We actually Hijacked the thread about - "Detonation Propensity In Big Cube SBC" - to discuss the EMC, but it is an interseting topic so here it is for all to participate, so if you want to catch up your're going to have to read that thread.

Denny Schmidt

Go To: Rules for 2006: http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng.../0601em_rules/

Every year is different. "OldSStroker"


Won by: 2002 BigJoe sherman 365 SBC
2003 Kaase 470 BBF
2004 Kasse SBF
2005 Autoshop 509 BBC

Short Engine Rules List:

2002 - 365 Small Blocks, Hyd Roller and Flat Tappet, No Compression Limit
2003 - 468 Big Blocks, Flat Tappet Only, No Compression Limit
2004 - 410 Small Blocks, Open Cams, No Compression Limit
2005 - 509 Big Blocks, Opne Cams, No Compression Limit
2006 - 434 Big or Small Block and Open Cams but 10.5:1 Limit Compression

2006 Results: http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...esults_friday/


Other Interesting ENC Winner Builds:

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

Kasse's Pontiac:
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...racing_engine/

Bret and his dad competed in the event and keep up with what goes on I'de kinda like to see them go again and actually win, but it's a money issue - it costs about 50K to do the project and the research. If all of us just donate $1.00 to $5.00 Dollars there should be enough to get the job done regardless of who takes on the task.

Just my .02 Denny Schmidt

 

According to what we have already been discussing it looks like the project has to be approached from an engineering standpoint, simply because of the RPM constraints of 2500 to 6500, with the low end of 2500 to 4000 being the most important.

Therefore taking advantage of the Intake Charge Inertia and the Exhaust's kinetic energy becomes important, along with the port & valve velocitys through the intake. Another concern is creating the best mechanical advantage in the short-block assembly - so we need a Formula for computing the ideal crank angle to rod length vs pressure exerted on the piston during the power stroke.

I had one but it got lost during one of my many moves from one place to another - can one of you engineering guys create one?

Denny Schmidt

 

Thoughts:

*Perhaps someone should look at the torque and hp averages of the higher-placing competitors from the previous EMCs. I'd suggest looking at the averages from say 2500-4500 and separately from 4500-6500. Remember that average torque and average hp are weighed equally in arriving at the magic number. Each Lb-ft @ 2500 = .476 hp, but each Lb-ft @ 6500 = 1.238 hp.

*Perhaps 2500-4000 isn't the MOST important. If folks like playing with numbers, this might be a good place to start. If you search you can find the actual numbers for all the rpms on many of the engines.

*As far as designing an EMC engine on the internet, you'd be giving away all your secrets to the competition. That seems like a very unwise idea to me.

*Like any competition with rules, finding the most restrictive rules and working around them (aka "getting competitive") has good possibilities. The obvious rule (10.5:1 SCR for example) may not be the most restrictive for squeaking out the last Lb-ft or hp.

*The folks who have done well in EMC and many other competitions usually have one central person who has designed the engine, and often has done most of the work on it. I have yet to meet an excellent engine designer that didn't have a substantial ego. Many have difficulty working for someone else.

*The LT1 production engine intake/head was basically designed by one person in GM, but he was constrained by a lot of non-engine people, so he didn't get what he really wanted. That's why we are able to modify an LT1 for more output. I suggest that a committee EMC engine design just isn't the way to go.

My $.02

 

I think I said that it's most important in the 2500-4000 range, but that's only after you get the 4000-6500 range down. The higher half is all wave tuning and getting the cam events right, but the lower half not many things can help that but little details..... I think it's the harder side of the curve to improve and can make or break a motor in this contest.

"*As far as designing an EMC engine on the internet, you'd be giving away all your secrets to the competition. That seems like a very unwise idea to me."

Ditto that.

Well as for the long arm principal

"Another concern is creating the best mechanical advantage in the short-block assembly "

I believe that the reason we have seen the small bores for so many years in the EMC was the detonation and burn. The stroke is just what it takes to get the cubes with the small bore.... what needs to be looked at is the total combination to get the most amount of postitives with the least amount of negatives.

"we need a Formula for computing the ideal crank angle to rod length vs pressure exerted on the piston during the power stroke."

The other side of this is, what is our burn going to look like? If we have faster burn and it's taking place later on in the cycle then the rod length change can be needed.

I'm still looking at the compression ratio rule as something that can use either a long or short rod.... Maybe we need more dwell, but if we speed up the burn then you don't want too much or you have more negative work and more problems getting the piston hanging around at TDC too long.

Bret

 

So whats your ideas on how to win????

Thinking out of the box is the only way to win this deal IMHO.

