806 cubic inches ........

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Here's how you stuff a 6-inch arm into an A460 (10.32-deck) block: easy-peasy, if you've got the necessary parts, skills and cash.

Post  Havaneiss Dei on August 23rd 2015, 12:50 am

Lem Evans wrote:
Nevs wrote:I'd like to see that done in a 10.32" deck block.................
Seems that is the case.........seems somebody wants some action on the forum  Rolling Eyes
LOL -- It's not a problem, anymore, IF you've got the budget for it. There are three solutions that I know of:

Solution A is to use the M-6010-A460(T) block. It is outwardly indistinguishable from every other A460 block with which we are all familiar; however, the T stands for Tardis. Unfortunately, the properties of this block are such that it has inspired knock-offs that are universally inferior; some of these may have the word TARDIS cast into the valley.

Solution B is to use the extremely pricey and rare elastic sleeve kit ("ESK"); the kit includes the necessary variable-length studs, with premium washers and nuts. Technophiles will appreciate that this kit eliminates the need for head gaskets, as the preussure inside the cylinder is never below that of the ambient atmosphere long enough for the head and sleeve to be separated. The downside is that the required machining operation is much more expensive than installing traditional O-rings. Also, while the cooling issues reported in the prototype appear to have been solved, there's no guarantee that this solution will prove reliable for you.

Solution C involves dynamic connecting rod ("DCR") technology: the connecting rod's length increases in proportion to the crank angle (up to 180 degrees ATDC) and then decreases to its minimum value at TDC. From the standpoint of reliable power, this is probably the best option for users operating extreme-length strokes, as it can reduce piston travel and speed by more than 50 percent. Peak power output during the operating cycle is greatly increased as the throw and the rod approach right angles to each other; however, some of the energy after this point is dissipated by the extension of the rod, resulting in no overall net gain (and in some instances, possibly a small net loss) of power.

Because the swept volume is reduced, DCR-equipped engines operate best as either supercharged engines, or as very-high-rpm engines, or (in competition) as both. I do not know of any sanctioning bodies that currently allow either the use of the above-described ESK or the DCR technology; however, I don't know of any that prohibit the Tardis block.

Havaneiss Dei

Posts : 2
Join date : 2015-08-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 806 cubic inches ........

Post  BIGINCH'S on August 23rd 2015, 6:20 pm

I would like to know more about this tardis block. S Leonard thx

BIGINCH'S

Posts : 31
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 806 cubic inches ........

Post  605FOX on August 23rd 2015, 6:31 pm

BIGINCH'S wrote:I would like to know more about this tardis block.       S Leonard thx

it is missing 2 letters ........ "RE"


I am sorry but this cat is on crack .......

605FOX
BBF CONTRIBUTOR
BBF CONTRIBUTOR

Posts : 165
Join date : 2009-08-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 806 cubic inches ........

Post  DILLIGASDAVE on August 23rd 2015, 6:43 pm

Havaneiss Dei wrote:the T stands for Tardis..........Tardis block.
BIGINCH'S wrote:I would like to know more about this tardis block.

Ha  Razz , Doctor Who reference, the Tardis was bigger on the inside than outside.
avatar
DILLIGASDAVE

Posts : 2178
Join date : 2009-08-08
Location : Texas. pronounced "texASS"

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 806 cubic inches ........

Post  supervel45 on August 23rd 2015, 9:15 pm

605FOX wrote:
BIGINCH'S wrote:I would like to know more about this tardis block.       S Leonard thx

it is missing 2 letters ........ "RE"


I am sorry but this cat is on crack .......
No doubt, I almost fell out of my chair laughing so hard, should have said DCR rubber connecting rods. Razz

supervel45

Posts : 3072
Join date : 2013-09-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 806 cubic inches ........

Post  SLord82 on August 24th 2015, 11:13 am

Thats got to be a typo. Probably meant 606, which is ~ 4.5x4.75

SLord82

Posts : 124
Join date : 2011-07-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum