"How fast do you want to go?".........How much do you want to spend?

Jim is playing in a league that has budgets FAR above his. He is smart enough to know he will not be at the front of the pack but as long as he can run mid-level with clean driving, he is a winner. We at Time Machines are proud to be a small sponsor to his efforts and will continue to provide whatever help we can from parts to sweat equity (we have some sway bar upgrades in the works).

Brent,

Not taking any offense at your comments. It will probably be at least a couple of weeks before I can get the engine installed, and then there will be some suspension modifications. Probably will not get it running for about a month. Timing sucks, I am in the middle of building a new house and just do not have enough time to do all that I have to do.

Time to run out, drop off some scaffolding and then pick up 2x4's and build a few more walls.

Jim

Rick,

I greatly appreciate all of the support both through parts and sweat equity that you, Ross, Roy and Dennis have supplied and continue to offer. That is what makes a race team, and I am proud to be associated with this one.

I see us as being the privateers of old competing with the big money teams and showing that you do not have to be rich to race. Bringing the sport back to it's roots of everyday people getting on the track. Carrol was not rich when he started racing.

Jim

Jim,

I see your cam as a wider LSA of one of these:

ULTRA-ACTION / Performance Level 5 Fast 3/8 to 1/2 mile super oval track profile. RPM Power Range: 4000 to 7500 / Redline: 8000+CUSTOM GROUND SOLID

This cam is 292/302, 256/266 @ .050, 106 LSA, .606/.600.

Yours would be an 112 LSA of this grind.

Gary

Gary,

Maybe the cam developer did a little research and found that cam and decided to use it as a basis for this cam. I think that the only suggestion given to the cam developer was to go with about a 112 LSA as Jim is concerned that under hard acceleration with a tight lobe center that there would be too much reversion and that fuel would end up going back up the velocity stacks as there is no common plenum in an independent runner system and therefore no place for the reversion to go. I know through discussions with Jim that fuel use at higher rpms is one of the factors that he uses in determining the jetting. It is quite possible that with a street engine and milder driving that I could have gotten away with the 106 LSA with only a little bit of fuel misting under heavier acceleration that I may not have really noticed; hard to say and I am by no means an expert.

Hope that all is well with you.

Jim

Brent,

I was just doing a little research because you mentioned that a single plane intake manifold with a 4 barrel would produce more peak HP at higher rpms. I agree with you on that, from what I have read. The problem is, that because single plane intake manifolds were not in use in the 1960's on race cobras, I cannot use one in vintage racing. I can only use the style of manifold that would have been in use then. Seems like an inconsistent rule, given that I can run roller rockers and those weren't is use then either, but I don't make the rules.

Again, thanks for your thoughts and input, they are always greatly appreciated.

Jim

Jim, good talking to you again, next call we need more time to talk racing :) I really like the moniker of the "Little team that could" The Alfa was always the "underdog" to the well funded Porsche 356 "Factory cars" :) in vintage racing :) Trust me I think some of these guy's spent more on tires then I spent on my motor. Just remember the driver is 75%, car is still only 25%. And HP is only 25% & handling, brakes is 75%. That's the formula I used to beat the DAMN 356's. :) Besides at the end of the day, the prize money was the same for 10th as 1st place :) Placing the race car in the trailer unscathed at the end of the weekend was my greatest reward. Cheers Tom.

I agree Tom. Talk to you again, and by the way, What are you doing up at this hour?! Go to bed. It's early here and I am 3 hours ahead of you.

Seems like this is the only time I get to myself anymore :)

Jim,

The Blue Thunder dual plane intake with some port work and divider work on a 289 will pretty much offer the same performance as a single plane up to about 6500 rpm or so. So will a Performer RPM.

Those higher end dual plane intakes actually do extremely well with balancing low/mid range torque with higher end horsepower.

I always push my customers that have to stay with the period correct intakes to choose the dual plane intake. The guys that get to choose whatever they want will usually get a single plane piece. When possible, I'd rather use the extra cost for the Webers and apply them towards other ways of making horsepower or making things more reliable. For instance, on one 289, I used a new crank, had the rod journals turned down to small journal SBC size, then used a 5.700" connecting rod. That little engine produced 390 lb-ft of torque. I also used titanium valves with very low spring pressure for durability and reliability. For the $4-5k extra that you pay for the Webers, you can funnel money into other beneficial areas.

The rules are all over the place for these classes. The 289 that I mentioned in the paragraph above was for a customer in the UK and he was not allowed to use roller rockers, so I had some factory rockers REM polished and cryogenically treated and we paired those with a solid flat tappet.

That camshaft, even with changing the LSA to 112, still has 73° of overlap.

Just randomly changing a cam to a wider LSA doesn't make it "friendly".

the rules that forbid roller rockers are the same that requires Webers...;)

I never could get a straight answer out of anyone on where the line was drawn. I figure it's easy for tech to pull a valve cover to check out the rockers, so that was probably something to stick to.

everything is clearly defined in homologation 115, some issues are easy to control, some not..

I had previously worked as a HMSA inspection tech, in my opinion the most stringent of the vintage racing organization in the US. I was also a competitor in HMSA vintage racing. The rules were very well defined, engine displacement, no roller rockers, no single plane intake manifolds, production cast iron engine block and cylinder heads and the list goes on. You would be amazed at the number of ways there are to combat friction with standard type rocker arms. The induction systems were dependent on the class and the "in period" rules for the class, any deviation had to be backed up by documented proof. A good example is the use of Webers, even though they were accepted by the rules they were not mandatory for the class, you could utilize a four barrel system on a dual plane intake manifold.

I was aware of certain vintage racers that would use roller rockers on one cylinder bank and stock type rockers on the other. Their thought was that they had a 50/50 chance of getting away with the roller rockers depending on which valvecover was pulled for the inspection. I also know that even though you were not allowed roller rockers you could run a roller cam.

There are tons of tricks....

Running less compression on the cylinder that you think they will whistle and check is another one.

Frankly, I think you could get away with murder as long as you're not leading the pack.

We actually “pumped” the engine cylinders to determine volume.
As far as “tricks” we had people plasma spraying aluminum block with iron for the magnetic check. There is a Cobra racer from Canada that went so far as to run a flat plane crank, the sound gave that engine away.
On our own engines we ran titanium, rods, valves, retainers etc. to lighten anything and everything we could.

It is amazing at how far people will go to try to create an edge. Not only with the engine, but transmission, brakes and suspension components. I think that I will just stay within the rules and have some fun. Hopefully some of you following this thread will be at Pitt Race for the Vintage Grand Prix and SAAC 44. I will be racing and looking forward to meeting some of you, sitting down and enjoying a beer and some track time.

Jim

It was a hard choice between SAAC 44 and the Pitt Vintage Race, but time constraints dictated my attending only SAAC 44 this year. But at least I'll get to do the track days.

I can only image the silliness that go's on in the big bore classes. We dealt with the "Cheater's" in the under 2-liter class as such. If they wanted to win, since that all they cared about, everyone In the first four or fives rows, (We talked about this before the race in the hot-pits, so no one would stack up on anyone else) We would just let him go, give him a straightaway lead, and everyone else raced (for 2nd place) as normal. After the race NO ONE went over and gave a slap on back or a attaboy for winning. Oh, and no one gave him one of our beers that may have hurt most :) After getting our drift that person either didn't come back to race with us anymore or went REAL racing. And I'm talking Porsche racer to another Porsche racer, cheater's were cheater's no matter what cars we drove. We stuck together as one group. Cheers Tom.