|
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
|
![]()
How was Mission, Bill ? !
Only fast track in my "circuit"... damn, I wanted to be there. No fuel check / weigh in / heads up ( not that I'd want that ! ) at Opens ? The weigh in at the very least, should be absolutely necessary.
__________________
Aubrey N Bruneau 6409 C/S 62 BelAir sport coupe, 409 HP 409 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
|
![]()
Aubrey, just curious, if there is no heads-up why would you want to weigh in?
__________________
Woodro Josey 2002 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
The air was okay @ Mission at worst I think it got up to 1700’. The track seemed a little slippery to me though.
There were 23 of us, including one of your Alberta buddies running his Comp car as a SS/BM The one thing I was surprised to see was Charlie Smiths old Dart, I think the guy that bought it was just running in Pro bracket. Mission would be a real easy place for that particular car to get the combo a Monday morning AHFS “gift”
__________________
Bill Edgeworth 6471 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
|
![]()
Just for my own curiosity, Woodro. If I managed to finally make this "car" work properly, and perform decently, I'd like to know that it was at a legal weight.
Gee Bill... 1700 ft, at a sea level track ? Might as well save my travelling money, and just go to Saskatoon ! But on topic... other than the inconsistent machined finish, do these new light weight tool steel retainers seem to be the answer ?
__________________
Aubrey N Bruneau 6409 C/S 62 BelAir sport coupe, 409 HP 409 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 112
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]()
Aubrey ... you going to make it to the Hat this weekend ? Everytime I have been to the N.O. at the Hat they have had fuel check , scales , and I have seen numerous records set there .
Mike Pruss 668 SS/GA |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
|
![]()
Thanks for asking, Mike...
nooooo, I'll miss that one too. You know, I SHOULD go and watch though. No doubt, I'd learn something.
__________________
Aubrey N Bruneau 6409 C/S 62 BelAir sport coupe, 409 HP 409 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
[
But on topic... other than the inconsistent machined finish, do these new light weight tool steel retainers seem to be the answer ?[/QUOTE] Yes, Other than the fact that they don’t seem to be inspecting parts off of their CNC machines I think it’s a great product. In the case of the ones I’m using they are 15 grams lighter than what I was using (43% lighter!) and any weight you can save on the Valve side of the rocker arm is very beneficial. Depending on what you are trying to achieve they can be beneficial in a number of different ways; You can rev higher before valve float You can get away with a little less spring pressure (only matters of you are not using ceramic or DLC coated lifters and you are worried about too much seat pressure) They also, at least compared to the Manley retainers I was using, give more clearance under the rocker arm. I had an issue with the clearance on a set of heads longer push rods resulted in too much lift and the correct length caused the rocker arm to touch the outer edge of the retainer, the Comp retainers solved the problem.
__________________
Bill Edgeworth 6471 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
|
![]()
Thanks Bill...
I certainly have a valve train weight problem. The ones I have coming, are about 13 grams lighter than the regular Comp parts I was using.
__________________
Aubrey N Bruneau 6409 C/S 62 BelAir sport coupe, 409 HP 409 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|