Next step for my 350

Discussion in 'Small Block Tech' started by UNDERDOG350, Jan 24, 2015.

  1. 8ad-f85

    8ad-f85 Well-Known Member

    Not calling BS, but are there any examples besides (Flowmaster's ?) marketing hype that the D shaped merge works better than a "scooped" looking merge as when happens when a vertical chop is done on 2 pipes that meet side by side? (see Burns type collectors for example) (Or even a cone looking type...I forget what that's called)

    I would guess that the D merge is more for manufacturing convenience, as I see this is fairly common in hot rod advertising.
    Isn't Flowmaster mainly a robotics welding facility?
    Wouldn't it be much easier for a robotic welding machine to reach that better?

    [Common example would be the "diamond turned" piston tops.
    I've read that the surface finish let by the tool leaves a "heat reflective surface" that is some kind of benefit to the consumer.
    Most likely the diamond insert's sole purpose is to be able to make many thousands of parts without being changed or the machine being offset.
    "We" could obtain nearly any surface finish we wanted with the massive variations of tool shapes, and feeds and speeds available. ("We" being an OEM with very high production runs).
    The other weird one is the belief that the 2 main types of forged piston alloys expand at different CoE's, where as a well known former OEM exec states that the extra silicone content has the characteristic of lubricity and the alloy lacking it must be run looser to avoid the material from grabbing the bore.
    Being a former marketing executive, I suspect these type of claims are simply marketing opportunities. ]

    Not trying to stir the pot here, but I've never seen huge engineering efforts into R&D work concerning affordable midrange consumer market products anywhere near the efforts put into the manufacturing aspects...mainly cost controls at that stage. That marketing twist helps the other end of the equation by creating sales.
    My apologies again to the OP's thread for the Haley's Comet sized orbit this tangent has taken.
    I've seen things said humorously on the shop floor end up printed on marketing pamphlets as a major focus of a company's strategy first hand, lol.
    Makes you kind of wish BS could be patented...
     
  2. 8ad-f85

    8ad-f85 Well-Known Member

    Read between the lines much?
    Way to go Perry Mason! You'll make a fine attorney one day by twisting people's words.
    "Not stirring the pot" is sarcasm, a polite acknowledgement that it will probably make waves.
    It's literally impossible to find a legit way to politely disagree with you.
    That and I'm better at being blunt than smooth.
    My participation in this offshoot IS contributing to the tangent. Of course the goals are relevant.
    It's hard not to notice the defense of some "patented tech"...I was just looking for some type of data.
    Marketing hype doesn't imply "crooks", that's just how salespeople work.
    What are they supposed to say...? "Look, a shiny new piston! You should have this! We patented the way we make it because it does something no other piston can, not because we don't want you to use the method we put so much time into perfecting a process on. Not because we can legally prevent competition! (??)"

    I don't care which method of merge works better, I was just curious if there was a legit difference. I suspect not.
    You would think that Burns or others wouldn't put so much time into other methods.
    I don't see any D merges anywhere else other than Flowmaster.

    To untwist your version of my words on the piston alloy...If you look up the 2 alloys and apply their CoE's to the temp range and section thicknesses, you will see that they barely differ by a few tenths.
    This has been illustrated elsewhere also.
    The silicon added material CAN be run tighter because of it's lubricity, according to a respected former employee of the manufacturer.
    According to promotion literature, which is not tech or engineering info, it would seem to misinform as to the reasons why the bore clearance could be run tighter.
    Based on seeing the difference between the two from actual experience making things and marketing things, I call that "marketing hype".
    If I'm wrong about this, please correct me. I'll eat a giant plate of crow.

    I'll agree that many OEM parts are superior to aftermarket. Ignition and electronics are the first that come to mind.
    I'll state again that the OEM stuff does what it's designed to do.
    I still believe that they are not giving us anywhere near what has been capable. That info is out there. (Xfiles, lol).
    I will also say that it would be careless to assume that any enthusiast or end user can really state what the OEM's priorities are.
    I can state opinions from my background MAKING these things people buy, as well as marketing them.
    There is sooo much access to engineering education it's silly. Argue with the rest of the world, not me.

    To assume that a businessperson needs to cut their competitors with self promotion or to legitimize that practice speaks volumes about one's understanding of integrity in that profession.
    There are some of those. They are the ones you hear about from the news.
    There are many times that industries hire consultants for cooperate efforts.
    I am not in any competition with anyone here.

    You've always had a logical way of describing your thoughts on the mechanics of things. I respect that.
    If you want to spend so much time proving your thoughts, cool.
    I was hoping to see a patent related to the type of merge discussed and it's actual benefits, other than "easier to make".
    You programmed and set up robotics too? Great!
    Knowing the learning curve involved to the process's repeatability , I still say..."easier to make"and "I don't want you benefiting from my expensive R&D simply because you can look at it and see how it's made"
    If you show me otherwise I'll gladly have your back, drink your Kool-aid, whatever.

    Sorry to have struck a nerve.
    My sincere apologies to V8Buick if these last few posts have no merit to the threads!
     
  3. Fox's Den

    Fox's Den 355Xrs

    here wee go again....








    Thanks for clearing up the intake mod for me Steve.

    Still nice numbers no matter what these two argue about.

    Put the two barrel on and stop all this.......
     
  4. 300sbb_overkill

    300sbb_overkill WWG1WGA. MAGA

    Tony, we have been through this before, how soon you forget. The expansion rates differ from the 2618 and 4032 alloys because the lubricity of the 4032 helps keep it cooler in the bore vs the 2618 alloy. Running pistons in an engine differs tremendously from just heating the 2 different alloys with a flame.(period!) The slipperier alloy WILL run cooler thus expand less.

    We have had this discussion before Tony, are you a 2618 piston salesman? :puzzled: LOL



    Derek
     
  5. Fox's Den

    Fox's Den 355Xrs

    don't worry Steve, we will get back to you and this thread after we get done with the technical aspect of the system you have not looked at yet.

    Why do these threads get this way.

    you have at least 50 hp missing.

    Every thread gets this done by our great technical team. Why!

    Now sit back and watch the popcorn go by by.

    I got an idea, why not when you all want to start an argument why not just start a new thread instead of clogging up someone else's thread with a bunch of crap that no one really cares about.


    :pray:
     
  6. 8ad-f85

    8ad-f85 Well-Known Member

    Sorry to do this...:eek:

    Ignore links if not interested;
    (In fact, ignore post if not interested)

    Calculation of Friction in Motorsport Engines - calculationoffrictioninhighperformanceengines.pdf
    Microsoft PowerPoint - Lec. 18 Heat transf.pptx - Lec. 18 Heat transf.pdf
    Scuffing resistance of coated piston skirts run against cylinder bores (PDF Download Available)

    I did mistype and subsequently fail to proofread my post

    There's way more going on than what can be described in a single sentence on any particular subject

    I don't read that the extra silicon sliding against the bore creates more heat until there's no oil film (asperity contact) or that the oil film is affected by elastic deformation due to the skirt's shape, rigidity (pressure contact pattern), and surface finish. The quantity of silicon by percentage seems to affect things to a lesser degree than the size and shape of the particles.
    It would appear that...Much more heat is transferring through the piston top and rings than a sliding skirt. The sliding of a skirt has barely greater friction than an oil film bearing until test speeds are closer to 10,000- 15,000rpm.

    I saw the point of the header merges on the earlier posts, they were already well described. I also see how a reasonable logical explanation was offered.
    I was just looking for the patent info describing why and what.
    Definitely not trying argue.
    Everyone here has fantastic contributions, it's what makes this place great!
    Hoping this is received a bit better by offering up references better able to explain things.

    Good day all!

