Race Engine Challenge II

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 10709
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing »

There are no final rules, at this time. There are plenty of proposed rules, but they're just that. Proposed.
Greg has a group of people weighing in on these proposed rules, and he will take all these suggestions into account, when he releases the final rules. I'm meeting with a legend in stock car engine building tomorrow, to get his take on the proposed rules. He may have some input that none of us had thought of. I don't know what the final rules will be, but I can tell you, they'll be well thought out.
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs

Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
Jones Cam Designs' HotPass Vendors Forum: viewforum.php?f=44
(704)489-2449
plovett
Expert
Expert
Posts: 871
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:49 pm
Location: Kansas City

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by plovett »

CamKing wrote: Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:02 am
plovett wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:26 pm I think that might be a good thing. A spec spring would show the advantage of smaller CID engines with smaller lighter valve trains. We're so often doing the opposite. I'm not going to say that stupid rhyme about large volume engines.
That's not the point of this competition. It's to showcase the engine builders abilities, and to reward innovation. With a spec spring rule, you'd have 15 engines, all built to the minimum CID, with the lightest valvetrain available. The guy that can spend the most time on the spin-tron, will have a huge advantage. IMO, that would make for a boring competition.
What if it wasn't the normal and boring hp/cid and/or torque/cid format?
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C »

Gregory wrote:
The guiding light for our first contest is an engine for a strong street/strip engine.
The over .700 lift stuff that has been pushed seems a bit excessive for a street/strip competition.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
User avatar
MadBill
Guru
Guru
Posts: 15024
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:41 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by MadBill »

How about a limit of thousandths of valve lift per square root of c.i. of cylinder displacement? 80 thous per √c.i. would allow 0.529" for a 350 c.i. and 0.657" for a 540 c.i... :-k
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognscere causas.

Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C »

MadBill wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:20 pm How about a limit of thousandths of valve lift per square root of c.i. of cylinder displacement? 80 thous per √c.i. would allow 0.529" for a 350 c.i. and 0.657" for a 540 c.i... :-k
What is the norm that builders do on a regular bases for a street/strip engine?

I have an idea for a lifter rule... :D

Hyd Roller only!
Must be a standard travel lifter, minimal travel lifters prohibited! Must be easily disassembled for tech inspection, lifter modification prohibited. oil restriction to lifter or lifter galley is prohibited! oil bleed in lifter or lifter bore prohibited.

The top 3 engines "Will" be torn down for inspection!
Any rules violation will result in disqualification and the competitor and team members will be band from this competition for life!

If the rules do not seem clear please contact... blablabla@blabla.com

You could use a minimum valve weight so that bigger valves are not at a disadvantage to smaller valves.

A max valve lift around .650 seems more in line with a max effort street/strip engine with any kind of life expectancy.

Seems simple or did I miss something again?
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 10709
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing »

GARY C wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:52 pm
Gregory wrote:
The guiding light for our first contest is an engine for a strong street/strip engine.
The over .700 lift stuff that has been pushed seems a bit excessive for a street/strip competition.
I have a bunch of street/strip cams out there with over .700" lift. Some of my customers are running .790" gross lift in their street/strip big blocks.
My thinking is, these engines are supposed to represent the top of the line street/strip engines, not the average. IMO, we want people to push the limits a little, but still be realistic.
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs

Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
Jones Cam Designs' HotPass Vendors Forum: viewforum.php?f=44
(704)489-2449
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C »

CamKing wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:55 am
GARY C wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:52 pm
Gregory wrote:
The guiding light for our first contest is an engine for a strong street/strip engine.
The over .700 lift stuff that has been pushed seems a bit excessive for a street/strip competition.
I have a bunch of street/strip cams out there with over .700" lift. Some of my customers are running .790" gross lift in their street/strip big blocks.
My thinking is, these engines are supposed to represent the top of the line street/strip engines, not the average. IMO, we want people to push the limits a little, but still be realistic.
Dang, I must be getting old. :D
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 10709
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing »

GARY C wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:24 pm Dang, I must be getting old. :D
I wish I was only "Getting" old. :lol:
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs

Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
Jones Cam Designs' HotPass Vendors Forum: viewforum.php?f=44
(704)489-2449
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C »

CamKing wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:48 pm
GARY C wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:24 pm Dang, I must be getting old. :D
I wish I was only "Getting" old. :lol:
At least your aging with the times.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
randy331
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: N.W. MO.

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by randy331 »

GARY C wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:29 am

What is the norm that builders do on a regular bases for a street/strip engine?

I have an idea for a lifter rule... :D

Hyd Roller only!
Must be a standard travel lifter, minimal travel lifters prohibited! Must be easily disassembled for tech inspection, lifter modification prohibited. oil restriction to lifter or lifter galley is prohibited! oil bleed in lifter or lifter bore prohibited.

The top 3 engines "Will" be torn down for inspection!
Any rules violation will result in disqualification and the competitor and team members will be band from this competition for life!

If the rules do not seem clear please contact... blablabla@blabla.com

You could use a minimum valve weight so that bigger valves are not at a disadvantage to smaller valves.

A max valve lift around .650 seems more in line with a max effort street/strip engine with any kind of life expectancy.

Seems simple or did I miss something again?
What's a " standard travel lifter " ?
Rules like that need stated ways of defining " standard travel "

Randy
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C »

randy331 wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:51 pm
GARY C wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:29 am

What is the norm that builders do on a regular bases for a street/strip engine?

