CLASS RACER FORUM

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)
-   Class Racer Builds (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=58)
-   -   Peanut Port Drag Test (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=59591)

HP HUNTER 10-28-2015 09:26 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
Update: I ran the car at Bandimere in some 8800 DA conditions, 24.24 baro. I was able to figure out the off idle stumble and was able to run a 1.47 60, 6.95 660, 11.05 1320 on Sunday, If I could have figured out the carb Saturday when the baro was a whole 24.38 and had my 29.5s on there surely I would have seen some 10s.

jcw31 11-03-2015 08:00 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
HP how would it have compared if you ran the next bigger cam 238/248 114?

HP HUNTER 11-03-2015 11:44 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jcw31 (Post 486920)
HP how would it have compared if you ran the next bigger cam 238/248 114?

I had 9.3 compression, I think it would be slower, but I don't know.

HP HUNTER 04-03-2016 12:03 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
Update,


I had the peanut port out this weekend at Pueblo, 25.10 baro, 7000 DA, made suspension adjustments, along with 29.5 Hoosiers and ran the following

60 1.42
330 4.35
660 6.82
660 98.8
1320 10.86
1320 120.4

pfordamx 08-03-2016 06:22 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
I'm really impressed your horsepower and weight make that seem like a 11.20 combo not a high to mid 10 second combo. someone knows how to build a efficient car that works. nice job

impstocker 08-04-2016 08:39 AM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
Great runs. Pretty impressive.

Have you ever done any work with the 366 truck motor? I know it is a high deck block, but we noticed it has smaller Main Journal size 2.50 like a 409 motor.

Does anybody know if this motor listed in the NHRA guide? Probaly not since it only came in dump truck/buses.

Will

jcw31 08-04-2016 03:01 PM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
HP is this the same engine combo with no changes as last year? Also if you had to make changes would you use a cam with a tighter lobe sep. ? What icl is the present one in at?What if you wanted to make more upper hp but not kill the bottom to increase the back half.Seems like you are running as fast as some alum. head roller cam more comp. engines.How about some thoughts on this.Most builders would cringe at a 114 ls.

HP HUNTER 08-05-2016 08:25 AM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by jcw31 (Post 510813)
HP is this the same engine combo with no changes as last year? Also if you had to make changes would you use a cam with a tighter lobe sep. ? What icl is the present one in at?What if you wanted to make more upper hp but not kill the bottom to increase the back half.Seems like you are running as fast as some alum. head roller cam more comp. engines.How about some thoughts on this.Most builders would cringe at a 114 ls.


It is the same combination as last year, just dialed in now, low 10s. The cam was used to keep the engine as close to what I sell as possible, the cam has great vacuum and works great in a street driver. There is better cam choices when it comes to the track for sure. I feel I've maxed the combo out and its time to move on to my 620 HP oval port combo, I think you will like that cam, 108 LC, peaks @ 6600 RPM, the peanut port peaked @ 5900, although it ran through @ 6900 RPM. Stay tuned....

jcw31 08-05-2016 09:12 AM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
It ran 10.80s at 7000 da is this corrected or what would you expect at 2000 da

Mike Taylor 3601 08-05-2016 09:50 AM

Re: Peanut Port Drag Test
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by impstocker (Post 510789)
Great runs. Pretty impressive.

Have you ever done any work with the 366 truck motor? I know it is a high deck block, but we noticed it has smaller Main Journal size 2.50 like a 409 motor.

Does anybody know if this motor listed in the NHRA guide? Probaly not since it only came in dump truck/buses.

Will

366 has same main journal size as other BBC don't know of many ever doing anything much with them,had a friend ran them years ago in Super stock 4wd pulling,they had 366'' limit,they made the rules don't guess they thought of anyone building 366'' BBC, he dominated it.
About all we have ever done besides build them back stock, is use the cranks,in 396,427's and use the rods for stock rebuilds.
366 wouldn't be good for any kind of budget build,by the time you had custom pistons made that would be more than the difference in $ of 454/427 block,could build bigger for same or less money.

HP,I like your build.

Mike Taylor 3601


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.