Well for all those who say hydraulic cams dont make power in big motors we just finished dynoing customers engine specs are as follows

454 std bore 4.25"
4.0" steel crank .020 under
4 bolt block stock main bolts
trw 9.89 to 1 comp forged piston
b@b oil pan melling stock psi oil pump
#138 oval ports open chamber
2.19 int 1.81 exh ferrea valves
bowl work w/ short side blended
290cfm int 200 cfm exh @600"
comp cam 230-236 @050 hyd 550 lift
110 lobe center 108 centerline cat roller tip 1.7 rockers
eddy air gap intake 750 proform dp carb
80 squared jets
4 sizes bigger idle air bleeds stock hi bleeds
mallory ign
2 inch k/n air cleaner with k/n top

in denver@7800ft density altitude
made 456hp@5600rpm w/ 513ft lbs @4600rpm
not bad for a hyd w big heavy valve train :hurray:
id hope with a piston not made of lead(lol) with more compression and same cam with a victor jr and maybe a 950 hp or so it would be in the 500-510 range and still pass emissions:clonk:

Are those corrected #s or at 7800DA?

those are @7800 ft correcetd were about 90 hp more and 80 ft lbs

Sounds impressive for a stock 454 when compared to a stock 383 stroker with similuar cam that made 456 hp and 488 tq at 5400.. Guess what I am coming away with is the larger motors dont need to pull 6k to make all the hp my little motors make. Looking at going 383 but find that small cams are better for these. I guess I also have to take in account your altitude compared with 3000 ft less. Still no pull like a bbc pull.

Plus another thing you have to consider that is huge...cylinder heads. Look at them flow numbers. Those numbers(at least the peak numbers he gave) are representative of some of the best larger port 23 degree small block heads out there. However, by big block standards, they are a little on the weak side. A lot of your general big chevy aftermarkets are showing 315cfm or better as is. Some of the better ones like the Race Rites spit out 345ish...and some of the larger(but still plenty streetable) AFR deals are spitting out numbers around 380ish! Big blocks definitely have a cylinder head advantage.

Was that dynod on a DTS or superflow?

Randy

it was a superflow 901 dyno

Sure, a hydraulic cam is great if you don't plan on taking a BBC above 6,000 RPM. But if you wan't to make power above 6,000 RPM, a solid cam will quickly become a necessity. Typically, a BBC will fall on it's face at around 6,500 RPM with a hydraulic cam. Especially if it's using a 2.30" intake valve.

Raymond

Raymond, why would you say a BB will fall on its face at 6500 if running a 2.30 intake valve?

Bigger valves tend to be better for higher lift cams and higher lift cams tend to be used for higher RPM.

Granted the weight of big valves can be an issue, but the proper valve springs should take care of that.

NER Perf,..I love these budget builds using readily available and simple parts. Plus this engine would have mega throttle response, pull 13-14 inches of vacuum at idle (good for pwr brakes), and live forever.

Two quick questions,..by "squared jets, I guess you mean 80's on all four corners,..but if you have a power valve on the primary side, seems you'd jet the secondaries a bit more.

Secondly, what sized header tubes?

there was no power valves used and timing was 38 total (altitude sucks) 2 inch headers (68 camaro chassis)im building a new motor for myself its a
454 030 over
wiseco 46 cc domes
plasma moly file fit ring
028"top 031" sec ring gaps(for nos)
7/16" rods polished beams balance pads mostly removed
stock crank 010"undersize cut for large chamfer bearings
fed mogul race bearings coated
2 bolt block drilled for 4 bolt mains
arp main bolts
balanced and block deburred honed w torque plates oil restictors insatlled
b@b oil pan w integral windage tray and scraper
melling hi vol pump
oval ports 049s 2.25 int 1.88 exh 11/32 stem ferrea valves
ported int exh heads not flowed yet but thinkin 310-315@600 range
custom valve job bronze guides titanium retainers
k-motion springs and locks
600 lift @valve solid roller 246@050"108 lobe sep angle
ported eddy victor jr major plenum and deep runner work
hvh super sucker
950 hp carb
2 inch hooker header
goin in 3000 pd car w driver w 373 gr and tight 8in ati converter
any horse power guesses/ et?

Sure, a hydraulic cam is great if you don't plan on taking a BBC above 6,000 RPM. But if you wan't to make power above 6,000 RPM, a solid cam will quickly become a necessity. Typically, a BBC will fall on it's face at around 6,500 RPM with a hydraulic cam. Especially if it's using a 2.30" intake valve.

Raymond

I`m not sure if you`re saying that 6000 or 6500 RPM is the limit for a BBC hyd.

But..6500 RPM is not bad at all for a hyd cam regardless.

I`d say 90% of everyone here rarely goes over 6500 RPM be it solid OR hyd.

The lifter has alot to do with it.
Rhoades claims their HYDRAULIC lifters will go 9000 RPM!

Raymond, why would you say a BB will fall on its face at 6500 if running a 2.30 intake valve?

Bigger valves tend to be better for higher lift cams and higher lift cams tend to be used for higher RPM.
With a "hydraulic lifter", the bigger, heavier valves add to the high RPM problems. It's the weight of these bigger valves, and the stiff springs needed to close them that causes the problem.

Granted the weight of big valves can be an issue, but the proper valve springs should take care of that.

The correct valve spring takes care of shutting the valve, but doesn't help a hydraulic lifter to operate properly at high RPM.

I just read Greg's post below. Sorry about the confusion. I should have worded my post a little better. My fault. :clonk:

Raymond

Just to chime in for a second. I think Eric probably took your comment the same way I did. As soon as I saw mention of a 2.30 valve not being good for higher rpm useage.....I forgot about any type of lifter all together(didnt even consider lifters) and just wondered what you meant about larger valves being poor for higher revs(if you look at it as a blanket statement than you probably see what I mean).

But, I do agree with both of you on this now that its been explained. Yes, bigger valves(in the right application) definitely have the potential for more power/rpm. At the same time, larger means the potential for additional weight and you just may need better springs to control this weight. And....that can definitely be tough on a hydro lifter(which, lifter type in relation to spring pressure is the part that at least I overlooked all together). So, I do agree with you on that.

Anyways, even though I would bet someone has done it with big valves, big revs, and hydro lifters.....I doubt many. It sounds like too much work for me, trying to lighten up everything and spec just the right lobes/springs.....and keep your fingeres crossed. You figure, if youve got a serious enough motor that it can actually make good use of a 2.30 valve, youve probably long since passed up the idea of any kind of hydraulic cam anyways hehe. Just wanted to say good point on the big valves and big springs WITH hydro lifters. It is a harder game to play and solids of any kind are a better idea with a serious valvetrain and big revs.

I`m not sure if you`re saying that 6000 or 6500 RPM is the limit for a BBC hyd.

But..6500 RPM is not bad at all for a hyd cam regardless.

I`d say 90% of everyone here rarely goes over 6500 RPM be it solid OR hyd.

The lifter has alot to do with it.
Rhoades claims their HYDRAULIC lifters will go 9000 RPM!
Again, sorry for the confusion guys. I should have worded my original post a little better.

I meant that 6,500 (or somewhere there about) is typically the limit for a hydraulic lifter in a BBC. I guess you could say that 6,000 to 6,500 is the "grey" area when deciding weather or not to step up to a solid lifter and cam. I think it's fair to say that a solid cam is needed after about 6,500.

Gotcha :beers: