Dyno proven 675-700 HP 540CI recipes?
08-05-2015, 08:04 AM
#271
Registered
Yes I do wish I kept the warmed up 420's and put pro chargers on them, that thoughts gone now lol
I have to work with what I got I think the combo just is too big for my heavy low rpm hull talked to Cigrocket got his combo, 315 heads and 741 cam pushed him 74-75 so again I guess I'm close just gotta tune it best I can and leave it alone, there is something to be said if it runs every weekend also....
I have to work with what I got I think the combo just is too big for my heavy low rpm hull talked to Cigrocket got his combo, 315 heads and 741 cam pushed him 74-75 so again I guess I'm close just gotta tune it best I can and leave it alone, there is something to be said if it runs every weekend also....
What was the compression again?
08-05-2015, 08:06 AM
#272
Gold Member
Gold MemberThread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,636
Likes: 0
Received 209 Likes
on
133 Posts
Oh trust me I am, hence me taking all summer to work bugs out, but let's face it I didn't get here easily and without heartbreak, I just want my combo to run to its potential whatever it may be that's all. Still hurts to spend 30,000+ for "captain cheapo" as Brian would say and not gain anything... Seems nobody understands that part of this...
I hope you get yours going and it's not a big deal, it's a great looking boat!!
I hope you get yours going and it's not a big deal, it's a great looking boat!!
08-05-2015, 08:13 AM
#274
Registered
I've ran cometic on out of the box Dart blocks with no issues. If it's really 9.5:1 I wouldn't be afraid of a procharger and 3-4 lbs of boost. That would definately wake the motors up. It's just money you can't take it with you.
08-05-2015, 08:25 AM
#275
Registered
Yes supercharged. I've been thinking about the scenario for the last few days. I try to wrap my had around things. I have some theories as to why. But who knows. The guy that did the testing knows what he's doing. If it comes out of his mouth you can take it to the bank he's not a bs'er. Just a little difficult to get your head wrapped around it.
NA, the Gill design is not good. And thus I wouldn't believe it NA unless dimensions/design/including muffs f*ked with the headers. Wave tuning ultra important, the more camshaft and hp the engine has.
08-05-2015, 08:26 AM
#276
Gold Member
Gold MemberThread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,636
Likes: 0
Received 209 Likes
on
133 Posts
As far as pro chargers it's not the money it's the drives.... I am happy with a mid 70's boat of course faster is fun too but adds much more cost of more parts and lots more breakage, I actually run mine like it is supposed to be its gonna break.... I don't think many guys get how I run my boat. If I really was after overall speed I would have bought a stepped lighter boat.... I don't wanna trade off the ride quality I got in this "tub"
08-05-2015, 08:46 AM
#277
Registered
Well, that's what I was saying. I can believe it more SC'd. Wave tuning less of a factor...biggest factor is breathing.
NA, the Gill design is not good. And thus I wouldn't believe it NA unless dimensions/design/including muffs f*ked with the headers. Wave tuning ultra important, the more camshaft and hp the engine has.
NA, the Gill design is not good. And thus I wouldn't believe it NA unless dimensions/design/including muffs f*ked with the headers. Wave tuning ultra important, the more camshaft and hp the engine has.
08-05-2015, 09:05 AM
#278
Registered
Heres what i would have done. Kept the stock 420s, spent 5g on a pair of 420 megablower kits. Removed trs setups and sold them. Installed a pair of 4s that would have allowed you to lower the wngines in the hull, which would have allowed for an acceptable propshaft height, and hatch clearance. You would have 725hp engines, drives that can take it. In the end your wallet would have been heavier, boat been faster, and a hell of a lot more fun to drive on lake erie.
We can argue 2 degreess of cam duration, 2 degrees of timing, 10cc of intake runner volume, till we are blue in the face. Some of the best running, best handling, fastest boats on the water dont bother arguing over this piddly crap ...
There is much more to offshore boats than a dyno number
We can argue 2 degreess of cam duration, 2 degrees of timing, 10cc of intake runner volume, till we are blue in the face. Some of the best running, best handling, fastest boats on the water dont bother arguing over this piddly crap ...
There is much more to offshore boats than a dyno number
08-05-2015, 09:18 AM
#279
Gold Member
Gold MemberThread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,636
Likes: 0
Received 209 Likes
on
133 Posts
Heres what i would have done. Kept the stock 420s, spent 5g on a pair of 420 megablower kits. Removed trs setups and sold them. Installed a pair of 4s that would have allowed you to lower the wngines in the hull, which would have allowed for an acceptable propshaft height, and hatch clearance. You would have 725hp engines, drives that can take it. In the end your wallet would have been heavier, boat been faster, and a hell of a lot more fun to drive on lake erie.
We can argue 2 degreess of cam duration, 2 degrees of timing, 10cc of intake runner volume, till we are blue in the face. Some of the best running, best handling, fastest boats on the water dont bother arguing over this piddly crap ...
There is much more to offshore boats than a dyno number
We can argue 2 degreess of cam duration, 2 degrees of timing, 10cc of intake runner volume, till we are blue in the face. Some of the best running, best handling, fastest boats on the water dont bother arguing over this piddly crap ...
There is much more to offshore boats than a dyno number
Like I said if I see any gain over 73 and use it every weekend or most of them I am happy you can be fast as you want sitting at Dock wrenching or waiting for calm water I am going boatin.... If anyone has been in old cig over 70 mph and up you know how fun it is .....
08-05-2015, 09:25 AM
#280
MarineKinetics
Platinum Member
Joe,
Not only is that not an accurate representation of what transpired, it is blatantly dishonest, untruthful, and misleading. The entire email chain is attached below.
Here is my email, where I clearly detailed my disclaimer regarding the attached materials.;
“Please do not forward as I need to add my content containing engineering diagrams
and complete instructions. I also need permission on the content that does not belong to me to
reuse the copy written material. Bob Bolles, who authored the CT piece, I know from the
Advanced Engineering Technology Conference and will likely be accommodating.”
“Dan, I will post up the Scorpion design dimensions you asked for on OSO. I appreciate the not
forwarding or reposting of the info on the net with this being merely a research draft containing
copy written materials.”
Below is a link to the file I sent to you. It is clear that I took no credit for the authoring the content. The intent was solely to provide a visual frame of reference to assist hobbyist/enthusiasts like Dan and Joe, as neither of you were familiar with how to obtain correct valve train geometry.
http://www.mediafire.com/view/tjtrl0...t_combined.pdf
