(Note: Donations are not tax deductible)




Forum's been "upgraded".
Things will look a bit different.
A *few* posts might have gotten lost in the crossover.
PM bobc with problems, or post in "Website Suggestions".

Author Topic: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)  (Read 810705 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bvillercr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2256
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1845 on: November 29, 2012, 04:49:29 PM »
Bob, what makes you think that?  JL222 asked a simple question that was never answered.  What most don't realize or believe is that we don't have problems with traction in high gear.  The better the traction the more HP that can be applied which leads to higher speeds.  Now in regards to taking advice from others, we have and we do; but not always.  In this case it's the later, why do you have a problem with that?  My suggestion to you Bob, is that you re-read this last page and try not to let past post cloud your mind. :-D

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1846 on: November 29, 2012, 08:40:57 PM »
  John, by weighing 6200 lbs. courtesy of a 2 1/2 inch plate steel belly pan and feathering the throttle.
  Why do you take everyone elses opionions as critisism?
  You, like me, seem to have a history of not making it down the track under power.
  Also, You like me are not afraid to try something new which I have applauded You and Troy for many times.
  I do not, however, aplaud you for trying to vilify anyone who has the balls to state his or her opinions on what may have caused or contributed to Your's or My engine problems.
  If you don't want peoples oplinions, save yourself some grief and quit posting.
                                                                                                              Bob Drury

  Bob is that your stude with the 1/2 steel plate and 6200 lbs? Its not ours. We weigh 4900 lbs + or -.

  When Paul states he has run steel rods at Bville for 15 yrs at 9000 rpm and refuses to answere how long they are and when he did it, and inplys that's what we should use. YOU can believe him, BUT I want to make sure others are comparing apples to oranges.

 Then he ask why a landspeed car needs that much hp. and changes his mind on his new car.

  Bend over and let him blow smoke up your Acura but I'am not going to let him do it to everyone.

  Hey Bob... richen your motor and back off the timing it will live longer.

               JL222

           

Offline Paul Powell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Just too slow to go
    • Paul Powell Performance
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1847 on: November 30, 2012, 09:13:01 AM »
JL222,
I am sorry if I offended you.
I personal post failures when I am looking for information, feedback, help.
As for you question, the rod length in that engine is 5.620 inches.
You also state “Paul talks about his use of steel rods at Bville at 9000 rpm for 15 yrs but spins the tires at 275 mph. Why would someone gear a  2000 hp car so low [9000 rpm at 275?]”  That is not what I said, nor how we have geared the car.  That is not even is the same area of the world the car is geared.  9000 rpm is the max we turn that engine on the salt(with our gearing, expected tire slip,….. we were hoping for 305 but it was not to be).  We turn our similar engines in drag to 10,000 rpm with much different cam profiles and intake systems.

As for information I will post some of my engine specs compared to what I would think your combination is
                          LS C     Drag   Drag   Yours?
CI                        370     500       560    496
Bore                     4.195     4.7   4.65    4.375
Stroke                  3.35      3.6    4.125    4.125
# of Pistons           8          8        8        8
Deck Height           8.7       9.2     10.8    10.725
Pin Height             1.403   1.35   1.2375   1.6625
1/2 Stroke            1.675   1.8     2.0625   2.0625
Rod Length           5.62      6.05       7.5       7
Max RPM              9000    10500    9000    9000
R/S Ratio              1.68    1.68     1.82     1.70
Mean Pist. Spd      5025    6300    6188    6188
Piston Weight        590     625      680      800?
            
My experience is I can get away with high piston speed for short periods of time and low cycle counts.
Our 560 turbo motor goes about 75 passes before we replace the connecting rods.  When they are removed they have only stretch a few thousandths and have very little egging of the small or big end.  We replace these rods per the manufactures recommendation as well as experience.  We know that some will go to 100 or more passes most of the time but not ever rod may be able and we cannot afford to chance it.  I know that most Fuel teams get nowhere near that out of their rods.  But the stress they put them under is way higher than our 3000-3500 hp.  We have also found we cannot get aluminum rods to live in low deck (like the 500 ci motors) The 6300 piston speed kills them.  Also with our packaging in the short deck motors increasing the beam width was not possible and also would have increased the weight.

