Disappointed Dyno Results

Get the tune-up right and go racing, like been previously said the only people who race dynos are EMC compeditors......

If you take a look at the math, your engine is within 3% of the written comparable engine output replies! One example seems to have a torque advantage but all others are right there with you relative to output even an example or two with larger displacement. IMO, for what it's worth, a bracket engine that will perform in an operating range as your's should truly be a good engine. One that may require little maintenance and provide more than one season of dependable consistent service. Just think, you can do a lot of tuning with a bottle of shoe polish!

Dave.

1markd wrote:Dave Bamber built C460 headed 598, Gary Sellin tuned and dynamometer. I’m a little disappointed in the results, looking for advice. 1040 HP @ 6900; 825 ft. lbs. @5600. Ron’s terminator injected on methanol. I suspect the camshaft is the culprit. Isky # 311800, WW 1.8 rockers give it a number like this.
.824 .824 .288 .304 @ .050
Gary Sellin thinks the throttle body is too small, (2100 cfm)
Looking for recommendations
Mark

I am sure I will recieve the riot act after this post but Are you guys crazy? This engine is definately an under performer. This gentlemen evidently paid alot of money hoping to recieve a badass engine and didnt. People can say what they want but there are those out there busting their butts to make good power and there are those that dont. 1040 c- headed engine is a dont. This is exactly why the c-head gets a bad rap. I run A-heads, I am sponsored by trick flow and I feel they are the best bang for the buck but if you think c-heads will not out perform a-heads you are mistaken. If a terminator would do anything it will put a ton of torque in this thing and looks like its about 70 down.

I in no way tried to step on anybodies feelings with a c-head engine but facts are facts. This is exactly why customers call to buy and engine and you say something about a c-head and they go oh know so and so has one of those and it doesnt run very good. Engine builders need to take some responsibility and give people what they pay for. I am not saying its the case here but more than not it is. jmo

Oakley Motorsports wrote:

1markd wrote:Dave Bamber built C460 headed 598, Gary Sellin tuned and dynamometer. I’m a little disappointed in the results, looking for advice. 1040 HP @ 6900; 825 ft. lbs. @5600. Ron’s terminator injected on methanol. I suspect the camshaft is the culprit. Isky # 311800, WW 1.8 rockers give it a number like this.
.824 .824 .288 .304 @ .050
Gary Sellin thinks the throttle body is too small, (2100 cfm)
Looking for recommendations
Mark

I am sure I will recieve the riot act after this post but Are you guys crazy? This engine is definately an under performer. This gentlemen evidently paid alot of money hoping to recieve a badass engine and didnt. People can say what they want but there are those out there busting their butts to make good power and there are those that dont. 1040 c- headed engine is a dont. This is exactly why the c-head gets a bad rap. I run A-heads, I am sponsored by trick flow and I feel they are the best bang for the buck but if you think c-heads will not out perform a-heads you are mistaken. If a terminator would do anything it will put a ton of torque in this thing and looks like its about 70 down.

I in no way tried to step on anybodies feelings with a c-head engine but facts are facts. This is exactly why customers call to buy and engine and you say something about a c-head and they go oh know so and so has one of those and it doesnt run very good. Engine builders need to take some responsibility and give people what they pay for. I am not saying its the case here but more than not it is. jmo

phil

you are so right, i say this quite a bit, i also dont see why so many are happy with some of the engines i see , we have 2 c head engines ,1 a 514 makes 935hp, 1 carb,cast intake,

then a 552 1 carb makes 1045, . both of these could make more. but they are both very low maint. engines right now. i have another that i will dyno soon that will be a lot more then these, but it also cost a lot more.all 3 of these guys are getting/got what they paid for







-rich

I've visited with quite a few guys that have had experience with methanol/alcohol on the C head engines, and all of them said they made more power/tq on race gas. Not to demean the fuel choice here, but as it has been explained to me, the C head runners have a small cross section compared to flow at the valve and this chokes the power down on the C heads when running alcohol. There have been improvements over the years and maybe this doesn't hold as true any more. Phillip and Lem, are on the cutting edge of the C head stuff and really know how to make engines with these heads shine, that 1200hp single carb deal speaks for itself.

