This is actually true and I would go about it the same way.Originally Posted by GTPpower
|
|
03-20-2015
This is actually true and I would go about it the same way.
03-20-2015
Power under the curve..
03-20-2015
I got a screaming deal on a set of heads that had them, or else I would just run stock.
03-20-2015
I second this.
Most solid info in this thread!!!!
But I'll wait for a follow up sentence from Dark that will never
03-20-2015
ZZP's info is on their website in the tech area, at least it was last I checked. I remember them saying the rocker ratio was 1.5-1.8 depending on where the tip contact point was, but at the stock .430 valve lift the ratio was 1.65.
They also showed how much deflection there was versus an SLP/Yella Terra roller rocker.
If the stock rockers start out at 1.6 or 1.5x ratio, and only reached 1.7x above .500" lift, for hypothetical purposes, then a roller rocker at a consistent 1.7 ratio and with less deflection would make more power. The opening rate would be faster, the valve would be held open above .300" for a longer duration.
The 1mph example is the only before/after I have, I don't recall anyone else having one setup and then getting the other from me. I can tell you it was done in a 2 week period in September with similar weather conditions. He was also able to pulley down to a 2.9" pulley instead of a 3.0", but I forget how much boost he lost (this was 2006).
SBC cam kits with 1.7 rockers (mainly 1.73 CompCam but switched to 1.7 Yella Terras when the CCs became unavailable) always had a stronger idle sound than the SBC cams with stock rockers. That's not very scientific but I'll mention it anyhow.
03-21-2015
The real data is me actually doing ****, then telling you wannabe's if it worked or not.
Just using common sense you can see that roller rockers will make less lift and weigh more... I cant teach you guys basic mechanical engineering stuff in a random thread, where everyone wants to hate anything I say before i say it anyway. The reason I dont explain myself anymore is because people will just argue with it regardless, then call me ugly, or make fun of my girlfriend, or call my car junk.
Wasting my time with you idiots is the least rewarding thing i can do with my valuable time it seems, and you still manage to call me stupid when I actually try to help.
03-21-2015
I have a mechanical engineering degree and I always found you pompous. I actually don't care if your right about anything.
Just so in not miss under stood.
Pompus = affectedly and irritatingly grand, solemn, or self-important. (From Google)
03-22-2015
pretty much hit it on the head. i also have one of those fancy degrees...
03-22-2015
Quite possibly the most hilarious thing ive ever read on this forum..........
03-22-2015
i dont recall calling you ugly or talking about your girlfriend. in fact i even think that i agreed with you that the rocker ratio changes over the entire duration of the cam lobe. but your claims of loosing power and people being stupid for running a roller rocker setup is just ignorant on your part. like GTPpower and Overkill eluded to, if you go to a roller rocker you may loose a few thousands at peak lift with say 1.7 rollers (which will still be more than advertised numbers from the manufacturers) but the duration the valve is open and the rate that it is opened is much greater with a higher ratio roller rocker over stockers. as has been noted these aftermarket 3800 cams have rather square looking lobes so i would say it is a safe assumption that the vendors also believe that duration and ramp rates are pretty ****ing important to these motors. peak lift isnt really all that important, all the cams that have ever been made that had massive lift have performed like **** from what i have seen.
using a little common sense, all of these things would en turn allow most people to see the value of a roller rocker setup.
DH keep pedaling your drivel, there is a reason you continually get shot down about your "testing"
(note: i run stock rockers)
03-22-2015
also backing up the above look at the people that rave about the VS/S1X/XP/ST1/ST2 cams none are giant cams and for example james made some giant numbers for a ST1 turbo cam setup (among others running the cams I just listed) that makes me second guess if I should use a St5 cam in a turbo build not to mention the heads, valve train, and timing chain setup needed to run the st5.
What makes me love the s1x car is its so simple. nothing is over kill, stock heads, stock rockers, stock timing chain.......
The results CAN be greater than the sum of the parts im a 100% believer in that after owning the car I have now.
Everyone says go big giant cam, but how many are daily and how many run with little to no issues? Now I understand this brings a lot into factor like user error and who ever is between the go pedal and steering wheel. But still what is the point of giant cam if the work required to run it ends up being a giant headache?......
03-22-2015
I've known you for a long time over the interweb. I don't ever recall you explaining yourself.
All I see from your post is, more lift always equals more flow. This isn't the lsx world.
Valvetrain weight affects power very very little, as long as itse balanced.
03-22-2015
If you're that completely butthurt over what you "do" around here, then just simply quit coming around here.
IF you need help in doing that, please see a moderator.
03-22-2015
Actually I've weighed a stock rocker and a comparable 1.84 Yella Terra roller.
A stock rocker weighs in at 80.5 grams, vs. The roller at 69.9. That's a close to 130~ grams of weigh savings across the valvetrain alone, without even counting the pediatals and rockers. Lighter valvetrain parts also do their fair share of lessening the load on the hard parts, due to less friction and wear on the guides.
Not sure where you got your info there, but you must have used some of that Detroit engineering math to solve that equation.
03-22-2015
Figured I would add what little I can to this conversation... Here is what ZZP has to say about rocker ratios changing.
http://www.zzperformance.com/blog/wh...tio-on-a-3800/
03-22-2015
They posted that along with saying a 3.4" pulley is alright with an intake and u-bend delete.
I always listen to ZZP advice when I can.
03-22-2015
i dont think there is any miss information in the rocker FAQ, however, all it really proves is that the 1.9 modded rockers deflect a lot.
03-22-2015
When you're combing through ZZP's tech articles, keep in mind they're dated for the times.
We've learned a little since 2005.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
