Edgy head throttle

[MoparMontana]

That all depends what compression ratio you are starting with. in '34 they were only 5.6:1, but by '59 they were 8:1, so what you are starting with will greatly effect the performance increase. The most accurate benchmark that I know of first-hand is the engine and chassis we built for the Peking to Paris rally (#MDBP2P) which won it's class in 2019. With a Gen II head, an EDGY "Boy Racer" cam grind (260 duration, .410 lift), Fenton headers, Edmunds high-rise 2x1 intake, Zenith carbs, porting and a meticulously detailed build, it dynoed at 150 RWHP at 1227' elevation and 86*, for a corrected HP of 157 RWHP and 179 at the flywheel. This was not a "hot" motor, as it was built for durability and dependability on unreliable fuel, instead of bragging rights, but it was probably one of the most detailed L6 builds ever, with lightweight forged coated pistons, a modern thin ring pack, weight matched rods, undercut valves, etc.

I think it's safe to assume that you can readily get 130-140 RWHP out of well-built, well designed 230 with 9:1 compression.

Note that all intakes are not the same! I personally think the Offys and modern repops with a fake vintage name on them are junk. When we do our flow bench work this spring, I'll be taking my extensive vintage intake collection along.

[MoparMontana]

6 minutes ago, James_Douglas said:

Pete,

 

I always shudder when people extol the virtues of a part due to its use in racing. I would watch that. The truth is that 75K miles driven on the road is much harder on a part that an hour of running on the track. One does not take apart, every six months, a street engine...

 

Agreed, but Chris, Earl, Ian, and I have put a combined hundreds of thousands of miles on our EDGY Gen I & II heads over the years, in every sort of driving condition (single digits in Montana to 113 degrees driving to Bonneville and back) without issue.

But yes, I always run antifreeze and well as a sacrificial anode.

And yes, Tony getting a real job really screwed things up. At least he's still assembling our race motors!

[MoparMontana]

29 minutes ago, James_Douglas said:

As I flash ahead to today, I cannot run an aluminum head as I do not use anti-freeze in my cars here in the middle of San Francisco. I know a LOT of cars guys and gals in this town across California who also do not. Why? because if we drained an engine and it was observed the fines would not be trivial. I have thought back to that old engine and wondered about ways to run an aluminum head without antifreeze...

 

 

That's nuts!! Why can't you simply drain it in the garage and take it to recycling?  Even that's "illegal"? Of course, this is coming from the guy who cleaned out his '29 DeSoto gas tank in the alley last week.

[ccudahy]

32 minutes ago, MoparMontana said:

Note that all intakes are not the same! I personally think the Offys and modern repops with a fake vintage name on them are junk.

Pete,

 

Do you eventually plan on getting into intake manifolds?

[greg g]

At what rpm did the PtoP engine develop the listed rear wheel up, and what process was used to simulate aero drag in the Dyno runs?  As I recall when I did my pulls on a Mustang Chassis Dyno, my 230 developed 127 rwhp.  If you figure 20% drive line frictional loss 151 flywheel hp.

 

My rpm was limited by me to 3300 which was timing me 62 mph. I started with a 56 engine which was rated at 127 hp at 3600 by the factory. 

Block decked .010

Head milled .040

Bored .030 with new Eggs pistons and rings

New valves, guides new valve springs

Stock cam

Fenton intake 2 b1b carbs

Ports matched manifolds gutted heat riser

Single exhaust with 2inch id throughout

Balanced, flywheel lightened

1954 Dodge distributer stock advance curve

Solid 1 piece copper head gasket

Solid core copper spark leads, ac45r spark plugs.

 

[MoparMontana]

4 minutes ago, ccudahy said:

Pete,

 

Do you eventually plan on getting into intake manifolds?

Yes, I have one designed. It is a modular design with one base that incorporates various top plates in order to run anything from 2 ones, 2 twos, 2300 series Holley, one or EFI like I have on my DeSoto. Still over a year out though. Managing four cars, two of them new builds, to run on the Salt next year has me chasing my tail.

