Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test. - Page 3 - Chevelle Tech
Performance Our High Performance area

 26Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
post #31 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 9th, 18, 4:07 PM
Senior Tech Team
Bart
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,063
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justkyle View Post
I guess until you guys watch the video of the dyno runs, it wonít make sense. All of them were surprised with the torque/hp curve and how the single plane out performed the dual plane with the same cam/heads and carb. From what they were saying, it had a lot to do with the AFR heads.

I guess, what Iím getting at is, you canít compare an engine that you drove 20 years ago with the engine combo they used for this test. This is a Ford 351, with current AFR 195ís, a Holley 750 xp, and a Comp cams XE282 cam and a jetting change and the Vic jr had a better curve everywhere over 3500. Below 3500, there wasnít a 100 hp/tq difference.

When it comes out for free in a couple weeks, watch the video.
I don't doubt what you are saying at all.. All I am saying is, (and just as you stated) "All of them were surprised". Unless you are building that exact engine with the same parts, same machine work done by the same person etc, you may not get the same results they got. At the end of the day, you just have to build it the way you want it, doesn't matter what any of us think. As long as it does what you want, I say go for it.

There's nothing wrong with being stupid as long as you know you're stupid, it's when you're stupid and don't know it that you become dangerous.
Bart_Swisher is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 9th, 18, 5:58 PM
Gold Member
Gene
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 14,430
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

The quote shared by Kyle seems a fundamental fluid dynamics system....math. mr 4 speed's logic is like using an integration under the curve and then weighing or constraining for real time stuff, like powertrains, converter, atmosphere, etc. I wouldnt doubt that a true hi-vel head can provide signal strength near a 180 divided with an open plenum. Combine that with a modern "intense" cam which shows better velocities....and the system may not miss the higher velocities of the 180 at all. Put lazy heads, or too big heads back on, and it'll show different.

Back in the day, I wish I ran the Z/28 and open plenum Holley at the track. The Holley always felt better at WOT, but in terms of azz dyno...? In that particular system....it was truly a draw... ( btw, you cant bolt on the same carb from a dual to single w/o recalibrating)

Gene
ACES 3112/Team Chevelle Gold #62
Be big, be a 'builder'!
427L88 is offline  
post #33 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 9th, 18, 11:13 PM
Senior Tech Team
Chris
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lincoln pk NJ
Posts: 3,448
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

You will love the AFR heads. They work very very well.
Ialone likes this.

73 nova,3515#(all steel)Pump gas!(91octane)406ci N/A, best 1/4,1.45 '60,[email protected],10.6 @ 122.38, short shifting,NO tuning!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
WHT/73 is offline  
 
post #34 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 10th, 18, 5:19 PM
Tech Team
Andy
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Lancaster PA
Posts: 175
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pockets View Post
Remember that a dyno test is ran at full throttle. Run that engine in a car at varying throttle openings and rates of acceleration and see what happens.
While I agree with your statement, nor to be argumentative, who is worrying about what HP and Torgue numbers you have @ 1/4 throttle below 3,500 RPM? Yes we all drive there, but at that point if more power is needed, we dip into the throttle a bit more.

Just pointing out, no one measures or really cares that his car only has 190 HP at 1/2 throttle at 3,200 rpms.....

Now drive-ability can be a factor and we would agree that should make a difference. So my overall goal is usually the most power under the curve- most overall power, over most top numbers.

As to this test, I think it's a good trade off in my mind, this engine, I'll take the Vic Jr results
Ialone is offline  
post #35 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 10th, 18, 8:26 PM
Tech Team
Kerry
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Lloydminster, Alberta
Posts: 884
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ialone View Post
While I agree with your statement, nor to be argumentative, who is worrying about what HP and Torgue numbers you have @ 1/4 throttle below 3,500 RPM? Yes we all drive there, but at that point if more power is needed, we dip into the throttle a bit more.

Just pointing out, no one measures or really cares that his car only has 190 HP at 1/2 throttle at 3,200 rpms.....

Now drive-ability can be a factor and we would agree that should make a difference. So my overall goal is usually the most power under the curve- most overall power, over most top numbers.

As to this test, I think it's a good trade off in my mind, this engine, I'll take the Vic Jr results
What I should have said was see what the differences are in throttle response, acceleration at light throttle, driveability, fuel useage, engine smoothness.
Ialone likes this.
pockets is offline  
post #36 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 10th, 18, 10:14 PM
Senior Tech Team
Chris
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lincoln pk NJ
Posts: 3,448
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

89 5.7 tpi engine , hurricane, 1" open spacer, fitech.
Drives pretty good actually. Even in lock up!
Good converter and gears help.
Idles at 650 in gear, 19.6" of vacuum timing locked at 34*

73 nova,3515#(all steel)Pump gas!(91octane)406ci N/A, best 1/4,1.45 '60,[email protected],10.6 @ 122.38, short shifting,NO tuning!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
WHT/73 is offline  
post #37 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 10th, 18, 11:02 PM
Tech Team
Andy
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Lancaster PA
Posts: 175
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

One thing that I have heard could be an issue that would affect the result of such tests...... Throttle body type EFI's can have issues with tuning on a dual plane intake, as opposed to a single plane..... I have heard many people who have come across this issue.
Ialone is offline  
post #38 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 11th, 18, 12:47 PM
Senior Tech Team
Steve
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,445
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ialone View Post
One thing that I have heard could be an issue that would affect the result of such tests...... Throttle body type EFI's can have issues with tuning on a dual plane intake, as opposed to a single plane..... I have heard many people who have come across this issue.
Not that it matters, but my experience using the two intake types on the same Gen 1 retrofit EFI powered engine was the reverse. The single plane took more thinking to tune. My motor doesn't make a lot of vacuum with either type intake. I had to add just a little fuel for the dual plane to make power, had to take fuel out in multiple places with the single plane with wet TBI. I had to do the same lean tune with the single plane and port injection to make good power for a driver. Every motor is different.
WHT/73 likes this.

