SoCal Jet Boats
Tech Talk => Engine Mechanical / Electrical => Topic started by: Marius on January 16, 2018, 01:22:53 AM
-
Hi guys
I got a Glastron Carlson Cvx20 with a Ford 460 and a Berkeley Je12 pump
Destroyed my motor last year, loss of oil pressure.
So i bought a newbuild '79 460 motor.
Plan was to get a little more out of it than stock, and raise my max rpm to more than 4400 i had with my old motor.
I was hoping for 5500 maybe? It should be ok with stock bottom i think.
My new motor is stock, with some changes:
It has pistons from newer 460, which give me 8,9:1 compression ratio, with the D3VE heads which is on it.
And this camshaft sits in it: http://www.northernautoparts.com/part/cs-cs1159r
Stock valvetrain
My plan was: i will get my heads to a specialist and get that exhaust ports ported.
Edelbrock Performer RPM intake, and Edelbrock 1410 750cfm carburetor
And about that camshaft, i think i need to replace it to get that higher rpm?
Wich one should i consider?
How much lift will normal low valve covers handle?
I have the hardin marine exhaust manifolds wich goes up, and it will not fit with high covers..
I was also planning roller rockers, suggestions for any good ones?
Anyone has any experience with this motor here?
I tried to register at the 460ford.com forum, but it won't work.
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi65.tinypic.com%2F16j1wrn.jpg&hash=b1dd27ecb511c631ae1f7821ec3b1709c6565090)
-
Just working on some numbers.
A typical impeller for that boat would be an "A" impeller. (http://www.jetboatperformance.biz/pages/calculator.html)
At 4400 rpm, the old motor was putting out 304 HP. Kind of anemic for a 460 Ford.
To achieve 5500 rpm, 595 HP would be required at the pump. A tall order for a mostly stock 460 with a cam.
A warmed over 460 should have no problem achieving 450-500 HP., 5000 to 5200 rpm, respectively.
The JE pump is another hurdle. While setback, it suffers from a 'molded in fiberglass intake', and is not as efficient as a 'JC/JG' type suction housing.
Before adding a fresh motor, I would go thru the pump, and freshen it up.
Go with an 'AA' impeller and 500 HP. A nice river cruiser/ski boat.
It'll need MORE cam for 500 hp. Upgraded valvetrain, too, along with a good intake and carb.
The Ford guys might steer you to the right cam. Mine's at .578" lift and 231 intake duration @ .050". (454 Chev), @ 500 HP.
Hope this helps.
Dan'l
Oh, and Welcome to SCJB :thumbup:
Nice float, too
-
Thank you sir, yes it helps :)
Yes it has an "A" impeller.
Oh my, i did not know it requried that much hp for that rpm, that means with only 5000 rpm it will push a lot more water, giving me more speed.. or what.?
My plan was to get more hp/rpm, and leave the pump alone with the impeller which sits there... 5500 was only a "guess" from me for what i have read 460 can spin with stock bottom end.
I actually was hoping for around 400-450 hp, if i'm lucky with the right parts..
I understand it might be a smart thing to do about that pump.. but i was intending to leave it as is it.. it works good :-\ :-\
-
You did not mention what the year is of your boat. If the original engine is 1978 or older then it would be an internally balance engine, whereas the 1979-up would be externally balanced. If this is the case then be sure to use an external balance flexplate with the 1979-up engine, not the original neutral-balance flexplate (which is for an internal balance engine).
If the 1979 engine is the combo of internal parts that you describe, then I wouldn't change it....except for maybe porting the heads (both intake and exhaust, not just the exhaust). It should produce about 350 hp with a good tune and Holley 750-850 carb (slightly less with the Edelbrock 750) and turn your impeller perhaps 4700 rpm under ideal conditions. If you want more power, specifically though the use of more camshaft, then you cannot simply change cams in that particular engine--specific machine work will need to be executed on the heads in order to accommodate a larger camshaft.
-
I used the comp cams rollers
Called clay smith and told him what I had and he made a camshaft for me. It’s awesome.
