Popup vs Flat Top?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Longer rods give more dwell time so you can fill a cylinder more. Great on slow burning fuels like diesel & nitromethane and of course, even helps gas & alcohol engines. Rod angle can be an issue in a V type block as too long a rod will try to push out of the side. I believe some very high (12,000+ rpm) short stroke V8's actually used a short rod.
 
Longer rods give more dwell time so you can fill a cylinder more. Great on slow burning fuels like diesel & nitromethane and of course, even helps gas & alcohol engines. Rod angle can be an issue in a V type block as too long a rod will try to push out of the side. I believe some very high (12,000+ rpm) short stroke V8's actually used a short rod.

You have that reversed. Longer rods reduce the thrust loads on the piston skirt and cylinder.

rods1c.jpg
 
Any way you slice it, the whole purpose to cutting a chamber or turning a pop-up is to increase compression.

A cut chamber will actually increase the compression ratio, by reducing the volume of the chamber. It's a cleaner, and in my eyes, a more efficient way of increasing compression. I can honestly think of no drawbacks to it....

On the other hand, a pop-up piston will increase compression. It does so by pushing the piston up further into the chamber, or, displacing the area inside the chamber with the piston. Volume above the piston at TDC is reduced, but in a much more crude way. Volume in the chamber is somewhat displaced more so than reduced. There are flow disruptions across the crown, that's a fact. Piston weight is reduced which is a good thing

I've personally built several saws done both ways. Ive built strong running pop-up saws, and strong running cut chamber saws.

I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that a pop-up saw can't be fast, or can't make power, but I strongly feel that there is a better way. Yea, it takes more time, care, skill and attention to detail to cut a squish band, but the end result is a cleaner, and in my eyes, more efficient way to reach a common goal, an increased compression ratio.

Brad, I bust your balls pretty bad about not cutting chambers. If I come off as a prick about it, I apologize.

The only thing that bothers is your unwillingness to even venture out, to give cutting a squish band a try, before saying there is no benefit. Nothing would tickle me more than to see you just try cutting one for yourself. If you honestly see no need, I guess I should just leave it be....

It shouldn't be about your build style vs Randy's, or mine or anybody's.

But we should all try to be better at what we do. I personally feel if im not going foreword, I'm going backwards...

I'll leave you be from now on, just wanted to say my piece...
:cheers:
 
A now defunct Italian Motorcycle company, VOR built a long rod 400/450503/530 single back in the late 90's early 2000 era. In 2002 Criss Carr and Kenny Tolbert put one of the 450's stock on their dyno and got 57hp at the rear wheel first time out.. with no changes. Were pushing 60 by the time Kenny got to tune on it a little. Won a couple of those "pro single" flat track races going away.... The Honda's of the time were lucky to get 52hp on the same dyno and that was after being built to the hilt. AMA stepped in and before the Springfield mile had basically made that motor illegal because VOR didn't have enough USA sales to meet the rules... then the companies USA operations manager died of cancer. The company put its assets into giving that young fellow a fighting chance and folded soon after.

Two characteristics of that motor in addition to its power were how little vibration it had and how easy it could deal with 10,000-12500 continuous RPM's.
 
My 289 Ford used to eat 350s' fer lunch. 327's, had to watch them and a big block would sometimes get me on the outer end...

Stock for stock? Depends on the application really. A 289 was a screamer so it would put a hurt'n on a 350 in anything lighter weight. Didn't quite understand what you said about the 327 but if you meant you had to watch them cause they'd rag doll your 289 then yes, I agree :D anybody who doesn't like a performance 350 has never run a properly built performance 350. The 400 was an absolute POS with it's siamesed cylinders. Didn't want those things sitting in one place piss revving with smoke all over for long :D. Big blocks are to heavy for nothing. I'm a small block guy myself. I had a 91 Chevy all built to the tits and jacked up. Had a 502 and turbo 400 in it when I got it and swapped it out for an LS1 with multi port and a getrag. Getrag started humming quick so later swapped in a NVG 4500. The LS1 and the NV didn't really get along as far as drivability but once used to it it got better. In the 502's defense it was thrashed and had chunks of piston skirt in the oil pan but ran great still LOL. Probably would have left it if the engine turned out good.
 