As a comparison I tried to figure how many cycles a land speed car would make compared to our experience.            
            
Passes               75          1      
time (s)              4          60      
Average RPM       8500      8500      
RPS                   141.67     141.67      
cycles per pass    567        8500      
Rod Cycles          42500     8500      

Looks like you are very safe for 5 plus passes to the 5 mile at a minimum.

I would also say that with piston speed weight is very critical.  As you mentioned the weight of the aluminum rod is much lower (about a 1/3) if all else is the same.  My experience with Hemi’s is higher piston weight.  That also is a huge contributor to the stress on the rod and should be considered.

This debate is very similar to our exhaust rocker arms.  We have been back and forth aluminum and steel. We found on NA motors Aluminum work great and is lighter.  On boosted motors we have gone to steel rockers all the way because of deflection when opening against the cylinder pressure was breaking the rockers.  It should be noted that the inertial forces are lower on the steel then aluminum but the overall weight is higher on the steel.  I am sure in the future we will be at a different conclusion on this, as we have been back and forth at least 4 times already.

JL222  I have not attached you or your program.  If you have assumed that was my intention you are wrong.  I am impressed with your program and hope that you exceed the 300 mark as well as take that production body record.  I post the information I do to help not start a battle.  I offer information from my experience with hopes that people with greater experience then me can correct me show me my errors.  When it comes to your program or any customer of yours you have the choice.  That choice is part of being in the Great USA.  I wish you well and hope the information I post helps someone think. They may think I am stupid or gather from my experience and not make the mistakes I have made.  Good luck on the Salt.

Paul Powell
« Last Edit: November 30, 2012, 09:16:20 AM by Paul Powell »
Paul Powell
Paul Powell Performance L.L.C.
5073 Barnhill Farm Road
Battleboro, NC 27809
(252) 452-4998

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1848 on: November 30, 2012, 11:27:29 AM »
  Paul...  Stroke is 4.325..bore is 4.1875=496 cu in   Not 4.125 and 4.375.

  5.62 rod length thats 1.38 in. shorter than our 7'' and trying to point out to our readers.

   We redline the engine at 7500 rpm [ not 9000 :-o] with our gearing =340 mph

   rpms on our 294 avg at the 3 mile [1st time mile] and 318 indicated speed at end of that mile.

   1st gear  5900 rpm-throttle position - 31%
   2nd        7450                      tps      - 39%
   3rd         7100                      tps      - 47%  
   4th         7000                      tps      - 100% after shifting into high gear.

    Gearing   1.85 overall with 28'' x 10'' goodyear tires but figure 1'' tire growth at 29'' =318 at 7000
  and 340 mph at 7500.

  Paul this is why you need a lot of power at Bville, to be able to accelerate after you get traction when the course
is going by at a fast rate.

  We lost a piston on this run because the piston was machined with not enough metal left at bottom of ring grove
were piston skirt narrows down resulting in blowing out of ring stack into inside of piston.

  I'am fairly convinced that our rod failure this year was because of our last minute trash of tearing the engine down and reassembling it. Laying under car to tighten rods [ manufacture wants one side tightened compleatly
in one steady pull then other].
  Beach marks on rod looks like it pulled apart over time lengthing rod allowing piston to hit head and jamming
ring lands. This destroyed ring sealing allowing ignited supercharged gas to blow a hole in piston from intake valve side. FAST efi does a great job of correcting air fuel ratios at partial throttle and was in low 10s and even in the 9s at times. Max boost this year was 16lbs

  We like to hold the engine speed below 7200 rpm  but in high gear at least 7500 :-D

           JL222

  Adding this 1 hour later

  Paul with 4 sec times that must be 1/8 mile strips.

  Was that 7.5 rod chromemoly?
  