'65 Chev El Camino
350/400+HP, 700R4
Edelbrock Pro-Flo 4 MPFI
Global West, QA1, Viking, Wilwood, UMI, ProForged
'68 P-11 Norton
Schwany is offline  
post #39 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 18th, 18, 1:22 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Kim
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: waayyy eastern Long Island
Posts: 566
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

I'm trying to decide on a Vic Jr. vs. Hurricane, vs.Dart dual plane for a 434 w/ 10.5, 220 AFR, 236/ [email protected] 520/540 lift hyd roller. I'm going to try Sniper and see how it goes. This is going to have a TKO600 in back of it and I am running 93 pump with an occasional tank of 112. I'm lacking hood clearance, so the Hurricane or Victor Sr. will be real tight. After reading for days, my eyes hurt. I really like the idea of getting the Sniper to cooperate, just a little leary. Any input is appreciated.
shelteredv is offline  
post #40 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 18th, 18, 11:42 PM
Tech Team
Tommy
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Denville, NJ
Posts: 126
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justkyle View Post
It seems to me that it would be a comparable Test. Cubic inches is cubic inches, with a similar size cam,heads and intake on a 350 Chevy versus a 351 ford would basically make the same horsepower
No disrespect intended, but that is an invalid comparison. The head designs are not comparable and all else being as close to the same as possible, most likely the 351 will make less power the the 350.

Tommy
LS6 Tommy is offline  
post #41 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 20th, 18, 11:51 AM
Senior Tech Team
Steve
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,445
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shelteredv View Post
I'm trying to decide on a Vic Jr. vs. Hurricane, vs.Dart dual plane for a 434 w/ 10.5, 220 AFR, 236/ [email protected] 520/540 lift hyd roller. I'm going to try Sniper and see how it goes. This is going to have a TKO600 in back of it and I am running 93 pump with an occasional tank of 112. I'm lacking hood clearance, so the Hurricane or Victor Sr. will be real tight. After reading for days, my eyes hurt. I really like the idea of getting the Sniper to cooperate, just a little leary. Any input is appreciated.
Use whatever is on it now? I've used the DART SHP intake on a smaller SBC with a wet throttle body. It worked well and was fun on a street car. The single plane I used with a wet throttle body was mellower torque wise (lower low RPM torque) on a street car, but worked well foot on the floor from a dead stop where a low first gear would get the motor up in the useful power band before a second gear shift. Again street car performance.

'65 Chev El Camino
350/400+HP, 700R4
Edelbrock Pro-Flo 4 MPFI
Global West, QA1, Viking, Wilwood, UMI, ProForged
'68 P-11 Norton
Schwany is offline  
post #42 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 20th, 18, 12:07 PM Thread Starter
Lifetime Premium Member
Kyle
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,835
Send a message via Yahoo to justkyle
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LS6 Tommy View Post
No disrespect intended, but that is an invalid comparison. The head designs are not comparable and all else being as close to the same as possible, most likely the 351 will make less power the the 350.

Tommy
They did a comparison on that too. 351 vs 350. Same cylinder head runner size AFR's, same duration cam, same manifold, carb, etc. back to back dyno runs and both engines average hp/tq were within 1%. The ford actually made a little more torque because of the slightly longer stroke.

Kyle

1970 malibu race car (unfinished)
1968 Malibu, ZZ4, M-21 4 speed, 9" ford 3.73:1 Detroit truetrac posi



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


justkyle is offline  
post #43 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 21st, 18, 7:33 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Kim
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: waayyy eastern Long Island
Posts: 566
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwany View Post
Use whatever is on it now? I've used the DART SHP intake on a smaller SBC with a wet throttle body. It worked well and was fun on a street car. The single plane I used with a wet throttle body was mellower torque wise (lower low RPM torque) on a street car, but worked well foot on the floor from a dead stop where a low first gear would get the motor up in the useful power band before a second gear shift. Again street car performance.
Thanks Steve, I'm building it now and that's why the question, the options are wide open because I haven't bought anything yet.. I should prolly start my own thread on it because I have a few other questions I'd like to put to the knowledge base here, and I don't want to jack this thread any worse than I have
shelteredv is offline  
post #44 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 21st, 18, 9:14 PM
Senior Tech Team
Steve
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,445
Garage
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shelteredv View Post
Thanks Steve, I'm building it now and that's why the question, the options are wide open because I haven't bought anything yet.. I should prolly start my own thread on it because I have a few other questions I'd like to put to the knowledge base here, and I don't want to jack this thread any worse than I have
Speaking of high jacking...

You building the 434 with a Dart block and putting it in the 67 El Camino?

I'll have to keep an eye on that if you are. Sounds like fun

'65 Chev El Camino
350/400+HP, 700R4
Edelbrock Pro-Flo 4 MPFI
Global West, QA1, Viking, Wilwood, UMI, ProForged
'68 P-11 Norton
Schwany is offline  
post #45 of 53 (permalink) Old Apr 21st, 18, 10:13 PM
Senior Tech Team
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 10,060
Re: Engine masters single plane vs dual plane dyno test.

Has anyone else noticed that none of the professional engine builders have weighed in on this thread.

Steve R
Steve R is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chevelle Tech forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address. Note, you will be sent a confirmation request to this address.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Old Thread Warning
This Thread is more than 597 days old. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
If you still feel it is necessary to make a new reply, you can still do so though.

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome