Roaldin's Alloy 364 Dyno' results

roaldin · 03-09-05, 05:45 AM

We did a base run on the car today. It made 269.5 KW (361.4 BHP) at the wheels. Hopefully a dynosheet will be attached.
It is an extremely tractable and flexible engine.
The figures are a bit short of what it should produce but I'm pretty happy for the moment. Hey it's only 42 KW short of what my little four cylinder produces. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Hmmm, I seem to have lost the option to attach image's for some reason...

Tim.

roaldin · 03-09-05, 06:43 AM

After reading the FAQs it looks like I now have to put it on a web page first. I won't be doing that so if someone is interested and can post it on this forum please let me know and I'll email it to you.

Tim.

Ron Earp · 03-09-05, 08:01 AM

"cylinder produces.

Hmmm, I seem to have lost the option to attach image's for some reason...
"

Actually, you guys beat me everytime something changes. Read on the main page....

Ron

roaldin · 03-09-05, 07:59 PM

The dyno' was Dyno Dynamics. The run was in 4th gear.

Tim.

roaldin · 03-09-05, 08:27 PM

Here's the dyno sheet for the GT (I hope)

Tim.

roaldin · 03-09-05, 08:30 PM

And here's that little four cylinder I was talking about. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
Not too bad at all four wheels considering the fuel pump failure.
The engine is expected to run 35 PSI boost when finished.

Tim.

Ron Earp · 03-10-05, 02:58 PM

Roaldin,

What was the V8 supposed to be making at the crank? 364hp would be around 420ish hp at the crank. What are the specifications? Thanks much,

Ron

roaldin · 03-10-05, 08:11 PM

It was supposed to make 500 BHP at FW. It apparently made close to that on the engine builders dyno' but it had a different induction setup on it.
I think I'm at the limit of the throttle bodies and/or manifold that are on it.
It's not too big a deal if I want to get the power up as there are a couple of options I can try.
Another problem is that due to a misunderstanding between myself and the engine builder the car has a hydraulic roller cam which is limiting the rev's somewhat.
It's not quite the fire breather I wanted but it's extremely pleasant to drive, wonderfully tractable/flexible. At the moment I'm in two minds as to whether to change it or not. It really is a gem of a thing to drive ATM.

It's a bit more road car than race car ATM and I suppose that's not such a bad thing. It has meant that I'm less inclined to take it racing than I felt initially but it's still a very fast road car.
It has RF's Koni suspension in it at the moment and although soft is much more comfortable than I imagined it would be.

I think we can gain some in the tuning but we won't find it all.

I'm aware that being a Dyno Dynamics dyno' it reads lower than you in the US are used to (Dynojet?) so I don't know how it would compare on one of those.

As it is both engine and chassis are a delight to drive and I'm reluctant to change it into a more cantankerous harsher beast.

Basic spec's are 302 based aluminium block 364, forged internals, ported AFR heads, dry sump, 8 stack Motec injection.

Tim.

Iron Sheik · 03-11-05, 06:05 PM

361.4 RWHP is pretty damn good specially on Dynamics (We do have them here in the US). My understanding is that you can add another 15% to that number for Dynojet. So about 415 RWHP for Dynojet.

You should have no problem doing 11s in 1/4 mile (assuming nothing breaks [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])

roaldin · 03-12-05, 08:25 PM

I'm pretty happy with the result for the moment.
As I said, the engine is an extremely good natured animal. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I didn't do any special dyno' preparation so the car had cat's, socks and mufflers fitted. No tuning was done, it was just a base run.

Tim.

347 · 03-12-05, 10:10 PM

Nice set up Roaldin.......What type of cam are you running and what are the specs?

roaldin · 03-13-05, 04:08 AM

It's a hydraulic roller, unfortunately that's all I can tell you.
I asked the engine builder for the spec's a while ago but I don't have them yet.
I trusted him to build an engine that suited my requirements and he's been pretty much on the money apart from the misunderstanding re "revability".

Tim.

347 · 03-13-05, 04:20 AM

I think I must get myself a solid roller everone seems to have a roller ! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

At whats revs does it stop making power?

roaldin · 03-13-05, 07:38 AM

Rev limit is set at 6300 at the moment. It might go a bit higher but not much.

Tim.

Colin Artus · 03-13-05, 08:56 AM

Modern hydraulic roller lifters are fine to 7000 rpm or more so running your engine to a higher limit should not be a problem unless the valvespring/cam grind spec is too mild; I notice on your dynoplot that the power curve appears to have peaked. Perhaps swapping the cam for one with a bit more lift and duration (but still an h/r) would give you the extra rev range you want?

Colin Artus

roaldin · 03-13-05, 09:31 AM

I think the throttle bodies/manifold are limiting top end.
The engine builder doesn't seem to think I should push the engine any higher with this cam anyway so it seems that if I want to get more out of it it's going to mean changing all three items (and associated hardware). [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
As I said before in the road/track compromise stakes it's a little more road than I expected but I quite like it. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Tim.

Ron Earp · 03-13-05, 10:11 AM

I might try to search for it but some years ago there was someone who dynoed their SB stroked engine with 8bbl throtle bodies, I want to say 48mm. The results were not was they expected and when they switched to a 4 bbl setup, I think it was a Victor Jr. manifold, hp jumped by somelike like 80 or so and torque stayed the same.

This thread started a debate of webbers/tbody vs. 4bbl and good manifold. As you can imagine camps were divided on the subject but one thing was clear and has been mentioned before - on a Victor Jr. (or Air Gap was proved just as good with more torque in a recent back to back test I saw) the cylinder sees a lot more plenium volume and available air/fuel flow than it sees through a single 48mm hole and this might account for a big difference on some large engines. But this motor that the guy had was a SB stroker and should have been well fed with 48mm bores though. I'll see if I can find it or if it was on the old board.

Ron

roaldin · 03-13-05, 08:00 PM

Thank's Ron,

I haven't seen the thread you're talking about.
I have seen a couple of fairly recent threads that include some comparisons.

Tim.

RRD · 03-13-05, 08:36 PM

ron, i love the idea and the looks of the individual runners. but if you have a good intake and really well sorted holley, it's hard to beat the power and simplicity. although many carbs work "out of the box", they may be far from optimal. most holley tuning is not that difficult.

Ron Earp · 03-13-05, 09:15 PM

I like the looks too, which is why I've got the weber manifold and carbs - but my engine man is betting against me on them and I think he'll win. He's a long time Ford fanatic and can build some serious motors, his money is on a worked single plane on the high compression solid lifter stroker we're putting together. Ron