Explain to me again, please

[john ancona]

Originally Posted by Todd Hoven

Look at my history I’ve been fighting against rule changes for a pretty long time. Go back to when I raced my first stocker I was fighting against the rule changes. Has nothing to do with being self-serving. I don’t race a car with roller lifters I have never owned a car with roller lifters. I don’t like the rules getting further away from Stock they are right now. That is my position. If you want to race cars roller lifters build a combination with roller lifters. And your argument could just be turned around and put your name in front of it. How can you speak for 1500 people that you think want rule changes? The problem is one racer thinks we should have roller lifters but he’s not looking at the cost on top of it or where it takes the engine program . It’s just now “I can buy roller lifters now it’s cheaper and I can go racing faster” has nothing to do with any of the other issues that pop up from it.

There you go again putting your spin , I never said 1500 racers want rule changes , I am sure have none of the changes on your car that have moved us closer to Super Stock !

[SBillinson]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

Are there that many failures using a standard solid lifter in a stocker motor? The NASCAR guys used standard solid lifters for decades. I know the ramps are more aggressive in Stock these days, but a tool steel lifter for a .312" lobe? Are people turning stocker engines to 10K?

Well... one point is NASCAR was running a solid MUSHROOM tappit, as far as I know, those aren't allowed in stock...

Also NASCAR engines use larger diameter cams and last I heard was running an enclosed pressurized cam tunnel to make their stuff live...

That was years ago, are they still even using solids?

Any way... comparing apples to grapes.
Not much NASCAR does even compares to stock eliminator really.

JMHO

No, they haven't run mushroom tappets in the Cup series for at least 30 years.

Larger diameter cam cores are used to reduce flex and produce better valvetrain stability, especially in engines with splayed or canted valve heads. They are widely used, even in Super Stock.

Cam tunnels are used primarily to reduce windage on the rotating assembly.

You're right about one thing, though. NASCAR is very different from NHRA Stock Eliminator.

The point, however, is that if a 750-850 HP, 358 CID, canted valve, flat tappet engine in a Cup car can run 500 miles at over 9000 rpm with a stock diameter solid lifter, then it's hard to imagine why it can't be done in a stocker that doesn't anywhere near that RPM and is raced a quarter-mile at a time.

[Frank Castros]

You're correct about their ability to properly check Cam Duration and shame on the N.H.R.A. for that. Greg Xakellis had a great team then and it was not a D1 issue and I doubt it was a D3 or D4 issue either as they also had great teams as well. But the Valve Springs? Come on man, anybody can check spring pressure.

[Bill Bogues]

Put the "stock" back in "stock".... good start would be Pressure on valve springs.

[L.Fite]

The point, however, is that if a 750-850 HP, 358 CID, canted valve, flat tappet engine in a Cup car can run 500 miles at over 9000 rpm with a stock diameter solid lifter, then it's hard to imagine why it can't be done in a stocker that doesn't anywhere near that RPM and is raced a quarter-mile at a time.

You're still comparing apples to grapes...

The technology used to make a NASCAR engine live is so for advanced it makes a SS engine look like a high school mechanics class project.

[L.Fite]

Originally Posted by Bill Bogues

Put the "stock" back in "stock".... good start would be Pressure on valve springs.

You are probably correct... But it's going to be awful hard to stuff that genie back in the bottle...

[Frank Castros]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

You are probably correct... But it's going to be awful hard to stuff that genie back in the bottle...

It's simple, NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

[SBillinson]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

The point, however, is that if a 750-850 HP, 358 CID, canted valve, flat tappet engine in a Cup car can run 500 miles at over 9000 rpm with a stock diameter solid lifter, then it's hard to imagine why it can't be done in a stocker that doesn't anywhere near that RPM and is raced a quarter-mile at a time.

You're still comparing apples to grapes...

The technology used to make a NASCAR engine live is so for advanced it makes a SS engine look like a high school mechanics class project.

You're batting a thousand on being wrong. Apparently, you haven't seen the inside of a well-developed Super Stock engine. By the way, I have several Cup engines, so please stop embarrassing yourself.

[L.Fite]

Originally Posted by SBillinson

You're batting a thousand on being wrong. Apparently, you haven't seen the inside of a well-developed Super Stock engine. By the way, I have several Cup engines, so please stop embarrassing yourself.

Don't know who you are... don't care...
I know what I've seen...
I'm not interested in getting in a pissing match on the inter web...
I have more important things to worry with...
Have a nice day...

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

The point, however, is that if a 750-850 HP, 358 CID, canted valve, flat tappet engine in a Cup car can run 500 miles at over 9000 rpm with a stock diameter solid lifter, then it's hard to imagine why it can't be done in a stocker that doesn't anywhere near that RPM and is raced a quarter-mile at a time.

You're still comparing apples to grapes...

The technology used to make a NASCAR engine live is so for advanced it makes a SS engine look like a high school mechanics class project.

I worked for a period of time for the former engine shop director for Robert Yates, Penske Racing and later on, Richard Petty. He spent lots of time sharing tidbits of the technology used in NASCAR on racing engine building. The only aspects that I see are advanced in NASCAR is the machining processes, equipment and materials used in the parts for longevity. Of course, they also spend millions on R&D and testing, and yes, we run more radical camshafts. Nevertheless, some of the qualifying engine cams have radical profiles and spent lots of hours and days doing Spintron testing, learning to control the valvetrain that is one of the main keys for making power.

As regards to camshafts, the cores are billet and treated. The camshafts are not broken in th engine. Every camshaft is broken-in by installing the cam in a specific machine the simulates the lifter contact and load, and different RPM levels and temperatures, being sprayed with engine oil during the operation. After the camshaft was broken in, then it would go into the assigned engine. The choice of hardened steel solid lifters made by either Trend, PPPC, Isky and Crower.

The other key for making power in NASCAR is sealing the engine, spending lots of time testing hone finishes and piston ring materials and configurations. All the torque plates we had in the shop, were custom made. The thickness of the torque plates mirrored the height of the actual cylinder head, with all the fasteners and hardware having the same length and diameter as the ones used in the engine. They were not the normal thickness of torque plates used by most shops, and many of the torque plates had provisions for hot honing.

There is more to building a fast engine than putting a big cam and stiffer valve springs.