Project complete
02-07-2006, 09:39 AM
#12
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Project complete
Originally Posted by mike11
Good evening gentlemen,
I see here that some of you are doubting the latest in engine building technology and the instruments which allow us to test our designs. I am happy to see that you are paying attention to the latest project completed at Roccard Marine.
Just to put you all at ease I’d like to remind you that the industry standard is corrected power; no professional engine builder uses uncorrected data. Here at Roccard, WE do not build our engines out of magazines. We build power using the latest available technology along with using our own proprietary designs and techniques.
Let me ask you folks with doubts, does the camshaft figure in anywhere in terms of how much compression ratio an engine will tolerate on pump gas? Making power is all about volumetric efficiency and cam timing, along with many variables, which smart engine builders employ. We just made approximately 640 hp with 502 cubes and that is 1.27 hp per cube, which is not outstanding power; it is average power. This is 2006 not 1986. By the time the stuff we are doing gets into your comic books telling you it cannot be done, it is already old news here.
Thanks Mike
I see here that some of you are doubting the latest in engine building technology and the instruments which allow us to test our designs. I am happy to see that you are paying attention to the latest project completed at Roccard Marine.
Just to put you all at ease I’d like to remind you that the industry standard is corrected power; no professional engine builder uses uncorrected data. Here at Roccard, WE do not build our engines out of magazines. We build power using the latest available technology along with using our own proprietary designs and techniques.
Let me ask you folks with doubts, does the camshaft figure in anywhere in terms of how much compression ratio an engine will tolerate on pump gas? Making power is all about volumetric efficiency and cam timing, along with many variables, which smart engine builders employ. We just made approximately 640 hp with 502 cubes and that is 1.27 hp per cube, which is not outstanding power; it is average power. This is 2006 not 1986. By the time the stuff we are doing gets into your comic books telling you it cannot be done, it is already old news here.
Thanks Mike
02-07-2006, 11:43 AM
#14
Registered
Re: Project complete
Those carburetors look Beautiful (although I might be a little biased) 
I wouldn't get too worried about those A/F numbers since looking at the picture they are a Superflow derived number, not Lambda.
People need to be careful of what they say will or won't ever work. I've run marine engines leaner than this without any problem, but you have to take special care. Most marine engines will run richer, but every dyno will read slightly different depending on how the cell is setup, and the type of equipment is being used.
I hope your customer is very happy with the engines, and do everything he wants. I just wish you had gotten our marine carburetors instead of automotive carbs.
I wouldn't get too worried about those A/F numbers since looking at the picture they are a Superflow derived number, not Lambda.
People need to be careful of what they say will or won't ever work. I've run marine engines leaner than this without any problem, but you have to take special care. Most marine engines will run richer, but every dyno will read slightly different depending on how the cell is setup, and the type of equipment is being used.
I hope your customer is very happy with the engines, and do everything he wants. I just wish you had gotten our marine carburetors instead of automotive carbs.
02-07-2006, 12:22 PM
#15
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: sint maarten
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Project complete
Originally Posted by offthefront
can you elaborate .......m
if dyno numbers are used by someone to illustrate their prowess then the information provided should be complete.
thats my only point.
but then again if you look up " cynic " in the dictonary, my picture is there
02-07-2006, 02:23 PM
#17
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: sint maarten
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Project complete
i ran superflows with both their software and third party software and used std correction and liked step testing .... would not use dyno sheets corrected more than 5 % but would test on bad days as relative indicators .... also would test on bad days to get data base for changes to be made at the track on those kind of days...
you can set the baro number on the console such that the correction will go off scale. you can do any number of things to make the sheets print any corrected number you want...
doesn't make them correct.
only the raw data tells you whats really happening from a research standpoint relative to the conditions on the day.
the corrected numbers on those days is just propaganda.
you can set the baro number on the console such that the correction will go off scale. you can do any number of things to make the sheets print any corrected number you want...
doesn't make them correct.
only the raw data tells you whats really happening from a research standpoint relative to the conditions on the day.
the corrected numbers on those days is just propaganda.