Speed pro flat top pistons give me 9.2:1 with worked over D3VE heads port matched with a weiand stealth intake. Stock crank. Pushes an Agressor AB cut to 51-5200 with a quick fuel 850. Not sure what the HP is but I’m guessing close to 500.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats
-
You did not mention what the year is of your boat. If the original engine is 1978 or older then it would be an internally balance engine, whereas the 1979-up would be externally balanced. If this is the case then be sure to use an external balance flexplate with the 1979-up engine, not the original neutral-balance flexplate (which is for an internal balance engine).
If the 1979 engine is the combo of internal parts that you describe, then I wouldn't change it....except for maybe porting the heads (both intake and exhaust, not just the exhaust). It should produce about 350 hp with a good tune and Holley 750-850 carb (slightly less with the Edelbrock 750) and turn your impeller perhaps 4700 rpm under ideal conditions. If you want more power, specifically though the use of more camshaft, then you cannot simply change cams in that particular engine--specific machine work will need to be executed on the heads in order to accommodate a larger camshaft.
My boat is a 1976 and the stock motor was from the same year, its internal balanced, and as you say, my "new" motor is a 1979 external balanced... So i need a new flexplate then??
thanks!..I did not think about that..... where could i get one of those?
Yes my 79 "new" motor is new build with the newer pistons, and the camshaft i mentioned in the first post.. but i was hoping to put in a more agressive camshaft...
So you are saying i can't use a camshaft with more lift then the one that sits in my motor just now ?
do i need machine work on the heads for more lift ?
The heads will get ported both exhaust and intake.
-
I used the comp cams rollers
Called clay smith and told him what I had and he made a camshaft for me. It’s awesome.
Speed pro flat top pistons give me 9.2:1 with worked over D3VE heads port matched with a weiand stealth intake. Stock crank. Pushes an Agressor AB cut to 51-5200 with a quick fuel 850. Not sure what the HP is but I’m guessing close to 500.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats
Sounds nice.
Does the comp cams rollers fit under standard low valve covers like the ones on my picture?
I cannot have the tall ones as you can see with my exhaust manifolds.. >:(
aha, maybe i should contact clay smith too, not a bad idea i think.
-
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F108e6nk.jpg&hash=a71565f11b094934764ab6d4b1a6e6b33a6460f9)
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F65304h.jpg&hash=7ab501c13f63dfc959281a3b45ae000e29fd9131)
Removed heads
-
Sounds nice.
Does the comp cams rollers fit under standard low valve covers like the ones on my picture?
I cannot have the tall ones as you can see with my exhaust manifolds.. >:(
aha, maybe i should contact clay smith too, not a bad idea i think.
Not sure if the rockers I have will fit under the stock covers. I would think you could find some covers that might accommodate What you want with that exhaust style. There are lots of options. Or you can always find a good pair of logs and snails which is what I have.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
Not sure if the rockers I have will fit under the stock covers. I would think you could find some covers that might accommodate What you want with that exhaust style. There are lots of options. Or you can always find a good pair of logs and snails which is what I have.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
That's purrdey 👍
1977 Challenger
-
I would like to keep my exhaust.. if it's possible.
I would need a valve cover that followed the exhaust like the stock ones, but was taller ! It should exist shouldn't it? :o
Like this ones in this video, would allow higher lift and roller rockers.. where to buy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wigvOTNzio
So i e-mailed Clay Smith about what i got and here is what i got:
This is the camshaft we would recommend part # 09-032 your Cost $ 195.00
We would also recommend the Hi-Rev Hydraulic Lifters Part # 120-0112 your cost $ 101.25
Big Block Ford Hydraullic
Grind #
H-280-8-BHL
I guess i should just go with that? ::)
I sent another question about what rpm and hp i should expect
-
Throw away the stock heads and get a set of aluminum aftermarket heads. That will add a bunch of horsepower as the iron heads are crap.
-
I would like to keep my exhaust.. if it's possible.
