| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#61
03-24-2021, 09:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
When my heads were reworked for the OF 2.0 Dave replaced the 99893 springs with Comp 26925 springs.
__________________
 466 Mike Voycey shortblock, 310cfm SD KRE heads, SD "OF 2.0 cam", torker 2 373 gears 3200 Continental Convertor best et 10.679/127.5/1.533 60ft 308 gears best et 10.76/125.64/1.5471 |
|
#62
03-24-2021, 09:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Comp Valve Spring Chart:
https://www.compcams.com/valve-spring-chart The 26925 spring is located on page 301 .
__________________
'70 TA / 505 cid / same engine but revised ( previous best 10.63 at 127.05 ) Old information here: http://www.hotrod.com/articles/0712p...tiac-trans-am/ Sponsor of the world's fastest Pontiac powered Ford Fairmont (engine) 5.14 at 140 mph (1/8 mile) , true 10.5 tire, stock type suspension https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDoJnIP3HgE |
|
#63
03-24-2021, 09:58 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Steve, I would imagine Dave used the Crane springs. It was one of if not the first set of KRE heads he did. He didn't use locators on mine, something he added to later versions, if memory serves me correctly.....
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran! https://cliffshighperformance.com/ 73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile), |
|
#64
03-24-2021, 06:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have wondered for years about how high you can go with rocker ratio to 'soften' the lobe on the cam. I once had some 1.7 ratio rockers combined with Rhoads lifters on a cam similar to a Summit 2802 and it ran great. It would seem like a 1.8 or 1.9 ratio could use a much lower cam profile and maybe be less likely to bounce. What is the reason for trying to get more lift/duration from the cam lobe instead of the rocker ratio? And are there any parts made with such a high ratio that can be adapted to pontiac use? Is there enough material in the head to remove for the extra pushrod clearance such high ratio rockers would need?
|
|
#65
03-24-2021, 07:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lift from Cam vs. Lift from Rocker Arm Ratio
If you Google that subject you will find some good information and opinions. It has been discussed here on PY, but I didn't find the specific thread. And somewhat related if a solid cam is involved, a change in rocker ratio affects the valve lash. When a catalog suggests or states a specific lash figure that is typically based on a 1.5 rocker arm ratio. .
__________________
'70 TA / 505 cid / same engine but revised ( previous best 10.63 at 127.05 ) Old information here: http://www.hotrod.com/articles/0712p...tiac-trans-am/ Sponsor of the world's fastest Pontiac powered Ford Fairmont (engine) 5.14 at 140 mph (1/8 mile) , true 10.5 tire, stock type suspension https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDoJnIP3HgE Last edited by Steve C.; 03-24-2021 at 07:39 PM. |
|
#66
12-03-2022, 09:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I was thinking I needed as much clearance as a solid lifter cam to keep the valves from staying cracked open. I was thinking .020" intake and .025" exhaust. But I see you running .010" clearance with no problems (I expect a lot more spring pressure), I'm only going to run 100lbs seat pressure. |
| Reply |
|
|
The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.
Linear Mode
