[Z06] LS7 Spintron Testing Request and Donation Thread
07-27-2014, 06:27 PM
#262
Burning Brakes
with Michael.Last year the stock spring did a respectable job with the REV valve which was adding 24 grams of mass. Running the heavier rocker with a heavier valve is introducing two variables making it extremely difficult to analyze the results.
07-27-2014, 08:37 PM
#264
My thinking was a slightly heavier rocker with a slightly heavier than stock valve might be better controlled than just a solid SS valve.
I'm especially interested in it because of the reduced side load on the stem.
For testing purposes I can see why adding fewer variables is better though.
Would it be safe to say you could just take the reduction in max RPM from the RR's on the stock setup and apply it to the aftermarket setup?
07-27-2014, 08:45 PM
#265
Melting Slicks
good point.
My thinking was a slightly heavier rocker with a slightly heavier than stock valve might be better controlled than just a solid SS valve.
I'm especially interested in it because of the reduced side load on the stem.
For testing purposes I can see why adding fewer variables is better though.
Would it be safe to say you could just take the reduction in max RPM from the RR's on the stock setup and apply it to the aftermarket setup?
My thinking was a slightly heavier rocker with a slightly heavier than stock valve might be better controlled than just a solid SS valve.
I'm especially interested in it because of the reduced side load on the stem.
For testing purposes I can see why adding fewer variables is better though.
Would it be safe to say you could just take the reduction in max RPM from the RR's on the stock setup and apply it to the aftermarket setup?
07-27-2014, 09:08 PM
#266
Mission creep
07-27-2014, 09:12 PM
#267
good point.
My thinking was a slightly heavier rocker with a slightly heavier than stock valve might be better controlled than just a solid SS valve.
I'm especially interested in it because of the reduced side load on the stem.
For testing purposes I can see why adding fewer variables is better though.
Would it be safe to say you could just take the reduction in max RPM from the RR's on the stock setup and apply it to the aftermarket setup?
My thinking was a slightly heavier rocker with a slightly heavier than stock valve might be better controlled than just a solid SS valve.
I'm especially interested in it because of the reduced side load on the stem.
For testing purposes I can see why adding fewer variables is better though.
Would it be safe to say you could just take the reduction in max RPM from the RR's on the stock setup and apply it to the aftermarket setup?
07-29-2014, 08:28 PM
#271
Estimate: 9 hours for setup, testing, and reporting for one configuration. Obviously adding additional configurations will add time, but a significant part is setup so it's incremental. Changes such as testing multiple install heights adds to test time.
Spintron rate is $100/hr.
Spintron rate is $100/hr.
07-30-2014, 12:52 PM
#272
When y’all start thinking about tests and pricing, you kinda need to put your mechanic hat on. How would you provide a customer a quotation for work request of you? Jason has already stated the rate, which is $100 per hour. So now think about the time it would take you to mount the test engine to the machine, then the time it will take to configure the heads and/or valve train with the components you have been asked to test. Then there is the time it takes to set up the gadget that looks at the valve. Then there is the test itself, the time to review the data to make sure it recorded and saved it correctly. OK, test one complete. Now you have test two….. What needs to be changed, and the time required to make the change, set up machine, run the test, etc….
So when you are asking for tests, be logical about it. What makes most sense from a time efficiency perspective? Would you test combination 1, with valve A first, then move to combination 4, with valve B?? That would require the removal of the head to change the valve. Figure a good hour to do that swap. Or, instead of testing valve B next, would you test a different rocker arm, pushrod, or spring??? The rocker would be the quickest change, so that would be the most efficient next test. Then you would test a different spring. Then test a different rocker on spring number two. After these simple swaps are done, that do not require the removal of the head are complete, the next logical and most time efficient thing to change would be the camshaft. Run a few tests with camshaft number 2. After these are done, yank the head, change the valve and start over.
So really, what you want to do, is ask the machine operator, and his mechanical assistant (if the operator is not the mechanic), what he thinks would be the most logical order of tests would look like.
This is why I had originally suggested several days of test time. If the funding was available to pay for three or four days of testing, MANY combinations could be tested. This piece meal approach to testing is not efficient, or even logical. The smartest approach, is to get the machine and operator/mechanic reserved on their calendar (as I’m betting the machine keeps pretty busy), for several days, and run a battery of tests in the most logical and time efficient manner.
Three days of testing would be about $2400. That’s a lot of tests. We are more than half way there.
So when you are asking for tests, be logical about it. What makes most sense from a time efficiency perspective? Would you test combination 1, with valve A first, then move to combination 4, with valve B?? That would require the removal of the head to change the valve. Figure a good hour to do that swap. Or, instead of testing valve B next, would you test a different rocker arm, pushrod, or spring??? The rocker would be the quickest change, so that would be the most efficient next test. Then you would test a different spring. Then test a different rocker on spring number two. After these simple swaps are done, that do not require the removal of the head are complete, the next logical and most time efficient thing to change would be the camshaft. Run a few tests with camshaft number 2. After these are done, yank the head, change the valve and start over.
So really, what you want to do, is ask the machine operator, and his mechanical assistant (if the operator is not the mechanic), what he thinks would be the most logical order of tests would look like.
This is why I had originally suggested several days of test time. If the funding was available to pay for three or four days of testing, MANY combinations could be tested. This piece meal approach to testing is not efficient, or even logical. The smartest approach, is to get the machine and operator/mechanic reserved on their calendar (as I’m betting the machine keeps pretty busy), for several days, and run a battery of tests in the most logical and time efficient manner.
Three days of testing would be about $2400. That’s a lot of tests. We are more than half way there.