  
« Last Edit: November 30, 2012, 01:29:45 PM by jl222 »

Offline Paul Powell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Just too slow to go
    • Paul Powell Performance
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1849 on: November 30, 2012, 03:50:26 PM »
Yes most of our racing in the south east is 1/8th mile. (I love the 1/4 mile but with most of our series they run 1/8th)
We do run some 1/4 mile and when we do the extra 1.85 or so seconds don't make that much difference in the life of the rods.  It does however save lots of parts (not running that last 1/8th).

I like your gearing.  That is in line with our new car.  (Winters extremliner!!!!) our old car was built with a 9 in and with the limited gear selection forced us to spin it to the moon and try overdrives (did not like the overdrives as the loss was pretty large to the wheel and rough on clutches!!!)

No the 7.5 listed above is AL! Almost all of our drag engines use Aluminum rods.  In that length I would use TI or make a shorter deck motor.  Or turn it less like you do.  7000 is much easier on parts then 8000 or 9000. (we use GRP, MGP, and Venolia)

We have tried a few steel rods E4340AQ being the most common material we have tried.  Of course if you use Carrillo (CP) they say theirs is a super special VAR molly but I bet that is the same as the E4340AQ or close to it.  

We are currently trying some TI rods made from 6AL4V.(468 ci small block turbo motor)  I am not as familiar with the TI alloys but I know this is different then the last ones we tried (because they were forged and this is billet).  They do make up for weight but the cost is crazy!!!!!

By the way some of the new steel rods we are trying look nothing like any rod I have tried in the past.  The machining is neither I or H more like a ladder (big weight savings!)

Hopefully they last since blocks and cranks are expensive!

I may have a set of the Goodyear tires that we may never use if you know someone who might want to buy them.  We set our new stuff up for the small M/T tire.  With the top of the body only 24 inches from the belly it limits your tires :-D.

Also I don't know if you are sponsored or get assistance from FAST but if you ever need anything with the injection I have been a WD dealer since it was owned by Felpro.  I keep a few systems here at the shop and bring enough with me to the salt to install a complete new system.

I noticed in your build that it appears you have an MSD 7531? have you tried the FAST ITC?  I have a few hundred hours with both on the track and dyno.  If you are using them be careful as the way they work can also cause very similar failures!

Paul Powell

« Last Edit: November 30, 2012, 03:57:05 PM by Paul Powell »
Paul Powell
Paul Powell Performance L.L.C.
5073 Barnhill Farm Road
Battleboro, NC 27809
(252) 452-4998

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1850 on: December 02, 2012, 11:25:19 AM »

 Paul...were not worried about the MSD and it can't cause the same problems.

 WOW.. a couple HUNDRED hours on the Dyno and strip with those ignitions?

  10 sec pass or dyno = 6 to a min =60 min in hr=360 passes and dyno  in one hr x WHAT 200 hrs :? :-o =72,000 dyno pulls and passes at 10sec. Double that for 5 sec passes and dyno pulls =144,000 :-o

  Whatcha think Bob D :-D

      JL222

  More to come on Pauls claim of 600-800 hp to drive our Pro-charger :roll:

Offline bvillercr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2256
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1851 on: December 02, 2012, 11:51:17 AM »
not sure what they are driving this system with but we will contact them next week about the amount of hp it takes to turn it. :-D

http://youtu.be/hPVJUCAjAT8

Offline JustaRacer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 258
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1852 on: December 02, 2012, 12:07:31 PM »
Nice.

Sent you PM.
My doctor told me to go out and kill people.
Well, sort of.  He told me to reduce the stress in my life.

Offline Paul Powell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Just too slow to go
    • Paul Powell Performance
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1853 on: December 02, 2012, 04:14:38 PM »
If you can find and F4 don't use it.  They have a serious bearing issue.  Mark destroyed at least one engine with one (or a few they tried) the F4 was put on the back burning for now.

Well if you are using the slew function on the salt just be careful.  If you are on it to much and are at high boost it can be rough on the engine.