I would need a valve cover that followed the exhaust like the stock ones, but was taller ! It should exist shouldn't it? :o
Like this ones in this video, would allow higher lift and roller rockers.. where to buy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wigvOTNzio
So i e-mailed Clay Smith about what i got and here is what i got:
This is the camshaft we would recommend part # 09-032 your Cost $ 195.00
We would also recommend the Hi-Rev Hydraulic Lifters Part # 120-0112 your cost $ 101.25
Big Block Ford Hydraullic
Grind #
H-280-8-BHL
I guess i should just go with that? ::)
I sent another question about what rpm and hp i should expect
And I would also buy the hardened 5/8 pushrods from clay smith and get rid of the stock 3/8 inch. Thats a good cam. Pretty mild with a nice sounding idle. You can use the stock rockers with that setup but if you have it apart, might as well put some rollers in there. They add a little power and are easy. Only thing is if you decide to add the rollers, you will need to have your heads machined to accept the guide plates and studs. The D3VE iron heads work very well with intake and exhaust porting and a nice bowl blend. I also added bigger valves to mine. Runs awesome and plenty of power for the family cruiser.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
Throw away the stock heads and get a set of aluminum aftermarket heads. That will add a bunch of horsepower as the iron heads are crap.
I don't agree with you, as long as the stock heads are ported they're not crap..
I would really like aluminium heads, but the costs is just too high for this build.
@Steveo909
I will get the heads machined so i can use any roller rocker kit.
Do you have a link to your comp rollers online steveo?
ClaySmith answered with my setup, and that cam i should see about 475 hp and rev 5000-52000 rpm. Sounds awesome to me.
Only thing i am concerned about is the lobe separation which was 108 .... i have read a lot about "sucking water" because when you have such thigt separation the inlet and exhaust valve is opened at the same time for a little time.
I will ask Clay about that also
Any experiences with 108 lobe separation on wet exhaust here ? :D
-
A couple things I see, FWIW:
I don't see specs for the cam except for the 108-degrees Lobe Seperation Angle. Based on the part number, I'm going to assume 280-degrees. The LSA is somewhat of an arbitrary number. More important is the actual overlap number, which is the degrees of crankshaft rotation that both intake and exhaust valves are open at the same time.
Overlap is the all important blowdown/scavenging period. This is a function of Cubic Inch Displacement and operating RPM, relative to low-lift valve flow, impacted by induction and exhaust. The goal is to evacuate the cylinder of all residual exhaust gas AND replace it with clean air/fuel mixture.
Too much overlap allows for a higher pressure condition to exist in the exhaust system than in the combustion chamber. This is compounded by the fact that there are always two intake valves open simultaneously. Flow is always from areas of high pressure to those of low pressure.
If the pressure differential is too high between the combustion chamber and exhaust, the flow reverses. The better the low lift valve flow, the worse this can be.
The above mentioned exhaust systems would typically require less degrees of duration for any given CID/RPM compared to a good header system.
Cylinder Heads
There are some basic truths about port flow, regardless of the engine make. Piston CFM Demand is how much port flow is required to satisfy the demand of any given bore/stroke combination at a specific RPM.
Next is minimum flow required to support any given horsepower level. SuperFlow has established some standards for this. For example, how much fuel (and therefore air) is required to produce each horsepower.
At 475HP, I seriously don't see needing aftermarket heads. I'm assuming the above mentioned cam doesn't have much over .550" lift. That's with a head that will probably flow to .700" lift IMHO, not worth the investment, however the weight savings alone is worth .1 second in the liquid quarter.
Conclusions
I would focus on the area of greatest restriction in the ports, the valve seat. A quality modern valve job is invaluable. I would focus on the valve seat geometry, throat and bowl. I don't see gasket matching making any difference and could actually hurt performance. There may be Ford specific areas that need to be addressed, such as intake to exhaust flow ratio. It is always best to invest in the best cylinder heads that you can afford. Just be realistic about the operating range and intended use, particularly with your intake and exhaust.
If you don't already have someone doing your heads, Lakes Only (http://www.highflowdynamics.com) is the guy.