Thanks for the compliments BTW........

Now if they finally allow a LS motor in we have a block

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showpo...73&postcount=1

Bret

 

Not so sure I want to see the price-tag. Not because it is probably more than I can spend, but in the off chance that it is not.

 

I don't know which posters on this forum you consider know what's going on inside an engine, nor do I care, but every once in a while there are folks on this forum, (and especially on some other forums) who actually approach engine design from a scientific or why point of view. All you have to do is sort them out from the other 53000 registered folks.

You need to hang out with a different group of folks. You might consider the PRI show in Orlando in December which attracts quite a few "why" guys. All you have to do is sort them out from the other 45000 attendees!

Of course there is something to be said for "getting the desired effect" aka winning, even with a crude understanding of how the world (engine) works. I strongly agree that knowing why and how things work and using that to build a better mousetrap gives one the edge.

FWIW, there are a couple of "group think" teams in Formula 1 racing, who spend the most money, but they are not winning. Curious.

 

Ferrari:F1 as Yankees:MLB

 

Actually no, not Ferrari. Think Yen.

 

Yeah I guess ferrari wins too much for their efforts to be entirely in vain. But they don't win as much as they used too (like the yankees ).

Does Honda really spend that much money? I always thought Ferrari had everyone beat in that area.

I guess it just goes to show you that money isn't everything (it really helps though).

Jeremy

Edit: On second thought maybe you were talking about Toyota? I think they spend a considerable sum of money on their F1 program. Since they joined the ranks of NASCAR I hardly consider them to be a Japanese carmaker anymore.

 

LOL. Ask Toyota if THEY consider themselves a Japanese carmaker. Rumor has it that they might be the biggest spenders in F1, but that's hard to confirm. They haven't done a lot of winning, which is easy to confirm.

 

You know maybe it's just me but I wouldn't mind donating money to either a very small group or even just one person if said group/individual were do compete in the name of CamaroZ28.com.

And I think if the idea were marketed properly their would be many people who would be willing to donate small amounts to further the cause. Combine that with our supporting vendors assisting in the procurement of parts and perhaps even assisting with certain machining processes and I think a good bit of financial backing could be arranged.

So if we can all agree that a large group would accomplish very little then perhaps we can nominate individuals who may be interested in representing our site and have a vote to see who gets the honor.

Just my highly uneducated $.02 though.

Jeremy

 

I would have to agree with the -"Let's not design the thing on this site" or any other site for that matter - whew - I almost blew it there!!!

I think I mentiond you names because I thought you guys were the most qualified, simply because you had already done it.

Secondly I tend to agree with One Person haveing the final decision, however there is a big "but" within that. Because there are so many choices to be made that a serious testing progam would have to go on. Therefore the person just can't arbitrarely throw out some good ideas just because they didn't think of it themself (S).

You see Bret you are already thinking outside of the box in terms of fast/slow burn rate's. I'm sure you are only touching the tip of the iceburg with your knowledge on that subject - but there is that "Research" thing again and how many heads do we have to go through to find that perfect combination.

Another thing to consider is the air-velocity and low RPM and if we can get that in its proper location we will have more leway with cam selections. At one time I had a dyno sheet where we found 21 HP in the exhaust system. Unfortunately it was an oval-track car with 180 pipes going out the right side of the car, not your everyday passanger car headers. But that does not mean that the principles that created that are nil.

Again we don't want to give the barn away just for the sake of an article!!!!!

Denny

 

I for one would donate to the effort. I also agree that one person would have to be incharge. To many cooks, well you know the story. I also think if we got one in a hundred to donate from this site we would be doing good.

 

Good dialogue going on now.

One person can't do every thing on an engine, so part of the plan has to be knowing the right person(s)/shop(s) to do the block, or to port the heads and manifold for example. Those guys that specialize and excell at those particular disciplines need to be gotten on-board, and paid for their expertise.

One of the things that may have not have been intentionally put in the concept of the EMC, is time. It's not just design time or dyno development time, but parts procurement time that gets critical. Some parts might need to be built that are very special, and getting to the front of the line in the shop that can make the parts can be a challenge.

It might be possible to have a CamaroZ28.com entry, but what if the best engine for the rules is a Ford? Would you run a Ford in your 'maro?

Here's a wild OOTB (out of the box) idea:

The engine is raffled off to the people who contribute money to the build. For example, if $5 or $50 gets you one ticket, the more you buy, the better your chances to win the engine. Let's say the drawing is before the runoffs, and the raflle winner gets a trip to the runoffs to watch "his or her" engine compete.

Just running things up the ol' flagpole to see if anyone salutes.

Comments?