4500 Dominator bolts on now, plenty of room on these Edelbrock 4150 Victor Junior intakes.

Does the car weigh the same as when it ran the 4.66 best? I may have missed that if you said if so I’m thinking a 4.60 flat maybe a .59 if car lost weight overall those numbers would change. Just what I’ve experienced, you are at the point performance wise that 50 hp at the crank has a much smaller effect than if the car was much slower.

quote:

There are people out there believe it or not, who can look the entire deal, difference in horsepower,torque and the changes I made in the rearend, transmission, and tell us what it's gonna be dial'd regularly.

I find these people interesting as can be, because they're smart, experienced and right within a couple hundredths.

Why aren't you out asking them all these questions then?

quote:

Originally posted by Wooley:
Does the car weigh the same as when it ran the 4.66 best? I may have missed that if you said if so I’m thinking a 4.60 flat maybe a .59 if car lost weight overall those numbers would change. Just what I’ve experienced, you are at the point performance wise that 50 hp at the crank has a much smaller effect than if the car was much slower.

Yeah, same weight. They've got another Ray Miller dragster identical with a 598, same Big Brodie heads, aluminum tall deck, 100 lb driver, makes a hair less horsepower now, than the new 565 I just did. I think it has been 4.60 or 4.61 best.

From what I understand the 598 was typically always 5 - 6 -7 hundredths faster than the 565 before.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mike Rietow,

quote:

Originally posted by imakehp:

quote:

There are people out there believe it or not, who can look the entire deal, difference in horsepower,torque and the changes I made in the rearend, transmission, and tell us what it's gonna be dial'd regularly.

I find these people interesting as can be, because they're smart, experienced and right within a couple hundredths.

Why aren't you out asking them all these questions then?

It's pretty simple, it'll dip in the 4.50's. Soon as I look at the data of the converter behind the previous 565, I'll let you know when.

6600 stall, shift 7300 = 4.50's crossing 7300 converter slipping 15%.

Mike is 15% slippage good?

quote:

Originally posted by Footloose:
Mike is 15% slippage good?

Apparently it is 1/8 mile, it was 17-18% before changes.

There's probably 2% - 3% allowance for error in there, because of exact tire growth is unknown to the equation, without data. I have not seen the data.

I guessed the tire is 36" at the stripe.

As long as it made the same torque, and dont run out of fuel with that single alky carb, it should pick up .03 is my guess.

quote:

Originally posted by 329L:
As long as it made the same torque, and dont run out of fuel with that single alky carb, it should pick up .03 is my guess.

Something like that I agree, in that neighborhood.

Another variable is comparing HP from two different engine combo's, on two different dyno's.

We have a tight dyno, meaning accurate.

We look forward to comparing ours to theirs, not for the purpose of ridicule, but info/data/verification.

With old technology Big Brodie cylinder heads, there's no telling how much more torque it'll make on methanol in the car. You know it's not an efficient engine by the relatively weak cylinder head.

I really just wanted to break it in on gasoline and beat on it a little on the dyno before putting it in the car.

It ran flawlessly though, made 979 off the trailer, not a single leak of oil.

I know how to seal these oil pans now, with easy cleanup when they have to come off too.

I'd have been satisfied with around 950 hp, or even a little less.

What camshaft is in this 565? Photo of the cam card would be great.


Thanks