07-30-2014, 03:39 PM
#273
Burning Brakes
When y’all start thinking about tests and pricing, you kinda need to put your mechanic hat on. How would you provide a customer a quotation for work request of you? Jason has already stated the rate, which is $100 per hour. So now think about the time it would take you to mount the test engine to the machine, then the time it will take to configure the heads and/or valve train with the components you have been asked to test. Then there is the time it takes to set up the gadget that looks at the valve. Then there is the test itself, the time to review the data to make sure it recorded and saved it correctly. OK, test one complete. Now you have test two….. What needs to be changed, and the time required to make the change, set up machine, run the test, etc….
So when you are asking for tests, be logical about it. What makes most sense from a time efficiency perspective? Would you test combination 1, with valve A first, then move to combination 4, with valve B?? That would require the removal of the head to change the valve. Figure a good hour to do that swap. Or, instead of testing valve B next, would you test a different rocker arm, pushrod, or spring??? The rocker would be the quickest change, so that would be the most efficient next test. Then you would test a different spring. Then test a different rocker on spring number two. After these simple swaps are done, that do not require the removal of the head are complete, the next logical and most time efficient thing to change would be the camshaft. Run a few tests with camshaft number 2. After these are done, yank the head, change the valve and start over.
So really, what you want to do, is ask the machine operator, and his mechanical assistant (if the operator is not the mechanic), what he thinks would be the most logical order of tests would look like.
This is why I had originally suggested several days of test time. If the funding was available to pay for three or four days of testing, MANY combinations could be tested. This piece meal approach to testing is not efficient, or even logical. The smartest approach, is to get the machine and operator/mechanic reserved on their calendar (as I’m betting the machine keeps pretty busy), for several days, and run a battery of tests in the most logical and time efficient manner.
Three days of testing would be about $2400. That’s a lot of tests. We are more than half way there.
So when you are asking for tests, be logical about it. What makes most sense from a time efficiency perspective? Would you test combination 1, with valve A first, then move to combination 4, with valve B?? That would require the removal of the head to change the valve. Figure a good hour to do that swap. Or, instead of testing valve B next, would you test a different rocker arm, pushrod, or spring??? The rocker would be the quickest change, so that would be the most efficient next test. Then you would test a different spring. Then test a different rocker on spring number two. After these simple swaps are done, that do not require the removal of the head are complete, the next logical and most time efficient thing to change would be the camshaft. Run a few tests with camshaft number 2. After these are done, yank the head, change the valve and start over.
So really, what you want to do, is ask the machine operator, and his mechanical assistant (if the operator is not the mechanic), what he thinks would be the most logical order of tests would look like.
This is why I had originally suggested several days of test time. If the funding was available to pay for three or four days of testing, MANY combinations could be tested. This piece meal approach to testing is not efficient, or even logical. The smartest approach, is to get the machine and operator/mechanic reserved on their calendar (as I’m betting the machine keeps pretty busy), for several days, and run a battery of tests in the most logical and time efficient manner.
Three days of testing would be about $2400. That’s a lot of tests. We are more than half way there.
What needs to be considered is there are 11 variables (components) that members have expressed interest in and this presents too many possible combinations with the money we can reasonably expect to get via donations. We have interest in two valves, two springs, two rockers, two retainers, and three cams.
If the four proposed test in the OP will satisfy everyone, then the job of arranging the test for greatest efficiency will be the most economical approach. I think we should let Jason advise on the most efficient way to to conduct the 4 proposed test and then provide forg0tmypen a quote based on that. My own interest is Test Combination #1 as proposed by the OP, with a second combination of a roller rocker with stock valve, endurance cam, PSI springs, Ti retainers which is not one of the proposed test. If I go the direction of my second preference on an LS7 build, I would probably just pay Katech to test it on my own.
07-30-2014, 05:48 PM
#274
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Michael,
What needs to be considered is there are 11 variables (components) that members have expressed interest in and this presents too many possible combinations with the money we can reasonably expect to get via donations. We have interest in two valves, two springs, two rockers, two retainers, and three cams.
If the four proposed test in the OP will satisfy everyone, then the job of arranging the test for greatest efficiency will be the most economical approach. I think we should let Jason advise on the most efficient way to to conduct the 4 proposed test and then provide forg0tmypen a quote based on that. My own interest is Test Combination #1 as proposed by the OP, with a second combination of a roller rocker with stock valve, endurance cam, PSI springs, Ti retainers which is not one of the proposed test. If I go the direction of my second preference on an LS7 build, I would probably just pay Katech to test it on my own.
What needs to be considered is there are 11 variables (components) that members have expressed interest in and this presents too many possible combinations with the money we can reasonably expect to get via donations. We have interest in two valves, two springs, two rockers, two retainers, and three cams.
If the four proposed test in the OP will satisfy everyone, then the job of arranging the test for greatest efficiency will be the most economical approach. I think we should let Jason advise on the most efficient way to to conduct the 4 proposed test and then provide forg0tmypen a quote based on that. My own interest is Test Combination #1 as proposed by the OP, with a second combination of a roller rocker with stock valve, endurance cam, PSI springs, Ti retainers which is not one of the proposed test. If I go the direction of my second preference on an LS7 build, I would probably just pay Katech to test it on my own.
07-30-2014, 09:31 PM
#276
Melting Slicks
Which is why I said $100 minimum. We would already be there. We need more donations or people need to buck up and kick in another $50.
Were close. $100 for this info is cheap. Lets do it people!
07-30-2014, 10:40 PM
#277
Instructor
Member Since: Sep 2013
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sent another $50 forg0tmypen
07-30-2014, 11:01 PM
#278
Safety Car
Thread Starter
07-30-2014, 11:12 PM
#279
Melting Slicks