Good luck,
Joe
-
I don't agree with you, as long as the stock heads are ported they're not crap..
I would really like aluminium heads, but the costs is just too high for this build.
@Steveo909
I will get the heads machined so i can use any roller rocker kit.
Do you have a link to your comp rollers online steveo?
ClaySmith answered with my setup, and that cam i should see about 475 hp and rev 5000-52000 rpm. Sounds awesome to me.
Only thing i am concerned about is the lobe separation which was 108 .... i have read a lot about "sucking water" because when you have such thigt separation the inlet and exhaust valve is opened at the same time for a little time.
I will ask Clay about that also
Any experiences with 108 lobe separation on wet exhaust here ? :D
With that cam you don’t really have to worry about reversion (sucking up water) especially with that type of exhaust but I’m not familiar with it. Unless the manifold is water injected before the rise I think it’s ok. It looks to me like they have water jackets like log manifolds. Just keep the exhaust flaps in good shape. As far as the comp rockers go, I also bought from clay smith but you can get them from summit I’m sure. With my setup George wanted me to run 1:8 on the intake side and 1:7 on the exhaust. I thought it was a little unusual but he’s been doing it for 50 years so I didn’t question it.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
.
-
Split ratio rockers favoring the intake increases the intensity at which the intake valve opens (and closes). It's like increasing the duration @.050 without increasing seat-to-seat timing. This helps to get the air/fuel mixture flowing that much sooner in the intake cycle.
Rocker ratio is not constant throughout the range of motion. You can play around with rocker geometry and actually change where in the lift profile you get the most benefit from ratio.
-
Split ratio rockers favoring the intake increases the intensity at which the intake valve opens (and closes). It's like increasing the duration @.050 without increasing seat-to-seat timing. This helps to get the air/fuel mixture flowing that much sooner in the intake cycle.
Rocker ratio is not constant throughout the range of motion. You can play around with rocker geometry and actually change where in the lift profile you get the most benefit from ratio.
That makes sense. I always thought it was just built into the cam grind but that is pretty cool. Thanks for the explanation.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
My boat is a 1976 and the stock motor was from the same year, its internal balanced, and as you say, my "new" motor is a 1979 external balanced... So i need a new flexplate then??
thanks!..
Yes my 79 "new" motor is new build with the newer pistons, and the camshaft i mentioned in the first post.. but i was hoping to put in a more aggressive camshaft...
So you are saying i can't use a camshaft with more lift then the one that sits in my motor just now ?
do i need machine work on the heads for more lift ?
The heads will get ported both exhaust and intake.
Correct, you need an external balance flexplate. Try eBay.
The heads will need machining in the valve train area to accept more lift, exactly what gets machined depends on camshaft and valve train setup but for sure you need to machine down the valve guide bosses. Maybe you will need to convert the pedestal rockers to 7/16 stud but that is not for certain just yet. I do happen to have a set of ported D3VE heads for sale with the 7/16" stud conversion already done.
Throw away the stock heads and get a set of aluminum aftermarket heads. That will add a bunch of horsepower as the iron heads are crap.
There sure are some nice aluminum heads out there, but they most certainly are not needed for such low horsepower builds. ::) Factory iron 429-460 passenger car heads has supported in excess of 1700 horsepower, naturally aspirated close to 800 hp. Why spend thousands on aluminum heads for such a mild build? That's misappropriated budget spending.
ClaySmith answered with my setup, and that cam i should see about 475 hp and rev 5000-5200 rpm. Sounds awesome to me.
If the claim of 475 hp is made with the camshaft linked in your original post, then the individual at Clay Smith Cams is off by at least 100 hp. 375 hp is more realistic, but still optimistic and assumes optimum, optimum tune with your engine parts combo as pictured.
-
Correct, you need an external balance flexplate. Try eBay.
The heads will need machining in the valve train area to accept more lift, exactly what gets machined depends on camshaft and valve train setup but for sure you need to machine down the valve guide bosses. Maybe you will need to convert the pedestal rockers to 7/16 stud but that is not for certain just yet. I do happen to have a set of ported D3VE heads for sale with the 7/16" stud conversion already done.
