|
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 485
|
I sent my stock cam off and had it reground to a L-100 by Dave Generous at Cam Techniques. I have Lincoln Zephyr springs which show about 55 lbs. at 2.125", 65 lbs at 2.100", and 85 lbs at 2.00". What pressure should I shoot for? It's a 265 cu. in., 0.060" over 59AB with a 4" Merc crank, balanced, forged 3 ring pistons, about 0.035" head clearance to the Edelbrock heads, with dual strombergs, 2500 lb. car with 3.78s and a Columbia. I'm not positive, but I'm thinking compression is going to wind up at 8 1/2 to 1 or so? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: ManchVegas, New Hampshah
Posts: 923
|
If you have access to Ol' Rons book "Nostalgia" take a look at pages 26 & 27. He recommends 50 lbs seat pressure for stock springs with a mild cam. Should be good to 4500 RPM and minimize cam wear. Maybe he will jump in on this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rising Sun, Maryland
Posts: 3,857
|
Following Ol' Ron advice in his book is good advice from Chuck. I used the L-100 in the last 59 engine that I built and wound up using LZ springs which I believe Ol' Ron and some of our other engine building gurus here advised me would be okay as well.
__________________
John “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” ― Henry Ford |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chester Vt
Posts: 2,504
|
Thanks Bill
I din't care what spring you use as long as it gives 50-55 lbs on the seat at the INSTALLED HEIGHT. This you have to measure. Yes the Lincoln springs will probably work. Remember if you're using chevy valves, They are longer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 485
|
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: new zealand
Posts: 802
|
is 0.035 enough piston to head clearance
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 485
|
That brings up a whole 'nother topic!
I'd rather it be a little more, but that's what it is after all machine work done and 'Ol Ron says he runs that in one of his engines. I really don't want to remachine the dome on the pistons and these are the thickest head gaskets I could find. The 0.035" measurement is taken in the tightest spot. I'm running new Scat rods which shouldn't stretch and I only measure 0.010" piston rock, so I'm hoping I'll be good. I guess I'll let you know! Last edited by Randy; 03-03-2012 at 04:24 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chester Vt
Posts: 2,504
|
I like the idea of the fact you're using "H" beam rods. You have now entered the a small group of experimenters that try things just to better and gain knowledge of what works and what doesn't. Remember we learn by out mistakes.
We use .o40-,045" for street engines to improve combustion chamber turbulence. This allows a leaner mixture and more ignition advance, which gives better fuel mileage. Welcome and good luck. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 485
|
Now you're making me nervous!
I've got 0.040-0.045" in spots, just 0.035" in the tightest spot that I found with clay and tinfoil. I was going to use stock rods but the ones I had were worn out and the cost my machine shop quoted to rebuild them made the H-beams look worth the money. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chester Vt
Posts: 2,504
|
Good plan, .035" is what SBC use and they turn up a hell of allot more than any flathead.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|