    [You'll have to copy/paste to your browser bar, as my lack of computer tech is evident]
     
  7. UNDERDOG350

    UNDERDOG350 350 Buick purestock racer

    Well I went to the FAST race this weekend to test out the latest combo. Pretty much just went back to what I had before with level 3 Crower. Only real difference is the bigger valves. The weather was mid eighties and dry both days. Traction at US 131 raceway parks was very good.

    First couple runs were nothing special. High 13's around 97 mph. About what I expected in the heat. I also did try removing my plenum divider and again it slowed down. Found out my O2 sensors were bad so no fine tune on the carb.

    Started messing with secondary rods with no real change. Then tried manually shifting at higher RPM around 5600 and it was liking it. Ran a barely best ever of 13.76 at about 98.5 mph.

    Removed the secondary air door break to see what speed it was releasing. Was about 3.5 seconds. I've never messed with this before. I could not see any hole inside the hose fitting, it seemed to be porous but no detectable hole. I drilled a small .022" hole in it and then it would release in about 1/2 the time. I did not expect it would help since I have a 800 Qjet and by all rights it should too big anyway. Boy was I wrong. I went 13.54 @ 99.4 mph. It liked faster secondary opening. Not wanting to go too big since I didn't have a spare I did not drill it any larger. That is an area I will be experimenting with in the future.

    Next thing I tried was flipping the air filter lid. I've switched back and forth before between the ram air and an open element before will little to no change. Well this time it made another improvement. Engine also was liking the higher temperature and ran its best time Friday with the engine at 200. Go figure. Wished my A/F meter was working so I could tell if it was because flipping the lid leaned the carb or the additional airflow was what helped.

    Saturdays weather was the same so didn't expect any improvement in times. I did run several warm up runs and it did go back to back 13.45's and finally hit 100 mph twice. Car will still only gain about 18 mph from the 1/8 mile to the 1/4.

    Raced a 1970 Cuda 440 six pack and won my shootout. Pretty good weekend.

    Moral of the story keep trying things. Even if they didn't work in the past with a different combo.

    PS. Tom Millers new car was quick. I'll let tell you about it. Very impressive.
     
  8. alec296

    alec296 i need another buick

    Nice to see an improved times for your run. What do you think about the bigger valves?
     
  9. UNDERDOG350

    UNDERDOG350 350 Buick purestock racer

    I'd say the valves might be worth 2 tenths since I was running near best ever times in the heat before the carb changes. If it picks up even more in Sept. Pure Stock drags with cooler air I think the correlation is valid.
    Also, it seems the bigger valves like more RPM. Note sure if this is common buts makes sense. I now need to change my trans governor for higher automatic shift points.
     
  10. 300sbb_overkill

    300sbb_overkill WWG1WGA. MAGA

    Hey Steve, great to read you're back at the track and sharing you results, thanks!

    I have a question, are the new pistons lighter than the old ones? If so that combined with the new larger valves has probably raised you HP peak RPM and your shift point may want even more RPM than where you shifted? Perhaps a few more test runs before the governor is adjusted?

    Anyway, it looks like you may have more in your combo, oh so close to the 12s! Glad to see you stick with the sbb 350 platform with your car and can't wait to see you post that 12.99 after the engine is broke in!!! :Brow:



    Derek
     
  11. UNDERDOG350

    UNDERDOG350 350 Buick purestock racer

    New pistons were 2.8 pounds lighter.
     
  12. 8ad-f85

    8ad-f85 Well-Known Member

    Opening your secondaries quicker is helping.
    If you drill much past .025", there's little dampening happening.
    Now you can play with the secondary metering a little bit.
    You're a long ways away from the need to eliminate the dashpot.

    Nice to see it working good :)
     
  13. No Lift

    No Lift Platinum Level Contributor

    Steve, that must have been some kind of late emissions pulloff or some big car unit to be that slow. Typical Q-Jet for performance use works best slightly more than 2 seconds and that is with the factory .010" opening.(smaller than a #80 .0135" drill bit) Of course there may be variations for different cars. I check it right on the carb. Compress the arm, release it and count, one thousand one, one thousand two, and it should be out right after that. .022" is a huge jump from that and when less than 2 sec. things can get "boggy". What is your secondary windup set at? I've always had the best success with the factory slightly great than 2 secondary pulloff and then the minimum secondary windup to prevent a bog. It definitely should not be wound up more than stock. Remember that just requires more air(rpm) to open the secondaries fully. If it is tighter than stock at this time and that is what is needed to keep your car from bogging with .022" then you need a smaller orifice size in the pulloff and then loosen the windup to factory specs. A push on the secondary flaps with you fingers shouldn't take much to open them. You get a feel for it after a while. An orifice opening of .025" pretty much makes the pulloff non-functional. Check you secondary windup tension. I made up a 1/8" brass plug that goes inline with the pulloff hose and drilled an orifice in it. If the "official" hole is too big already a smaller hole before it will slow it down and the plug is changeable.

    If you think about it with a 3.5 sec. secondary delay how far out on the track would you be before the secondary is fully open? The top of first gear maybe? No wonder you picked up a chunk of performance from that little change. Better late than never, right? Honestly, for how great your car was running before I figured you had the secondaries all science out.

    Good deal on the shifting higher. The only guys who should be shifting at 5000 rpm are the guys with stock cams and probably not even then with a well running 350.

    Nice going on the personal best and probably the fastest Buick 350 "stock appearing" ET's ever plus you've got 2 tenths in the bag as soon as the weather cools off in the Fall.
     
  14. 300sbb_overkill

    300sbb_overkill WWG1WGA. MAGA

    WOW! That's quite substantial :shock:, with a set of the AutoTecs on a set of nascar take out rods on a '73 or newer crank, internal balancing might be accomplished without the use of heavy Mallory metal? I'll have to look into that eventually if I can ever get to the sbb 300 stroker build that I plan on using the AutoTecs in. Thanks for that tid bit of info. :TU:

    2.8 lbs less rotating mass or is that reciprocating mass? Either way that's a lot of weight off of the end of each rod!(.35 lbs each or 5.6oz each, that is 158.75 grams each!!) Right there is a big reason that thing wants to spin faster, I'm sure the bigger valves aren't slowing things down either. :Brow:

    AND if you got the skinnier metric ring pack on those pistons that also helps free up some power to make it want to spin faster as well if you were able to get the thinner rings with your bore size?

    Sounds like you did a great job on building a very strong runner! Wonder how you would build a sbb 350 for a non "stock" racing class street/strip type engine for your GS? :eek2: :Brow:



    Derek
     
  15. sean Buick 76

    sean Buick 76 Buick Nut

    I was able to get an internal balance done on a 77 350 with using the stock rods and Diamond pistons.. Then I took it apart and had it internally balanced for Herche rods which were 100 grams each lighter than stock and still no mallory metal was required to balance the stock crank.
     
  16. 8ad-f85

    8ad-f85 Well-Known Member

    ^^Remember what the bobweight was on those?
    I'm assuming no mallory?
     
  17. sean Buick 76

    sean Buick 76 Buick Nut

    No Mallory metal in the crank, bob weight was 1755 Grams, internally balanced, both of my engines have the same rods and pistons, one with stock crank and one with the billet King crank.
     
  18. Mark Demko

    Mark Demko Well-Known Member

    I really have no clue what the subject of this thread is, but Steves post here is cool:laugh:
     
  19. sean Buick 76

    sean Buick 76 Buick Nut

    What was the bob weight on the rod and piston combo? I am guessing external balance job?
     
  20. 300sbb_overkill

    300sbb_overkill WWG1WGA. MAGA

    Any updates Steve?





    Derek
     

Share This Page