|
07-02-2010, 02:55 PM | #21 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Hill, Georgia
Posts: 2,003
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
Quote:
They already have Super Chevy races Do you want to make them all that way?
__________________
Art Leong 2095 SS |
|
07-02-2010, 03:16 PM | #22 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,060
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times in 8 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
Quote:
But anyhoo, I agree... get that party started, Mr. Bell! I'm questioning my sanity, but for some silly reason, I've been daydreaming about building a "traditional" Stocker motor for the Volare.
__________________
Michael Beard - NHRA/IHRA 3216 S/SS |
|
07-02-2010, 03:25 PM | #23 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
The 69,70, 71 Street Hemi had single springs with a damper at 150 lbs on the seat and 320 open pressure specs. I have my old NHRA/IHRA engine spec book right in front of me as I type this. The 68 Street Hemi had 131 lbs on the seat and 280 open. The 66-67 Street Hemis had dual springs with the rating of 114 lbs outer and 53 lbs for the inner spring on the seat with 189 lbs outer seat pressure and 96 lbs for the inner open pressures (add them together) with solid lifters.The 68 and 69s had solid lifters also while the 70, 71s had hyd. lifters. The 68-71 had single springs with a damper. This was good for 7000 RPM operation. The street Hemis with an OEM oiling sytems and pans dont take to kindly to 8200+ RPM shift points for very long. I would think most all of the brand of engine combos would be OK with 150 lbs seat pressure and about 320 to 350 lbs open pressures unless they are running a cam with square lobes on it. By the way the 1969 440 six pack had a 150/320 lb pressure spec also.
Last edited by X-TECH MAN; 07-02-2010 at 03:46 PM. |
07-02-2010, 03:42 PM | #24 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
Quote:
|
|
07-02-2010, 03:42 PM | #25 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Hill, Georgia
Posts: 2,003
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
Quote:
I know it was critical. We would set up a motor with stock valve springs put it together and reve it in to 7500 a couple of times. Then pull the heads and change the valves and springs. It was legal to put notches in the piston as long as the motor did it not the machine shop. PS we shifted at 7200 when we were trying to go fast. The only time the motor would go any higher was in the water (once in a while)
__________________
Art Leong 2095 SS Last edited by art leong; 07-02-2010 at 03:45 PM. |
|
07-02-2010, 05:07 PM | #26 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
Just to remind some of you guys the 1969 396/375 and the 427/425 used a single valve spring with damper that had 106 lbs on the seat and 327 lbs open before the 1985 rule change. The max wedge was less than the street Hemi and the Chevy. The 428 CJs really sucked at 97 lbs seat pressure and 298 lbs open. I think 150/350 lbs would handle just about any current stocker running today and the expensive flat tappet lifters would no longer be needed. A new rear gear might be required for those who delite in slinging the snot out of their combos.....lol.
Last edited by X-TECH MAN; 07-02-2010 at 05:53 PM. |
07-02-2010, 05:31 PM | #27 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,234
Likes: 3,132
Liked 6,840 Times in 1,535 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
James, I can see that you need a good "balance job"! I think about 2oz of lead behind your right ear would be a good start!
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS Reality, what a concept! |
07-02-2010, 05:35 PM | #28 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,234
Likes: 3,132
Liked 6,840 Times in 1,535 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
[QUOTE=X-TECH MAN;195800] I think 150/350 lbs would handle just about any current stocker running today
That's about "entry level"today! I'm running that on my 6 cylinder! Even if you made it 170 or 180 it would help!
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS Reality, what a concept! |
07-02-2010, 05:54 PM | #29 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
|
07-02-2010, 05:59 PM | #30 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NOO JOISEY nexta NOO YAWK
Posts: 5,879
Likes: 38
Liked 100 Times in 45 Posts
|
Re: Why did nhra change the cam and valve spring rule in 1985?
This topic is very amusing to me.I think that the standard shold be 130#/350# as my springs meet the parameters.Does this mean that all those intimidating ABC cars are
going to be slower bearing down on little old me? I think if it can be proven that the seat pressure is higher than 130#/350# from the factory then that should be the standard for that combo. Bill,nice comeback.
__________________
Former NHRA #1945 Former IHRA #1945 T/SA |
|
|