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
Printable View
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailites
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