And yes I have lots of experience on the dyno (chassis and engine) and plenty of track experience.  I ran a durability facility for the big three for over two years (24/7 OEM and aftermarket) and we did off shore boat testing with 7531's (that is what they were originally designed for, when the props came out of the water to keep from hurting the engines before the throttle guy could back off).

I only put about 3-5 hours on my chassis dyno every week.  So my number my be off a little bit.

Check your fuel numbers from the dyno.  Look at your BSFC and let me know how much power you think it is using.


Paul Powell
Paul Powell Performance L.L.C.
5073 Barnhill Farm Road
Battleboro, NC 27809
(252) 452-4998

Offline dieselgeek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 269
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1854 on: December 02, 2012, 04:19:09 PM »
Just caught up with this thread.

Nobody thinks that top-melted piston is a tuning issue??  odd.


Didn't you guys tune on a dynojet?   I've given up on using a inertia dyno for WOT tuning.  A 2.5 second WOT pull to redline is about the same thing as racing downhill at a 45 degree angle - and it's not a realistic load on the engine.  The other thing I've observed at Bonneville is that you spend 95% of your time at part throttle - NOT wide open, so you might want to make sure your part throttle timing and AFRs are in check.  You mention 10s or even 9s AFR at part throttle, the engine won't run on those kind of AFRs (or misfire like crazy), and your AFR sensor is maxed out somewhere around that same point so.....    Just my 2 cents but it looks pretty clear from the pic of the piston.   That piston is blowtorched.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2012, 05:31:19 PM by dieselgeek »

Offline dieselgeek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 269
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1855 on: December 02, 2012, 04:22:32 PM »
Quote
 More to come on Pauls claim of 600-800 hp to drive our Pro-charger :roll:

He's not far off.  It gives you back 4x that so it may not seem like it's working the crank that hard -  but it's why turbos are easier on the rotating assembly as someone else mentioned above.  The tradeoff is the blower motor is a more drivable engine so I'm nowhere near saying it's a bad combo to run.

Also, I'll back Paul, he knows what he's doing.  Consider listening to his suggestions, everyone here just wants to help.

Offline dieselgeek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 269
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1856 on: December 02, 2012, 04:36:24 PM »
  You actually wonder if 2300 hp is needed in a land speed car?


Can you share your data from your fastest run?  If you can tell me your injector size and the duty cycle or pulsewidth they were running at WOT I can tell you how much power you were making at the flywheel uncorrected.  Rough guess says your car should be able to go 300mph easily on 1100 flywheel horsepower uncorrected, or about 1340 corrected FWHP.

As a point of reference, the #97 car (more frontal area) was generating 985hp uncorrected at the flywheel based on fuel burn.  Your and our data gathering systems provide very accurate metering of fuel and give you the ability to know very close to real HP numbers.  We were running 8-9psi of boost on those passes.


Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1857 on: December 02, 2012, 07:46:33 PM »
  You actually wonder if 2300 hp is needed in a land speed car?


Can you share your data from your fastest run?  If you can tell me your injector size and the duty cycle or pulsewidth they were running at WOT I can tell you how much power you were making at the flywheel uncorrected.  Rough guess says your car should be able to go 300mph easily on 1100 flywheel horsepower uncorrected, or about 1340 corrected FWHP.

As a point of reference, the #97 car (more frontal area) was generating 985hp uncorrected at the flywheel based on fuel burn.  Your and our data gathering systems provide very accurate metering of fuel and give you the ability to know very close to real HP numbers.  We were running 8-9psi of boost on those passes.



 Yeah ...maybe we can go 300 mph with 1100 hp at the end of 5 miles [Bville pro says 1700] but we were going 318 at the end of the three with 2 more miles to go and accelerating from 6500 to 7000 rpm in 4.2 sec.

  Our fastest time has been 280 + in the 21/4 and 294 in 1st timed mile
 How fast was the #97 going at 987hp and were on the course was it.
 Seems I read Lee was never able to give it full throttle.

  How long does the #97 car take to accelerate 500 rpm in high gear.