Oakley Motorsports wrote:

1markd wrote:Dave Bamber built C460 headed 598, Gary Sellin tuned and dynamometer. I’m a little disappointed in the results, looking for advice. 1040 HP @ 6900; 825 ft. lbs. @5600. Ron’s terminator injected on methanol. I suspect the camshaft is the culprit. Isky # 311800, WW 1.8 rockers give it a number like this.
.824 .824 .288 .304 @ .050
Gary Sellin thinks the throttle body is too small, (2100 cfm)
Looking for recommendations
Mark

I am sure I will receive the riot act after this post but Are you guys crazy? This engine is definately an under performer. This gentlemen evidently paid alot of money hoping to recieve a badass engine and didnt. People can say what they want but there are those out there busting their butts to make good power and there are those that dont. 1040 c- headed engine is a dont. This is exactly why the c-head gets a bad rap. I run A-heads, I am sponsored by trick flow and I feel they are the best bang for the buck but if you think c-heads will not out perform a-heads you are mistaken. If a terminator would do anything it will put a ton of torque in this thing and looks like its about 70 down.

I in no way tried to step on anybodies feelings with a c-head engine but facts are facts. This is exactly why customers call to buy and engine and you say something about a c-head and they go oh know so and so has one of those and it doesnt run very good. Engine builders need to take some responsibility and give people what they pay for. I am not saying its the case here but more than not it is. jmo

An engine like this says NOTHING about the compression ratio or cylinder heads other than they are a "C" head.
Personally, I have seen some pretty bad "C" heads in one way or another. Some of those you can do nothing with unless you remove all the seats and weld metal back into the ports and refinish the entire head. At that point you may as well get a new head or pretty much "take what you get".
Simply because a certain engine builder builds an engine, (Dave Bamber who is pretty well known), it doesn't mean he had complete control of what was used in that engine build;
Ford, Chevrolet or Mopar.
1040 horsepower for THAT engine could be a good number OR it could be a terrible number dependent upon EVERYTHING involved.

1markd wrote:Dave Bamber built C460 headed 598, Gary Sellin tuned and dynamometer. I’m a little disappointed in the results, looking for advice. 1040 HP @ 6900; 825 ft. lbs. @5600. Ron’s terminator injected on methanol. I suspect the camshaft is the culprit. Isky # 311800, WW 1.8 rockers give it a number like this.
.824 .824 .288 .304 @ .050
Gary Sellin thinks the throttle body is too small, (2100 cfm)
Looking for recommendations
Mark

Dave Bamber,Gary S, are both great engine guys, maybe something else is wrong,



you should just be talking to dave, he'll fig it out

3 sides to every story....

what about the dyno?
for example the shop were i get my stuff done at
did a steve schmidt motor on stevs dyno it made 1200hp
on the dyno i was on the motor made just over 1100 hp
almost a 100 hp dif between dynos
my a head deal made 786hp and i was very disapointed
i have a
4.500 bore 4.150 stroke
1250 qft
a good cam from lem
custom dimonds 14-1 comp
fuel is vp114
heads a c&c ported donr have a flow sheet but was told 460 max on the int
but my motor runs great and hangs in there with big duke and big cheif gm motrs that make 1000 hp
true i could go to a differnt dyno or a few differnt dynos till i get what i think it should have
but how honest is that?

Cylinder head upgrade, camshaft change, fuel pump and/or type of fuel change? Keep us informed if you decide to go in any or all of these directions, will the expense justify your destination?

Dave.

Good conversation Guys, Dave & Gary are both top notch engine guys, that being said this is my combination they assembled. Gary did say he has many egnines he has dynoed that made the 1100 hp and out ran all the claimed 1300 hp advertised engines on the market. He recived my notrous kit today and will hit it with 200 and 300 shot. Bamber did the cylinder heads and intake, titanium intake & exhust. 500/385 @900. Motor sounds very clean. It's a starting point. Garys dyno is a inertia style that he built and quite a piece of art, the workmanship is outstanding. will keep you posted
Mark

Talked to Gary today and they got it as good as it's going to get. Got the oiling issue figured out, different pan, pump and custom pickup. The low horse power and tourqe is due to the camshaft we belive. The Nitrous Woke It Up! 1050 @ 6900 on motor, I can bracket race with that. 1240 @ 7200 with a 100 shot, 1360 at 7400 with a 200 shot with 1100 ft lbs. Didn't try the 300 shot. Gary and Dave have be outstanding to work with and have earned my future business.

A lot of what you say is what is really difficult to explain to some customers.
An engine designed to run WITH nitrous is usually a dog when run normally aspirated.
An engine designed to run normally aspirated will pick-up with nitrous but, not to near the same degree.

rmcomprandy wrote:A lot of what you say is what is really difficult to explain to some customers.
An engine designed to run WITH nitrous is usually a dog when run normally aspirated.
An engine designed to run normally aspirated will pick-up with nitrous but, not to near the same degree.

I agree with most of what you say...it's a trade off some times...but I've seen used cams offered for sale on both of the 460/429/370/429/460 sites that were touted as spray cams that were 4* short on the exh. duration and 1* or 2* too narrow on the LSA to be a good "on-the-engine unit". Most everything is open to interpretation...