[MoparMontana]

6 minutes ago, greg g said:

At what rpm did the PtoP engine develop the listed rear wheel up, and what process was used to simulate aero drag in the Dyno runs?  As I recall when I did my pulls on a Mustang Chassis Dyno, my 230 developed 127 rwhp.  If you figure 20% drive line frictional loss 151 flywheel hp.

Here is the P2P dyno sheet.

 

I'm not familiar with "simulating aero drag" on a dyno, and don't understand why that's relevant to measuring HP. We use El Mirage for our wind tunnel ? 

Sounds like your HP figures are very similar, but we have learned that there can be some pretty significant variances from dyno to dyno. We were lucky enough to have access to the DynoJet "mule" dyno at their facility in Belgrade, MT for about ten years. Our readings changed significantly over the years as they made hardware and software upgrades. It made it pretty hard to get an accurate baseline, so we basically just used it to optimize A/F and timing.

[Sniper]

When I drain my coolant I use a pan to catch it.  I don't want to clean up a mess in my garage.  Not sure why CA would fine you just for draining the engine, I could see it if you were draining it into the ground or on the road and letting it run.   But, James, you don't seem to be the type to do that, so I put it down to CA crazy regs.

 

I know plain water is a better conductor of heat than glycol and it won't cause your wheels to spin if you blow out a core plug, which is why racers don;t use it, rules too.  But for me coolant works 

[MoparMontana]

6 minutes ago, Sniper said:

When I drain my coolant I use a pan to catch it.  I don't want to clean up a mess in my garage.  Not sure why CA would fine you just for draining the engine, I could see it if you were draining it into the ground or on the road and letting it run.   But, James, you don't seem to be the type to do that, so I put it down to CA crazy regs.

 

I know plain water is a better conductor of heat than glycol and it won't cause your wheels to spin if you blow out a core plug, which is why racers don;t use it, rules too.  But for me coolant works 

California does indeed have some odd regulations, but after 30 years of driving my fleet 90 days per year in Montana, I'll happily find ways around them in order to drive my old stuff in the sunshine year-round!

[greg g]

As part of the set up the program asked for year and model of the car, there was no chart item for 46 P 15 so we used the data for a late 80s GMC minivan.

Below is what the manufacturer has to say regarding aero.

 

(the data is used to)

reproduc the forces the vehicle would experience on the road or track. The “hp at 50 figure” is an EPA figure that represents the horsepower required to maintain a constant speed of 50 mph on a flat and windless road surface. This number varies according to aerodynamic characteristics of different vehicles and represents the effect that wind has on a vehicle at increasing speed; higher speed equals higher wind drag, and thus, a need to increase load to accurately reproduce road or track conditions.”

 

[MoparMontana]

9 minutes ago, greg g said:

As part of the set up the program asked for year and model of the car, there was no chart item for 46 P 15 so we used the data for a late 80s GMC minivan.

Below is what the manufacturer has to say regarding aero.

 

(the data is used to)

reproduc the forces the vehicle would experience on the road or track. The “hp at 50 figure” is an EPA figure that represents the horsepower required to maintain a constant speed of 50 mph on a flat and windless road surface. This number varies according to aerodynamic characteristics of different vehicles and represents the effect that wind has on a vehicle at increasing speed; higher speed equals higher wind drag, and thus, a need to increase load to accurately reproduce road or track conditions.”

 

Huh?

[Sniper]

He's talking about aerodynamic drag at speed.  Somewhere I have "The Doctor's guide to Optimizing you ignition system" and it details a way to calculate that number (hp required to maintain the speed) for your ride.  Unfortunately, I don't recall the method nor the location of the book right now, lol.  Old age and all.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Sniper
clarity

[MoparMontana]

11 minutes ago, Sniper said:

He's talking about aerodynamic drag at speed.  Somewhere I have "The Doctor's guide to Optimizing you ignition system" and it details a way to calculate that number (hp required to maintain the speed) for your ride.  Unfortunately, I don't recall the method nor the location of the book right now, lol.  Old age and all.

