Bret

Are you going to compete in the next EMC?

Thats where that question came from.

Denny

 

Only if someone hands me a check and says go at it.... the time is one thing but the $30K it would take to do something worth anything in that time frame is another.

I still have a lot of good ideas floating around that I think would give me that extra to do well and I think they would also be outlawed once they were shown in the contest one year.

Bret

 

Did you see Kaase's engine apart?
How do they determine the winner?
Does the CID size of the engine determine who has a better chance?

Why?

Because at this point in my investigatons and someone that has the knowledge of competing in that game I feel confident that winning is almost a cinch.
I don't know what the actual restrictions are?
Can we read between the lines without actually cheating?
Can we build a for real racing short block, high-vaccum, drysump and all the other major tricks?
Can we find a sponser?

Denny

 

Rules for 2006:

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng.../0601em_rules/

Every year is different.

 

There seems to be some room to manover within those restrictions, the biggest problem I see is the headers and mufflers.

Did I read that right - the engine never sees anything more than 6500 RPM?

Denny

 

Denny,

If you think that winning that deal is EASY I think you are seriously discrediting the guys that have won already....

Kaase, Bischoff, Bergquist and Sherman are not dummies.

The teardowns on any of these motors show some impressive stuff...

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...05/0603em_emc/
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...05/0604em_emc/
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...racing_engine/
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...208PHRSherman/

The headers are one of the biggest restrictions, the mufflers are only a little bit of a problem if you know what to use.

Now actually the problem is the compression ratio of 10.5:1, that's not even pushing the limit of what OEM's do with 200° @ .050" stock cams.

They are finally getting smart with the cam rules, 1.8:1 rockers, no roller cam bearings, shaft mount rockers..... are finally some improvements on what was happening with these motors.

They now need to fix all the welding that goes on with the chambers, that's been out of control for a while. I like the idea of that and what it lets you do but it is far from the spirt of the rules.

If you read those rules there are very few things that you can do that are out of the box now, which kinda takes the fun out of it.

IMHO unless they let the LS motor in to compete whenever a Cleveland fits the rules it will win from now on, or they need to let 15° heads in so the SBC has a chance.

Bret

 

I consider the decision to limit compression to be a huge mistake. The rule stifles creativity. Just suppose someone like Larry Widmer would decide to show what he knows and display a high compression efficient pump gas engine for the world to see!

 

I agree. I would like to see the envelope pushed using 91 octane gasoline.

 

Same here, but to make it more realistic they need to test the motors harder with detonation AND they need to make the gas available to the contestants before the contest in Long Island.

Bret

 

I didn't mean to infer that they were - "Dummy's" - Nor do I consider you a dummy, but there are things that I know that go way beyond anything those articles showed me.

Did I also read that the CID is now limited to 434?
I saw something in the Bischoff motor - the grooves in the pistons
Then what about the 102 LSA in the same motor - Thats not new by any means but very few even consider that approach.

A-B

I'm in agreement with you on the Widmer thing and the C/R limit

I'm in disagreement with the welding part - because thats how we can create new products, processes, and other things that will begin to move the industry forwards rather than in the "Appathy" that it is now in. Our industry is built on the backs of people that innivate, push the envelope, and think outside of the box. Many of the guys that post here are thinking outside of the box, but its like Widmer says, you have to collect all of those pieces and put them in the same box in order to achieve the results you are looking for.

Furthermore I don't think that I could do an EMC project on my own and win the first time out, it would have to be a community project, where the sharing of information proceeds the development of any part being used, modified or whatever. Every idea, concept that passes muster would have to be tested and proved before being put on the real engine. The first decision to be made is which engine makes the best piece according to the present rules, which we do not know because we are now looking at 2007 and beyond.

Bret says that they change the rules every year!!!

Denny

 

I agree with allowing chamber welding. This promotes modifications that enhance combustion.

With all of the emphasis that has been put on VE for racing, most people are good at filling a cylinder. Sure, there are always small improvements in port shape and camshaft designs that give the leaders an edge.

With the current rules not allowing compression what's left? COMBUSTION. Within the current rules, having the ability to weld chambers and develop ideas that create an improved combustion space is the key that seperates the winners from the also rans.

 

What's left is better cylinder filling (VE) and trapping that charge (DCR) as well as better combustion. It became a "live in detonation" contest in the years prior to 2006 with unlimited SCR.

I think there are other ways to fill the cylinders within the current rules which haven't been tried, but it may become a "better burn contest" if the 10.5 SCR rule remains. As Bret said, too bad it costs so much to be competitive.

It's always interesting to see what the next EMC rules will be. Any predictions?

 

Ever thought about making it a community project and share the expenses?
How many of the manufactures will let us buy the parts we need at cost?
There is so much talent here that I find it hard to believe that as a group we couldn't win the thing!!!
How many members are on this forum?

Denny

 

Committee engines rarely do much; engine designers I know want to do it their way.

At manufacturer's cost? Probably very few unless the builder is doing R&D for them. Delivery is actually more critical than cost. It's hard to get to the front of the line for the best head porters, or crank manufacturers if you need a non-stocked crank (and who doesn't?)

Geography would be a killer if you mean hands-on cooperation.


Approximately 53,393. Now if each one sent in $1.00 as their contribution to the EMC engine, I think a competitive engine could be built by some forum members. Is that what you meant by a community project?

 

Your right, improving VE and DRC will always be primary objectives. But what about burn, you think there’s much improvement to be found?

Predictions, their thinking goes beyond my reasoning.

How’s about cutting the cost, a budget bottom end, cast crank and pistons, production rods, but that wouldn’t make for good advertisement or interesting magazine articles, or would it?

Another thought is big cubic inches, it looks like every time I turn around bores are getting bigger and strokes are getting longer.

Who knows, whatever the direction, it’s not something I can afford to get involved with.