There sure are some nice aluminum heads out there, but they most certainly are not needed for such low horsepower builds. ::) Factory iron 429-460 passenger car heads has supported in excess of 1700 horsepower, naturally aspirated close to 800 hp. Why spend thousands on aluminum heads for such a mild build? That's misappropriated budget spending.
If the claim of 475 hp is made with the camshaft linked in your original post, then the individual at Clay Smith Cams is off by at least 100 hp. 375 hp is more realistic, but still optimistic and assumes optimum, optimum tune with your engine parts combo as pictured.
I think he was talking about the cam that clay smith quoted him on. I have the same one with the worked over D3VE heads and it put me in the neighborhood of 450-500. I turn about 5100 with an agressor A/B cut
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
@LakesOnly, as Steveo909 says, i wasn't talking about the camshaft in the original post, but the one Clay Smith recommended.
For you also @Flusher, seems to have some knowledge about it :)
Here is the cam data from Clay smith
# 09-032
Big Block Ford Hydraulic
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2Fjpx2kk.jpg&hash=b935779155e4544497c65cf5dca69a38cc0b0b64)
Clay smith says this cam will not be a problem with the water\exhaust if the riser is gasketed correctly... they have seen my exhaust manifold type.
What do you guys think?
-
I would like to keep my exhaust.. if it's possible. So i e-mailed Clay Smith about what i got and here is what i got:
This is the camshaft we would recommend part # 09-032 your Cost $ 195.00
We would also recommend the Hi-Rev Hydraulic Lifters Part # 120-0112 your cost $ 101.25
Big Block Ford Hydraullic
Grind #
H-280-8-BHL
I guess i should just go with that? ::)
@LakesOnly...the one Clay Smith recommended.
Here is the cam data from Clay smith
# 09-032
Big Block Ford Hydraulic
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2Fjpx2kk.jpg&hash=b935779155e4544497c65cf5dca69a38cc0b0b64)
Of course if you talk with ten different cam grinders and/or engine builders, you'll get ten different opinions as to which camshaft you should use in your engine.
If you were to remove the current camshaft from your 1979 engine and install the Clay Smith cam shown above, and add ported D3VE heads/Edelbrock Performer RPM intake/Edelbrock 1410 750cfm carburetor as you intend, you might make 425 hp. The engine will not generate 475 hp in your boat. It will not generate 450 hp. It might make 425. Perhaps it could generate more on a dyno at a higher rpm, but your jet pump won't allow it to get there and you'll never experience it in your boat. Part of the reason for the unexpectedly low resulting power is the camshaft choice itself, another part is the overall engine combination relative to the new cam (although your newly acquired engine in its current state is a fine parts combination).
If I were building a 460 engine for a jet boat and stuck with using that camshaft, the build would need to have tubular over-transom headers. Then the power output might get to 475 in your boat.
The peak valve lift advertised on the Clay Smith cam card is right at the point where it would be highly advisable to machine down the D3VE's valve guides for more retainer-to-guide clearance and simultaneously convert them for snap-on stem seals (rather than the OEM umbrella-type seals). The OEM pedestal valve train could still be utilized including the stamped steel rocker arms if properly set up with pedestal shims and correct pushrod lengths; aftermarket pedestal roller rocker arms might be a nice upgrade but not entirely mandatory.
-
Of course if you talk with ten different cam grinders and/or engine builders, you'll get ten different opinions as to which camshaft you should use in your engine.
If you were to remove the current camshaft from your 1979 engine and install the Clay Smith cam shown above, and add ported D3VE heads/Edelbrock Performer RPM intake/Edelbrock 1410 750cfm carburetor as you intend, you might make 425 hp. The engine will not generate 475 hp in your boat. It will not generate 450 hp. It might make 425. Perhaps it could generate more on a dyno at a higher rpm, but your jet pump won't allow it to get there and you'll never experience it in your boat. Part of the reason for the unexpectedly low resulting power is the camshaft choice itself, another part is the overall engine combination relative to the new cam (although your newly acquired engine in its current state is a fine parts combination).
If I were building a 460 engine for a jet boat and stuck with using that camshaft, the build would need to have tubular over-transom headers. Then the power output might get to 475 in your boat.
The peak valve lift advertised on the Clay Smith cam card is right at the point where it would be highly advisable to machine down the D3VE's valve guides for more retainer-to-guide clearance and simultaneously convert them for snap-on stem seals (rather than the OEM umbrella-type seals). The OEM pedestal valve train could still be utilized including the stamped steel rocker arms if properly set up with pedestal shims and correct pushrod lengths; aftermarket pedestal roller rocker arms might be a nice upgrade but not entirely mandatory.
After looking at an impeller chart, that seems about right.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
Throw away the stock heads and get a set of aluminum aftermarket heads. That will add a bunch of horsepower as the iron heads are crap.
I think that by the time you had those iron heads ported and modified for roller rockers, you could buy a set of aluminum heads, and get more power and lighten the weight as well.
-
Of course if you talk with ten different cam grinders and/or engine builders, you'll get ten different opinions as to which camshaft you should use in your engine.
If you were to remove the current camshaft from your 1979 engine and install the Clay Smith cam shown above, and add ported D3VE heads/Edelbrock Performer RPM intake/Edelbrock 1410 750cfm carburetor as you intend, you might make 425 hp. The engine will not generate 475 hp in your boat. It will not generate 450 hp. It might make 425. Perhaps it could generate more on a dyno at a higher rpm, but your jet pump won't allow it to get there and you'll never experience it in your boat. Part of the reason for the unexpectedly low resulting power is the camshaft choice itself, another part is the overall engine combination relative to the new cam (although your newly acquired engine in its current state is a fine parts combination).
If I were building a 460 engine for a jet boat and stuck with using that camshaft, the build would need to have tubular over-transom headers. Then the power output might get to 475 in your boat.
The peak valve lift advertised on the Clay Smith cam card is right at the point where it would be highly advisable to machine down the D3VE's valve guides for more retainer-to-guide clearance and simultaneously convert them for snap-on stem seals (rather than the OEM umbrella-type seals). The OEM pedestal valve train could still be utilized including the stamped steel rocker arms if properly set up with pedestal shims and correct pushrod lengths; aftermarket pedestal roller rocker arms might be a nice upgrade but not entirely mandatory.
hmm... choosing the correct camshaft is some science :)
I have no clue about it, and when Clay Smith recommended one, i felt kind of relief knowing what to buy.
So, @LakesOnly, is it possible to recommend another camshaft for me, who will suit me better?
Or, is the camshaft the right one for my build, i'm just going to see less hp than Clay Smith thought?
As you see at my boat type, over-transom headers is not an option.
Regarding those iron heads, they have valve springs with damper, and are converted to snap-on stem seals.. might be hard to see on the pictures but.
The exhaust valve seats are replaced and stainless valves are put it.
I am thinking of converting to roller rockers, the guy who got the heads right now will fix so i can mount studs, he will also fix the valve guide for more lift if it is needed.
As you see on the pictures, the heads are actually E8TE, but i've read they are exactly the same as the "more known" D3VE, so therefore i wrote that number.
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi66.tinypic.com%2Fzscub.jpg&hash=3dbac07b341b3205bab9b3d5c83cc1f0c8d0fcbe)
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi63.tinypic.com%2Fqye2vr.jpg&hash=e296733e6041aef9b089869e0d6bc001ef4b97a1)
(https://www.socaljetboats.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi63.tinypic.com%2F14908bn.jpg&hash=47a1bb18e83a1100a47b3a67d9e8b54067b09bc4)
-
I think that by the time you had those iron heads ported and modified for roller rockers, you could buy a set of aluminum heads, and get more power and lighten the weight as well.
I would really love to have those alu heads!