  You think Lindsleys and Leggitt 291 and 308 records were only putting out 1100 hp :? They had a top time
avg of 333 mph, and Less told me they were tacking over 340 and this was in the 4th mile :-o

  You actually wonder if 2300 hp is needed in a land speed car?

  Dieselgeek ...if the ring lands get tight orslammed shut and the rings can't seal, the piston will be torched. A melted piston is not always from a lean condition. Lack of ring seal is what happened in both of our piston melts.

  I'll try and get a video of our data log [ Troys job :-)] and post it. but on our 294 run at full throttle in high gear
the AF ration varied from 11 at start 10.5 a tenth of a second later with a high of 11.38 and a low of 10.25 correcting constantly every tenth of a second.

  Dyno was a DynoDynamic and uses a magnetic train brake for loading [ made in Australia I believe]. It has 2 rollers and we were able, with our wide tires, and a few tricks of the trade, able to make a 2300+ hp pull without spinning the tires. I recall tire spin with the # 97 car at around 800 hp.

  2000 + HP is not unusual with these ProChargers. In the sidebar of the ProCharger video above Steve Morris
makes 2000+ hp on pump GAS and a blow thru single 4 barrel carb :-o

              JL222

   

 

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1858 on: December 02, 2012, 09:53:11 PM »
 
 Paul and Dieselgeek...BSFC was not data logged or tried. All I know about fuel use is that ERC ends up with a
lot of my bucks. Then they seal the tanks making it hard to measure what was used after a run.
 And after refueling to make sure there's enough, the engine blows leaving a bunch of expensive lawn mower gas :roll:

  Troy just used some in his dirt bike yesterday :-D

 Paul...I haven't tried the slew but it seems it would be interesting to limit how fast the engine accelerates at
Bville. From what I understand this feature allowed the 1st 10'' tire drag car to go 200 mph.
 Does it drop cylinders like a rev-limiter?

             jl222

Offline Paul Powell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Just too slow to go
    • Paul Powell Performance
Re: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)
« Reply #1859 on: December 03, 2012, 06:25:49 AM »
Jl222 The 7531 slew acts like a rev limiter(it actually has two types, one is a absolute RPM curve {people call this riding the dots}, and a change in RPM/s that is the slew function).  That is why it can hurt the engine at high boost.  It can cause unburned fuel in ring pack (forced there from boost and fuel still being in the cylinder) and the fuel igniting on the next stroke.  This can be compounded if it chooses the same cylinder twice.  I have seen this when taking an engine apart from a customer that just rides the slew or hard limit curve a lot (normally trying crazy amounts of power to early),  before it damages an engine (burnt piston) you can see it in the rings, they loose tension and waffle the oil rings.  The real damage normally starts from the detonation as the oil ring goes away and then oil enters the camber.

The reason I used it so much is I tune 275 drag radial, tt10.5, and outlaw 10.5 cars. We have learned that it can save a pass if you break the tires loose but it cannot be used at a chassis tuning tool.  If the car is set up for a 1.30 short time using slew or ITC will not make it run a 1.20's 60 ft.  We also learned that when you try to run on it (it limiting the engine say for the first 60-100 ft) it will beat up parts quick.

On a good run we will never see the FAST ITC work or activation of the 7351 slew (by the way we normally use one or the other but not both on the same car, even though some have both in due to times prior to FAST having ITC).  But if you try a little too much boost or the track turns bad it will reach out and slow it down just enough (if set up correctly).  I like the FAST ITC (there are others with similar systems like Davis, BS3, .........) because it pulls timing to start with and only limits (rev limit style) if you get above a set curve.  But all of them work best if you have a driver that can feel the system working and back off if it gets to crazy (saves motors).

By the way if you log duty cycle or injector opening time you can calculate the fuel used to get BSFC.

As far as ERC fuel the price is rough for us East coasters.  We have trouble getting it to tune with and the cost is higher then we give for VP.  SO I feel you pain on them ending up with lots of your bucks. :-D

Paul Powell
Paul Powell Performance L.L.C.
5073 Barnhill Farm Road
Battleboro, NC 27809
(252) 452-4998