anybody done any research on HP losses thru the valve train?
need to find out how much HP is required to run the valve train on a 302
Loading...
|
anybody done any research on HP losses thru the valve train?
need to find out how much HP is required to run the valve train on a 302
Don't think it is significant when compared to ring tension/friction, oil friction cavitation on the crank, blower drive losses etc.
Lightening the moving valvetrain (lifters, pushrods, valves, retainers etc) by one gram adds app 50 rpm potential according to some NASCAR and other engine building blogs I ve read.
ie) Edelbrock undercut stainless steel 2.05" intake valves weigh 118g each
Ti versions for the same size and height weigh app 80g each
38g x 50 = 1900 rpm potential
Retainers are cheaper to lose weight, altho not nearly as much
If you are talking about frictional losses, I would think hydr roller would be the lowest, since that's what the OEM s are using for efficiency and emissions.
yep...was thinking cam ramp rates & springs mostly...not weight so much
reason why I asked...its interesting how easy the engine turns over
when theres no cam in it...so there has to be considerable HP loss just to move the valve train
hmmmm I wonder.....maybe cause all the valves are staying closed all the time, lol
ie) you're converting to a 2 stroke this way