But i've done the calculations, i live in Norway so i also have to pay 25% extra tax on everything from you guys, Edelbrock alu head from ebay, the cheapest i could find, a pair plus shipping and tax will end up at $3400 .. porting/machining my heads will be about $1300 ...
And considering this isn't a really high hp build, i think i will do fine with my old iron heads. ^-^
-
I think that by the time you had those iron heads ported and modified for roller rockers, you could buy a set of aluminum heads, and get more power and lighten the weight as well.
Because of the desired compression ratio and the exhaust risers that shall remain in the boat, there are only two aluminum cylinder head choices with the correct chamber size and correct exhaust port/bolt pattern: 95cc Procomp heads or 95cc Edelbrock heads. The Procomp heads will make LESS power than ported D3VE heads; that leaves the Edelbrock heads.
The cost of a new pair of 95cc Edelbrock heads is $2500. And when you bolt them on, the engine will still not generate the power desired--you will still have to spend more money (cam, etc). That is not cost efficient, nor is $2500+ dollars "less than ported D3VE heads."
The cost of a used pair of 95cc Edelbrock heads is $1300-$1400. You are then well advised to run them through a machine shop for inspection, touch up the valves and valve seats, new stem seals, etc, adding up to at least another $300. And when you bolt them on the engine will still not generate the power desired--you will still have to spend more money. That is not cost efficient, nor is it "less than ported D3VE heads."
If the OP has settled for less than 500 hp desired, then why the excess expenditures on such unnecessary items? I admit I do think in the most practical terms rather than "show" or "shiny," but then again show & shiny do not make horsepower. And, greater horsepower supporting components do not equal practical.
Just get a combo-correct cam, bowl blend the iron heads, and maybe execute a 7/16" rocker stud conversion. Done, and the cost of such mods ought not exceed $1000.
-
Just get a combo-correct cam, bowl blend the iron heads, and maybe execute a 7/16" rocker stud conversion. Done, and the cost of such mods ought not exceed $1000.
Thanks for sharing knowledge about this.
I'm repeating myself, but..
Do you mean the Clay Smith recommended camshaft is OK, it's just that i really should have a higher compression ratio and a better exhaust? -to get better use of it
OR should i buy another camshaft?
If no no other camshaft will give me any higher HP because of my exhaust/compression i think i'm just going to go for it..
And then it's the question regarding the lobe separation.
Clay smith at first recommended 108 degree, that would be no problem they said because of my exhaust type, but they could also grind 110 degree on the same camshaft, would also work well they said.
Would i loose much power with that?
Lots of questions, but i'm struggling here ::) :D
-
Thanks for sharing knowledge about this.
I'm repeating myself, but..
Do you mean the Clay Smith recommended camshaft is OK, it's just that i really should have a higher compression ratio and a better exhaust? -to get better use of it
OR should i buy another camshaft?
If no no other camshaft will give me any higher HP because of my exhaust/compression i think i'm just going to go for it..
And then it's the question regarding the lobe separation.
Clay smith at first recommended 108 degree, that would be no problem they said because of my exhaust type, but they could also grind 110 degree on the same camshaft, would also work well they said.
Would i loose much power with that?
Lots of questions, but i'm struggling here ::) :D
As lakes only mentioned, you can talk to ten people and get 10 opinions. I would honestly go with what ever he recommends for your set up. George (the owner) has been building engines for jet boats for a very long time. He won’t steer you wrong. I think your exhaust is going to hold you back from the full potential so I’m sure he won’t recommend anything to aggressive because it would just be a waste.
Sent from my iPhone using SoCal Jet Boats mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=201)
-
I could spec you a cam & lifters for your build as you intend to complete it (reworked D3VEs, Performer RPM intake, etc) and price would be similar to the other price quote. Shipping would be extra, and if shipped directly to Norway would be via USPS Priority Mail Flat Rate "Large" box. I could make a recommendation/point you in the right direction as far as valve train setup but ultimately it will be your responsibility. I could also point you toward some porting tips, etc. Private message me if interested, or contact me via direct email through the HFD website.
-
Since the conversation started here i sent you a PM. :)