Irish69427

This was my thinking too and I think this is what Wilson manifolds would do to it. Got to open it up and make it move some serious air. Otherwise all those cubes, cam and heads won't get it done. I'll see wat 632C2 has to say and what he is up to with his.

ajrothm

BTW Drag radials are run what ya brung...... I drove 90 miles round trip to the track, ran a 10.99 and several other 7.0x 1/8 miles and drove home....



I go back and forth between BFGs and ET Street radials.... When just cruising around, I feel guilty wasting my ET Street radials for just putt putting around....so I go back to BFGs.....then I hate it because I can't do $hit with the car under 40 mph....unless I start in 2nd at 40 mph which just sux.....Not too mention its just unsafe playing around with this thing on BFGs....My whole advantage with my car on the street is its launch and superior "hit" from a 20-30mph roll in 1st.....NO ET Streets and forget it...

For now, I am just gonna run ET Street radials all the time unless I am taking a trip in it....Its expensive, but its safer, the car is MUCH more fun...... Spin'n ain't win'n....


I am quite concerned about my 146k mile stock IRS though....its making some noise and I keep beating on it....She keeps on ticking though....

ajrothm

OH and about Terry's Vette, I am not sure about the converter but I imagine it is quite sloppy......I know I read Wayne Nelson's converter flashed to around 5000....it was soft out of the hole but came on hard quick..... He was 60' ing 1.61s on 8" bias plys..... At one race, they allowed the FAST cars to run full slicks and when Wayne switched to slicks, he only 60'd a 1.58....not much better....Ofcourse both of these cars have every trick in the book for hooking and they are super light. I read somewhere that Wayne's vette was under 3200lbs with him in it.....Thats less then 3000# with a BB......Thats 500lbs lighter then mine.....(but mine has a lot of heavy sh*t in it.)

I have also LOOSELY patterned my car after Wayne's.....just more of a street cruiser, pump gas version without the restrictions of the stock manifolds and 2.5" exhaust.

My ultimate goal is to go 10.70s@125+ on drag radials and full size front wheels/tires and not stripping anything off it....Not sure I will get there.... 3 tenths is an eternity away for me.... Hoping the jump to a 3.36 nets me a tenth by itself...less fuel, (maybe some oxygenated), some -DA air, jet extensions and some tuning....MAYBE?

Irish69427

I think that is well within reach. But you will need some killer negative DA air. Amazing what that does for the trap speed although unlike my viper we have to jet to get the full benefit.

And you are right, your DRs are run what you brung. I just meant I run all white lettered tires on my classics. Love the look and they don't come in a sticky version. Now if they did WELL that would be a different story!!!!!! Then we would be talkin! It is pretty easy to strip a couple hundred pounds off your ride by just some basic suspension upgrades, aluminum radiator, etc. that would make it still look stock as all get out. Van steel now offers a disk brake kit that will take 55 lbs of ROLLING weight off the front end and still use your ralley wheels. That will sure as hell take a tenth or more off and it is for the street not just drag racing. You do have to send them your spindles though. They upgrade the hub to aluminum and the calipers as well but rolling weight is like taking 4 lbs of static weight off. They said they have seen cars pick up a full half a second with the mod. Something I am thinking about also.

gkull

About a year ago our shop started using VP113™ every few % of power counts when you are class racing in 2 liter 4 cylinder cosworth and 3 liter 12 cylinder Ferrari motors.

http://www.vpracingfuels.com/vp-drag-racing.html

632C2

I am a little ways off on the Tri-power build up. I have all of the components for the motor with the exception of the cam. All of the machine work is completed. Plus I have both the early and late Tri-power intake manifolds. One difference between mine and most others will be the exhaust system. I am going to be running the factory exhaust manifolds.

The hold-up right now is because I just got my 632 running on the run-in stand. Everything went perfectly so now I need to get it in the car. This is quite a big job due to the dry sump, vacuum pump, crank trigger, etc., etc. I can't begin to tell you guys just how loud a 632" motor is with open headers...

Steve

Irish69427

Steve, have you done any flow testing on either of the tripower intakes? Really curious to know how much of restriction they are. I may have enough flow already there and with a cubic inch and/or cam upgrade could get the horsepower I need for that 10 second time slip without having to go crazy on modifying it.

632C2

I haven't done any flow testing. My plan is just to do some A-B-A testing on the DynoJet.

