On 2006-02-22 12:21, dfree383 wrote:
I would like to see your 12:1 306 with AFR 165's and a Comp cams 306S make 500hp on a real dyno. I'm not arguing it would't run good. 350 Real Crank HP will run low 11's if you set it up right, But Computer Dyno's are for Bench Racers and Guessing.
I'm not sure if your saying it will only make 350 HP or that i'm just a bench racer or both.
If 165s don't flow as advertised, then what do they flow? I can only go on what they advertise. I'd like to see what they really flow if it's different. I'd probably feel compelled to clean up the ports on a set of AFR "production" heads anyhow.
Why not AFR 225s...why stop at 205s on a 302. What do guys do that build race 427 windsors? Put AFR 225 race heads or similiar on? Ok...i'll pose a question to you...take the head intake volume and divide it by the ci of the engine. 165/302 and 225/427. Which has the larger intake volume to ci ratio...the 302 with only 165s on it! Does this mean anything without taking flow into account...maybe not but AFR heads are used on both and they both flow pretty darn well, and it helps to illiustrate a relationship of head volume to engine size or engine flow requirements. So what do we make of it...hummmmmmmm! Food for thought maybe...I may have to build this engine just to show the tach flying past 7000 rpm (in gear under load).
165s are not small (for a 302) and a 302 isn't big so where does bigger not become better?
I'd really like to build a 500 HP 289 with 165s but i can't find a good off the shelf forged short skirt piston to use with a 5.4 long rod like I can for a 302...an internal friction reducer that I would recommend to you hotmaverick302.
Oh...that brings up another issue...long rods...does a long rod promote more power in the real world because it makes the piston dwell longer at TDC, because the rod angle is reduced, or because it tends toward a smaller shorter skirt piston that reduces internal friction of the engine thus leading to more usable power? If it's because of the longer dwell at TDC, how much longer does the rod have to be to start making a difference? This is a question for more discussion if anyone cares to discuss...and I think I gave away part of the answer...I gotta go tune my bench...see ya
Oh yea, what would happen if someone actually went against the rod/stroke ratio grain and used short 5.155" 289 length rods when they designed a 331...what the heck could they be thinking!...why would they do such a thing?
That's enough self-deprecation for one post.
Tracy Blackford: Corona, Ca
'65 FB Mustang 331 with 282S cam, fully preped 351W heads. T5z and 3.50 9" posi. 335 [email protected]
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blkfrd on 2/23/06 9:29am ]</font>