I have an idea for a lifter rule... :D

Hyd Roller only!
Must be a standard travel lifter, minimal travel lifters prohibited! Must be easily disassembled for tech inspection, lifter modification prohibited. oil restriction to lifter or lifter galley is prohibited! oil bleed in lifter or lifter bore prohibited.

The top 3 engines "Will" be torn down for inspection!
Any rules violation will result in disqualification and the competitor and team members will be band from this competition for life!

If the rules do not seem clear please contact... blablabla@blabla.com

You could use a minimum valve weight so that bigger valves are not at a disadvantage to smaller valves.

A max valve lift around .650 seems more in line with a max effort street/strip engine with any kind of life expectancy.

Seems simple or did I miss something again?
What's a " standard travel lifter " ?
Rules like that need stated ways of defining " standard travel "

Randy
There are always rules in these competitions that have to be defined and someone to contact to clarify but I think most builders would understand this one fairly easy.
I don't know what the standard is now it used to be around .250 if I recall. That could be determined and written as below based on what decided to be stnd travel.
Hyd Roller only!
Must be a standard travel lifter*, minimal travel lifters prohibited! Must be easily disassembled for tech inspection, lifter modification prohibited. oil restriction to lifter or lifter galley is prohibited! oil bleed in lifter or lifter bore prohibited.
*lifter must maintain at least .200 travel as ran on engine*
If the rules do not seem clear please contact... blablabla@blabla.com
EDIT! But if they are going to be running around .800 lift then I don't think Hyd Roller should be mandated at that lift I think solid roller would be a safer less expensive option for all.
Last edited by GARY C on Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Barry_R
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1232
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Detroit area
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Barry_R »

I have been kinda "watching' this after my initial post just to see what other folks think. Its been pretty interesting and for the most part follows my own feelings. Some of the rules that grew out of the EMC over the years worked really, really well - others simply failed to accomplish the desired results.

I very much like the catalog oil pan rule because the normal viewer/reader/customer can not relate to a 12" deep square box for a pan.

I like the catalog header rule even though it severely limits my options. It eliminates crazy expensive stuff & engines look "real" - same deal.

I like the .904 max lifter diameter because its realistic and simple

Lifters have rollers on the bottom. Flat tappets are an insult to evolution.

I like some kind of net lift rule - I go over .600 on darn near everything - .700 or .750 seems intuitive

I like the open spring pressure rule because its at least somewhat limiting and easy to check

I liked the older EMC intake rules where the outside of a cast intake had to be unmodified but epoxy was OK inside.

The no welding allowed on heads & manifold rules are good. Completely unenforceable but morally correct.

Replacement blocks and heads that share OE architecture are an economical reality in today's market

I like to look at wild intakes. They are on the outside of the engine and you can see them. I think that the readers/viewers like seeing them too. This means single four, dual fours, tunnel rams, independent runners, webers, EFI, stacks, box intakes - - anything that is cast and cool will get attention. Past EMC contests have seen all of these at one time or another - and all have won or placed when competing alongside the others. A sea of single Holleys on Victor intakes seems pretty dull in comparison.

I like EFI because I like the ability to quickly make changes in fuel and timing without leaving my chair. I am old. And fat. And lazy that way. So far - when competing heads up - the carbs and the EFI systems have proven pretty comparable in results. I think the the WOT only and the wide test range RPM reduce any advantage EFI may have in power to the point where a sharp carb guy can keep right in the game if he chooses to.

Over the past dozen years EMC has taught me a lot. It has a level of competitive camaraderie that does not exist anywhere else. It has showcased a degree of creativity and ingenuity that ranges from the subtle to the mind bending - - from "why didn't I do that" to "how does he think up that stuff"? You get to not just learn how to build, but how to work around limitations to find opportunities where it seemed none existed. You also get to learn that a lot of the stuff that everybody knows works - doesn't, and some things that folks insist don't work - works very well. Turns out that engines can not read.

David asked why somebody would enter and not intend to win. I never entered once where I thought I was going to win outright - but there were several times where I felt I was going to be very competitive. Did reasonably well a few times. Got beat up a few times. I was often trying to beat my own past efforts, further my knowledge, and to develop new combinations based on my chosen platform. There are a lot of ways to define the term "win".

Looking forward to seeing the rules.
Survival Motorsports
www.survivalmotorsports.com

WD for Comp, Manley, Blue Thunder, Diamond
Probe, Holley, Clevite, Federal-Mogul, Scat....
CGT
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2063
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 12:29 pm
Location:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CGT »

Warp Speed wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:04 pm Money always wins, be it tight rules or none at all.
Yes mostly. But there are exceptions occasionally.
randy331
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: N.W. MO.

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by randy331 »

Barry_R wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:59 pm I like the .904 max lifter diameter because its realistic and simple
Me too.

Without a rule like this,... the goal will always be, how to make it act like a solid in the engine, but tech legal.

Randy
Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6355
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Walter R. Malik »

Beside the higher cost of really good "big lift" valve springs, I would like to see a .750" gross valve lift rule simply because there are a lot, (a whole bunch of any brand), cam lobe profiles available in the marketplace with around a .440" lobe lift and that is .748" with a rather common 1.7/1 rocker arm ratio.

Requiring "catalog" headers would be OK but, NOT a header which has to fit in a car which originally came with that particular engine ... like the EMC required the last few years. Absolutely ridiculous for the not so common engine brands.
Transplants are very, VERY common in the street/strip crowd.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.
Post Reply