Steve

Irish69427

Guys, how would I correctly flow test a tripower manifold for air flow? Connect flow device to one port and block off others and let it pull air through all three carb openings. I am new to this type of thing and need some advice. Trying to get my hands on another square port stocker and see the limits of airflow on this design before contemplating any hacking.

Hoping (probably wishful thinking) that it may move enough air to allow me to just upgrade cam or cam and short block displacement to get my HP numbers.

427Hotrod

Keep searching the Super Stockers and Stockers. Phil Cocuzza was running high 9's/low 10's many years ago with killer MPH with a 427/400 oval port motor. There's not much allowed with respect to heads and intakes in those classes....might find some ideas there.


Not sure more cubes with same intake restriction will help much. Just runs out of air earlier.

JIM

Mr turbo rotary

Irish,
that parasitic loss seems too high??? 140-145 hp loss?

PRNDL

Wayne Nelson's L-88 clone. I believe this was a record at the time.

Irish69427

I took 650 HP and multiplied by .78 which would be 78% of the power left at the wheels and 22% lost to parasitic, exhaust, etc. That gave me 507 HP. Did I do that right or is it computed a different way?

ajrothm

That is how I do it also...

You can take your chasis dyno numbers and divide them by .78 and get your estimated crank HP also. Ofcourse the catch is, you don't really know what your loss percentage is....you are guessing it.

I am going to chasis dyno my car Friday and then I can calculate what my loss is since the engine has been on two different engine dynos, now with chasis dyno numbers I can easily figure out what I am losing.... I am guessing I am losing 30% since I am running a T400, all mechanical accessories and spinning an AC compressor...not to mention no carb spacer and a full exhaust system....even my headers are smaller in the car then the dyno headers are....

I am mentally preparing for 430-440rwhp which sux.....but as long as it runs 10s in good air, I won't be concerned about the chasis dyno numbers much...

ML67

Interesting topic. I ran a 540 Tripower in my 67 back in the early 90’s and made 655 HP (flywheel) at 13.8 air/fuel ratio and a mild 9.5:1 CR. I don’t remember the exact cam specs, but it was a solid roller of approx 255 @ .050” intake duration and ~ .650” lift. With another point of compression and more fuel, over 700 HP should be no problem.

The Tripower I ran was not stock. It was heavily massaged by Bernard Mondello. Yes his father is Joe Mondello. As Jim pointed out, Phil Cocuzza ran some crazy speeds in his 67 SS 427/400 Corvette and all his induction and engine work on this car was done by Bernard Mondello. That was precisely the reason I went to Bernard, and have exclusively used him for all my engine combinations and custom intake and head work over the years. He is a true craftsman / artisan and does exquisite work.

One note about adjusting the fuel curve on the Tripower carburetors: only the center carb has jets, the outboard carbs have metering plates. You can richen the main circuits on the outboard carbs by either swapping the metering plates w/ plates of larger orifice (make sure your idle feed restriction orifice diameter doesn’t change); drill the metering plate main orifice (somewhat trial and error as the orifice entry is radiused from Holley – flow is not based exclusively on diameter) or modify the plates to accept the equivalent of screw in jets. It’s been a while since I’ve seen the latter done, perhaps someone here can provide more information.

As I’m sure you know, the 68-69 Tripower intake is at least 1” shorter than the 67, and will not flow as much air. What that actually translates to in potential lost power, if any, is unknown as far as I know.

Good luck with your build.

PS those comments on your (future) broken IRS are not made lightly. What transmission are you running?

Irish69427

Thanks for chiming in ML67. I remembered someone mentioning running a tripower making some good horsepower from one of my other tripower threads and for the life of me could not remember who, but it was you.

They actually make a nice jet conversion plate now that you can run in end carbs or any vacuum secondary holley and that is what I have. Allows you to jet it like a regular carb on the ends.

The big question is does Mr. Mondello who massaged your tripower still do that kind of work and if so please advise on the contact info. I recognize the name but don't know any more about him. Pardon my ignorance.

Your camspecs on your 540 with the added displacement taken into account are nearly the same as my 496 which is about 10 degrees less duration and similar lift. All in all, encouraging info on my goal.

Irish69427

Transmission now is an autogear super muncie recommend by 632C2. I blew up my brand new rebuilt m20 without even a powershift or good burnout. The new trannie seems great. The IRS is all new with 3.08 gear.

ML67

PM sent

c6silver

Fogger under the manifold in the lifter valley.

69427

So how much weight are you currently running?