Measured HP is HP, and measured torque is torque, regardless of what one puts that engine in. The aerodynamics of the vehicle that one chooses to put that powerplant in is irrelevant to measuring the power output.

 

 

[Sniper]

Not talking about the HP an engine dynos at but rather the HP is costs to maintain the vehicle at a given speed.

 

 

[MoparMontana]

2 minutes ago, Sniper said:

Not talking about the HP an engine dynos at but rather the HP is costs to maintain the vehicle at a given speed.

 

 

Dyno measurements of an engine's performance are completely independent the aerodynamics of the vehicle that hosts it.

 

[Sniper]

I know that.  We are not taking about the engine.

 

Every vehicle requires a certain level of power to go a given speed.  Some of that is the rolling resistance of the tires, most of it's the aerodynamic drag.  His reference to aero drag refers to that amount of power required for that vehicle to go that speed not the engine, nothing to do with the engine, forget you have an engine as it not applicable to the aero drag question.  You could be towing the thing and the drag would still be there but now the towing vehicle is dealing with it. 

 

 

 

 

[HotRodTractor]

I'm lost. I thought the engine and the potential power it produces was the discussion..... 

[MoparMontana]

15 minutes ago, HotRodTractor said:

I'm lost. I thought the engine and the potential power it produces was the discussion..... 

I'm either confused or drunk or both. This is a prefect example of why I am reluctant to participate in forums.

 

[1936Forepoint]

I agree with Peter. The guy was trying to say that aerodynamic drag had something to do with the dyno derived horsepower. 

[Sniper]

Yeah, there was some thread drift.  Aero drag will affect a land speed run, that's why they use streamliners and belly tanks for those things.  Aero drag has the effect of taking HP out of the scene.

 

I guess what was being asked was if that was factored into the calculations when planning the run.  Or I could be wrong and the asking was about dyno's HP numbers,  lol  No insult or anything meant in my postings though.

[greg g]

I didn't write the Dyno setup procedure and obviously they differ between various Dyno makers.  Just reflecting what my experience was.  The difference between weather forecasts between local tv channels one uses one type of modeling one uses another and they end up slightly different.  Measuring hp at the drive wheels isnt a measurement of engine hp, it's a measurement of how much used, taking into account any losses on the through put. This Dyno had a factor they thinks is important.

 

 

 

[MoparMontana]

It's all good, although I'm still trying to understand what Gregg G meant. Maybe he has our various projects confused.

The "P2P" is a stock-bodied '33 Dodge rally car that was built for the 2019 Peking to Paris Rally. That engine was built for dependability, not horsepower and only had 8:1 compression.  The rules require a stock body, and the average speeds across the Gobi desert are relatively low, so aerodynamics are irrevealant. I stand by my opinion that an 8:1 engine that make 150 HP and 278 ft/lb at the rear wheels is impressive. He also mentions that a stock engine produced 127 gross HP. Using a conservative figure of 15% drivetrain loss, that equates to 108 HP. Again, a 42 HP increase with the same compression ratio is pretty impressive in my book.

[MoparMontana]

10 minutes ago, greg g said:

Measuring hp at the drive wheels isnt a measurement of engine hp...

 

 

 

Really? What would your RWHP be with no engine? A dyno absolutely measures engine horsepower. It's why there are gross (at the flywheel) and net (at the wheels) HP calculations. All automotive manufacturers have used SAE NET horsepower (at the rear wheels) figures since 1972, so it's clear that they believe a dyno measures horsepower.

 

[MoparMontana]

By the way, here is a photo of the EDGY-equipped P2P car!

[Sniper]

I bet that was a hoot to drive too