Cams...

Message

wistech · #41 Post by **wistech** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:40 pm

QUOTE (thedeatons @ Jul 29 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's good to know Pete! The dyno chart looks awesome too! What was done to that engine prior to the spring change?

Ive been trying to figure out what is up with all of pete's dyno runs. I think the peak hp numbers are good but the curve is bogus for comparison. Something is weird with the charts. If you try to compare power curves in the engine speed graph its off scale saying 100hp . Time is also way different saying the runs were over a second or more different. The only thing that springs to mind here is who was running the cutoof button. If you hit the button way past the runs end you get bogus results and a very squigly line going backwards. I havent worked with the software enough to see if you can select that out. Maybe a manual rescale?
Also did you have the airbox or pod filter on the quad? Mydreamrides cleanup jobported head 432 with a pod filter is very close to your stock engine in the vehicle speed chart.
You must have had the tach hooked up to get the torque readings. The rev limiters were different? If they were the same then that would have helped out if you only have the speed charts to work with . Somebody else pull these up and see if you can figure this out? Hard to believe every one of the nearly hundred runs was like that.

peterock · #42 Post by **peterock** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:06 pm

For some reason my quad had an issue with the tach readings. It would read find on the dyno but not in the charts. I called dynojet about it and they said that sometimes they tach hook-up will be getting interference from the quad and try to hook it in a different location. We tried moving it around but never changed. Since those runs I have changed out to the Nology set-up from Dave. I haven't had it on the dyno since though to see if that changed. Steve was running the dyno for all my runs. We didn't realize it until after when we were looking at the charts as everything looked good on the dyno run screen.

Happyboy · #43 Post by **Happyboy** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:33 pm

QUOTE (cannondale27 @ Jul 30 2008, 09:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Happyboy maybe you should think before you post.You said that we meaning Pete,Timbo and I werent capable of testing and you would rather have some Engineer handle it.I take that personally since alot of effort and $ goes into testing these things.I may fly off the handle but at least I dont stab someone in the back like your derogatory comments.Engineer Sheeesh...

Are you kidding me? Steve, I am really tired of you only seeing things in black and white. I can't disagree with something or state an opinion that differs from yours without you freaking out about it. You just got done saying you wouldn't run the single spring with normal valves, I stated the same thing. Whats the problem? Maybe Crower did the numbers and came up with that spring and if so then great. From the post it was more of a conversation so I just said I would be hesitant on running them. By engineer I just meant someone actually doing the numbers man. Thats it.

I never questioned you guys testing or discounted it. I have always supported the R&D work, especially when its moved this group forward. Saying I am stabbing you guys in the back is just wrong, hurtfull, and uncalled for. How does this always seem to turn personal with you?

Now, back to the lower spring. You know the result of someone throwing in a lighter spring that does allow the valve to float don't you? They could drop a valve. That is a huge freaking risk and should not be taken lightly. Hence my comment.

wistech · #44 Post by **wistech** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:37 pm

I know some other quads had problems with pickups so we used the one with the ground clip as well. Its odd that it actually shows a torque line on the graph. I wonder why it says 100hp+ when reading the rpm scale? What else is different on your quad. ATK ecu?

peterock · #45 Post by **peterock** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:16 pm

Cannondale ECU for the dyno as Steve has the Cannondale software. Nothing else out of the ordinary.

I forgot to mention. those runs were with the stock air intake with bike airhorn. Stock air intake competely intact.

m_mcgranahan · #46 Post by **m_mcgranahan** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:01 pm

Hi Happyboy and C27,

I just want to encourage you both to try to have a bit more grace towards others. I know it is tough on the boards cause it is just words and no inflection body language etc. to let you better know the intent of the author.
One thing that has helped me greatly is the idea that I need to believe the best about others as much as possible. (This comes from the book of 1 Corinthians, chapter 13 in the Bible for those who are wondering) I do my best to try to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt, that maybe I am reading an attack into a post that the author did not mean etc. It really does help to keep things from getting personal and nasty. It was really tough when I bought a quad that the guy forgot to put oil in before his last ride aned sold it as having a bad fuel pump, but I chose to believe the best about him and that he really did not know it had been runnning without oil before he sold it to me. (It helped that he was sincere and he did try to help with some extra parts for it etc. to make up for the needed rebuild) I know there are people out there who do take advantage of people who are trusting, but I think overall here, we can trust each other not to be trying to hurt each other.
I know you are both great guys in your own right and are valued members of this community, so I would ask you both to try to think the best of the other person and forgive the misunderstandings of the past.

Please forgive me if you find this post out of line, but I just wanted to try to get this thing behind us all.

God bless...

Mark

Happyboy · #47 Post by **Happyboy** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:14 pm

don't mind it at all Mark. And you are very forgiving person with taht quad story.

jinx44 · #48 Post by **jinx44** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:27 pm

You know what they say, "If two people agree, one of them is not needed." LOL

wistech · #49 Post by **wistech** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:14 pm

QUOTE (cannondale27 @ Jul 29 2008, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Time and time again real world testing has proven them wrong.Just saying the old route of stiff springs and shimming stock springs is definitly not panning out to solve anything since we have gone 180deg different and had better results so far.

Whats that about? Ive been shimming new and used stock springs for years now with near perfect results. In fact the only spring I have ever had lose tension and float was on the 12500 rev motor and Im sure if it had only the outer spring that engine would have grenaded the second it fatigued. It ran several more hours before being replaced with no damage at all to the bucket or lobes. Of course I let off as soon as it started hammering and shifted into the next gear.
Now you have buckets coatings chipping off ,lobes wearing ,running low rev limiters all with a substantial increase in costs .I maybe am not seeing that as improvements.

Top ends have been a PITA for some of you guys for a while now and I would like to see some more long term results on some of these new aproaches. Just got some bad news from Tim yesterday regarding a Ti valve head. I will let him go into details.

Since stroker cranks are well over a year wait if ever to get we have seen a vast improvement in the stock crank engines. Lots of room to play with cams .

cannondale27 · #50 Post by **cannondale27** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:43 pm

Happyboy I never said I wouldnt run single valvesprings on stock valves.I just said it is riskier.It is being done right now and was tested last year.

Wistech I am telling you that since we are in fact running with substantially less valvespring pressure than stock and not having any floating or cam wear the theory that more pressure is needed must be wrong.Logical?I believe so.

Coatings are an effort to make substandard cams/buckets last nothing more.Never had any other issues at all.

My testing has shown that a substandard springs whether single or stock dual is just that.Garbage.No amount of shimming is going to make it acceptable and wear of that spring will be accelerated.Throw them away and buy new ones.

Higher spring pressures with shimmed spring has not lowered the rate of cam wear or valvefloat.

Fixing sticky buckets and Coatings have lowered rate of cam and bucket failure.

No hardwelded Cam has ever survived without a coating on either the buckets or cams

Who knows.Maybe single valvespring/less pressure will produce more hp and be easier on entire valvetrain.Testing sure seems to be indicating that.

Wistech the guy had a wristpin go.What does that have to do with Ti valves?