Stock for stock? Depends on the application really. A 289 was a screamer so it would put a hurt'n on a 350 in anything lighter weight. Didn't quite understand what you said about the 327 but if you meant you had to watch them cause they'd rag doll your 289 then yes, I agree :D
This was in the late 70s'. I was young & dumb, but got lucky when I built that 289! Yes, I lost to a couple 327s', But not bad & not every time... Didn't take much to get a 327 to run right! ;)
 
This was in the late 70s'. I was young & dumb, but got lucky when I built that 289! Yes, I lost to a couple 327s', But not bad & not every time... Didn't take much to get a 327 to run right! ;)

at least you have done it and know something. sick and tired of the middle age men who never did anything their whole life but still argue like they know. middle age men just hate knowing younger guys have achieved more then them by age 20 LOL they always pull the yer young so think you know everything BS. piss me right off. if i say i know something i promise you i know that thing. i don't pretend to know everything. somehow it seems all the old guys pretend to know everything once they realize a young guy knows way way more then him. the funniest thing is making an old man who "knows it all" look like a fool in front of a bunch of people with facts he didn't know but claimed he knew :)
 
C'mon guys everyone knows MOPAR RULES:rock:ever ran a built 340?

Oh yeah.

71 Demon.......340 with X heads, 4 speed, 456 gears.

That was before I was smart enough to know what subframe connectors were.

Cracked the windshield off the line......doors got impossible to shut...... :laugh:
 
Stock for stock? Depends on the application really. A 289 was a screamer so it would put a hurt'n on a 350 in anything lighter weight. Didn't quite understand what you said about the 327 but if you meant you had to watch them cause they'd rag doll your 289 then yes, I agree :D anybody who doesn't like a performance 350 has never run a properly built performance 350. The 400 was an absolute POS with it's siamesed cylinders. Didn't want those things sitting in one place piss revving with smoke all over for long :D. Big blocks are to heavy for nothing. I'm a small block guy myself. I had a 91 Chevy all built to the tits and jacked up. Had a 502 and turbo 400 in it when I got it and swapped it out for an LS1 with multi port and a getrag. Getrag started humming quick so later swapped in a NVG 4500. The LS1 and the NV didn't really get along as far as drivability but once used to it it got better. In the 502's defense it was thrashed and had chunks of piston skirt in the oil pan but ran great still LOL. Probably would have left it if the engine turned out good.

Wanna race ? ;) this moda has pop ups by the way
roadrunner 012.jpg
 
Oh yeah.

71 Demon.......340 with X heads, 4 speed, 456 gears.

That was before I was smart enough to know what subframe connectors were.

Cracked the windshield off the line......doors got impossible to shut...... :laugh:

What else was done to it? No way a little 340 would do that with what you describe unless the subframe connectors really are that weak in the mopar cars. Everything firewall back is behind the sub frame too so it would be more from uni twist then a weak sub frame. Yer making it sound like the car had a supercharged 440 LOL. Yes, I'm trolling you today :D
 
LS you say? How about a built 6.0?

IMG_3638-L.jpg


Dished pistons?:surprised3:
IMG_3615-L.jpg


IMG_3684-L.jpg


Yes, I ported the LS6 heads myself :)
IMG_3476-L.jpg


IMG_3486-L.jpg


Custom ground cam
IMG_3408_DPP-L.jpg


Billet Yank converter
IMG_3296-L.jpg


Going in
IMG_3752-L.jpg


My truck
IMG_0036-L.jpg




Are we far enough derailed yet?

Like like like!!!!!!! I have to leave now. I'm trying to not go into debt from these damn things again. Next engine I build will be a diesel and it will be after I'm rich from not building engine anymore :D
 

Latest posts

Back
Top