02-07-2006, 02:29 PM
#18
Registered
Re: Project complete
Originally Posted by stevesxm
i ran superflows with both their software and third party software and used std correction and liked step testing .... would not use dyno sheets corrected more than 5 % but would test on bad days as relative indicators .... also would test on bad days to get data base for changes to be made at the track on those kind of days...
you can set the baro number on the console such that the correction will go off scale. you can do any number of things to make the sheets print any corrected number you want...
doesn't make them correct.
only the raw data tells you whats really happening from a research standpoint relative to the conditions on the day.
the corrected numbers on those days is just propaganda.
you can set the baro number on the console such that the correction will go off scale. you can do any number of things to make the sheets print any corrected number you want...
doesn't make them correct.
only the raw data tells you whats really happening from a research standpoint relative to the conditions on the day.
the corrected numbers on those days is just propaganda.
Don't know that I'll total agree or disagree with all of that. Are you using Depac software or someone elses? But I normally correct to SAE which most engine builders don't like since it shows lower HP figures. If you control as many parameters going into the test as possible you get much better data. I generally try to at least control temp, & humidity if not barometer. Then from there get all pulls within 1 degree on oil, and water temp.
02-07-2006, 03:54 PM
#19
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: sint maarten
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Project complete
correct and agree in all respects. i was a friend of davids when he first developed the depac system but haven't spoken to him in 20 years or more.... THERE is a guy that was light years ahead of his time... he did some DOS software for me that i use to this day.
i started a thread about dyno numbers here some time ago and got the bejessus beat out of me for being cynical and a doubting thomas.... both of which i am...
i just find it personally annoying when people make hp claims and publish sheets with no raw data... especially when the claims seem to be...well...optomistic.
what started this whole thing a while back was a similar claim that some guy made about 720 hp normally aspirated on a single carb from 500 inches on pump gas... not even 92 octane.... i suggested that that was unlikely as the compression ratio nec to do that would mean 100 + octane all day... asked for specifics then... and got none.
i don't know.... the whole bench racing / hp thing is just the entertainment i guess...
i think if i where buying big money , hi hp marine engines, i think ide want to stick with the guys that are racing and winning and actually have a vested interest in producing the numbers they claim if , in fact the numbers were meaningful to me. for most people i suspect, they ( and me , for that matter) wouldn't notice or feel 50 hp dif in the performance of the boat if i got sold 650 and only got 600.... but i could sure impress the hell out of my buddies with the dyno sheet
i started a thread about dyno numbers here some time ago and got the bejessus beat out of me for being cynical and a doubting thomas.... both of which i am...
i just find it personally annoying when people make hp claims and publish sheets with no raw data... especially when the claims seem to be...well...optomistic.
what started this whole thing a while back was a similar claim that some guy made about 720 hp normally aspirated on a single carb from 500 inches on pump gas... not even 92 octane.... i suggested that that was unlikely as the compression ratio nec to do that would mean 100 + octane all day... asked for specifics then... and got none.
i don't know.... the whole bench racing / hp thing is just the entertainment i guess...
i think if i where buying big money , hi hp marine engines, i think ide want to stick with the guys that are racing and winning and actually have a vested interest in producing the numbers they claim if , in fact the numbers were meaningful to me. for most people i suspect, they ( and me , for that matter) wouldn't notice or feel 50 hp dif in the performance of the boat if i got sold 650 and only got 600.... but i could sure impress the hell out of my buddies with the dyno sheet
02-07-2006, 04:16 PM
#20
Registered
Re: Project complete
stevesxm,
So you know Dave.... He is brilliant, but a pain in the ass to the point we no longer own a dyno with his system. We do still use Depac stuff on our flow benches.
So you know Dave.... He is brilliant, but a pain in the ass to the point we no longer own a dyno with his system. We do still use Depac stuff on our flow benches.
