man, there was some MAJOR  league dick waving! ;D I sat through that thread that started the whole LSA/LDA/overlap rumpus in real time, IIRC it went to twenty some odd pages. ;D
The point is, if you have either 1) duration LSA and ICL, or 2) duration, cam advance and overlap, and you have them at the same check height, you can calculate the valve events of any two camshafts. Neither one is "superior" or "more correct", they are just two different methods of arriving at the same numbers, IO,IC,EO,EC. There was a HUUUUGE argument over this on Speedtalk around 2001 or 2002, it was actually pretty funny. I just sat it out, I think I might have made one post on the entire thread.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 01:47:53 PM by falcongeorge »

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #49 on: November 10, 2018, 02:07:06 PM »
Speedtalk was an awesome place back then, with a LOT of very knowedgable guys way above my pay grade, but man, there was some MAJOR  league dick waving! ;D I sat through that thread that started the whole LSA/LDA/overlap rumpus in real time, IIRC it went to twenty some odd pages. ;D
The point is, if you have either 1) duration LSA and ICL, or 2) duration, cam advance and overlap, and you have them at the same check height, you can calculate the valve events of any two camshafts. Neither one is "superior" or "more correct", they are just two different methods of arriving at the same numbers, IO,IC,EO,EC. There was a HUUUUGE argument over this on Speedtalk around 2001 or 2002, it was actually pretty funny. I just sat it out, I think I might have made one post on the entire thread.

I agree completely
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

MHarvey

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #50 on: November 12, 2018, 05:07:06 PM »
I just primed the oil pump via the disty...and the guage did not show any pressure...all dashes on a digital and I did not see oil running...I felt the resitance on the drill but no oil flow...

Is my grear fallen low or ...what....

MHarvey

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #51 on: November 12, 2018, 08:15:38 PM »
false alarm...replaced the sensor and joy...and that was the sensor the dyno guy used to give me 40...it was pushing 65 with a new sensor....you just cannot make this stuff up.

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: 428 CJ
« Reply #52 on: November 12, 2018, 09:00:03 PM »
false alarm...replaced the sensor and joy...and that was the sensor the dyno guy used to give me 40...it was pushing 65 with a new sensor....you just cannot make this stuff up.

Glad to hear it worked out, as a technique, I have a master gauge, mechanical, with all kinds of adapters that I use when I prime.  It's purpose built from Snap-on, but for years I just used a quality mechanical gauge with a grease gun hose attached.   Always good to have a second opinion or a trusted gauge in times like you have experienced
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch