Dyno dog has had a bit of exercise and an upgrade,
i did some repairs to a big valve injection head and added a newman Ph4 cam, 43cc chamber head giving 10.9CR i then decided i would fit it to dog and bed the cam in, knowing Dogs bottom end is exactly the same spec as the bottom end this head is destined for i could dial the cam in for best power so it could literally be dropped on its own bottom end and be right or very close to it.
the heads owner has a pair of 40's but i thought i would try it on 40's and 45's
currently fitted are 45's i started out with 34 chokes left from the previous tests but in an attempt to cure a rich spot that i wasnt able to jet out swapped the 34's for 36's, interestingly the 36's gave more power right through the rev range
black lines are power and torque of the big valve head red lines a standard injection head and cam with same 45's., i can probably wring a little more out of it fine tuning the jetting, i didnt intend to crop the power/torque numbers but seeing as i did anyone want to guess what they are?
Last edited by Graham; 27-05-2021 at 21:04.
Black lines intersect at 5750 rpm as they should. Why don't the red lines?
in fact neither graph intersect at 5252 which is where they should,
or would if the graph scales are the same at both sides, but left and right scales are not the same so the lines wont cross at 5252.
when i look at the data sheet which shows power/torque in numerical table both red and black runs show almost identical bhp/torque @5200 ( it doesnt log 5252 only 5200 or 5300)
Last edited by Graham; 28-05-2021 at 08:02.
Yes ofcourse it should be 5250 rpm my mad.
103 ftlbs and 153hp ? I know you don't like smoothing but I find those 'spikey' traces hard to follow - that midrange hole in the torque looks nasty - just as it comes 'on cam' perchance?
Lines do not need to intersect anywhere, especially with no scalings.
but as Graham says, IF scalings are the same number ranges, AND in lbft and Hp units, they would intersect at 5250...but only if those conditions are met.
But I'll guess at 160hp and 115lbft
9.85 @ 145mph 202mph standing mile
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss_c7fML3rw
Standard engine 112 horses, 135 torques.
Modified engine 163 horses, 152 torques.
Power 156, Torque 145.
the mid range hole looks huge, but its only 4lbft! for some reason i have yet to fathom ( and maybe wont) the mixture goes very rich at that point so far attempts to jet it out have only resulted in it going lean elsewhere.
advancing the cam a bit helped as it picked power up everywhere except the very top when it lost 1-2 bhp and by very top i mean 6600-6700rpm at which point i was getting nervous on a bog standard not even rebuilt engine.
Last edited by Graham; 28-05-2021 at 18:19.
some interesting guesses there,
the red run which was a bog standard injection head and cam gave 131lbft and 117bhp,
that might change some of the modified head/cam combo guesses......
actually your first guess was closer, the engine revs on further than the cam specs suggest. exhaust is small bore ashley 4,2,1
there might even be a bit of power lurking in the intake manifold, its as cast not matched to the head, so the ports are smaller than the head by a noticeable amount. being a dyno mule i cant really match it to anything, so far its already been on 4 different heads for testing purposes
Last edited by Graham; 29-05-2021 at 10:39.
ive just ordered some F9s
i fitted a new rotor arm and some harder plugs, AP7FS instead of 6's that seemed to pick up a fraction at the top end, mixture is still wobbling around, mostly a bit rich, but very rich around 3700, quite rich around 4700 bit lean at 5000 and 6500! it doesn't like 150 main or 180 airs so
i think it wants 155 mains and 190 airs but im still waiting on those sizes to come in, its currently got 160 main 200 air
but the current scores on the doors are 146lbft @5000 164 bhp @ 6700 got to say im bloody impressed with that power from the PH4 cam,
the graph below isnt quite the same one i posted earlier, the red run is but the black run is from today
Last edited by Graham; 30-05-2021 at 06:41.
interesting as the graph looks quite linear ?
this is what JASON (RWD FORDS RULE) said back in 2016
"Hold on guys I have the Definitive answer as I have mapped both Phase 4 Newman and FR30 / BP134
ALL of the Newman cams have HUGE amounts of Overlap at TDC, they are super bad for fast road use imho, you will have a HOLE in the power band above idle, that is why they list PH4 as a power band of 2000 to 6000rpm, the difference between the Overlap Lift on PH4 vs FR30/BP134 is HUGE!!! (which means the overlap degrees and flow reversals are also HUGE at low rpm)"
"At the point where both valves are open equally it is less than 1mm as already said with FR30 and BP134, for the Newman PH4 it is over 2.5mm!! insane overlap for a fast road cam, it would be an excellent cam if they widened the LSA by 4 or 5 degrees at least, you want an LSA of 111 to 112* for fast road, not the crazy tight LSA Newman Use which is like a Race Cam, hence the overlap is huge and the intake closing and exhaust opening points are too low to make any decent top end power, so you end up with an engine that is crap below 2000rpm, great in the mid range and crap top end, with the wider LSA of FR30 / BP134 you get a super wide spread of power everywhere, less in the mid range but no hole in low end just off idle and better top end above peak power."
do you know if NEWMAN have changed the profile since then ?
that said the graph doesnt really appear to start untill 2500 rpm if thats correct ?
Last edited by alladdin; 30-05-2021 at 12:19.
2500 rpm is the load in point of the dyno, the point at which the dyno holds the engine as you open the throttle, its adjustable it will go lower down to around 2000rpm sometimes less, depending on engines torque and rev range if you have a 800bhp v8 which revs to 8000 you would probably have a load in rpm of 4000
so whilst i could load the engine up at lower RPM i tend not to, its kinder to the equipment and engine.
let me explain, what you do is set test rpm start point, open the throttle to WOT, the dyno will respond and drag the revs down to the required RPM, you let the rpm and engine torque stabilize, this takes several seconds, at which point you hit the go button and the engine is allowed to rev, its the equivalent of driving your car slowly in a low gear, full throttle and max braking at the same time, the load on everything is immense.
that cam will take full throttle down at 2000 rpm, although why you would is beyond me unless you have a diesel
Last edited by Graham; 30-05-2021 at 14:20.
ive just run it up again, with a pair of 40's. The smaller carbs are easier to jet for sure, my first guess was close enough leave alone, and through most of the rev range match the 45's, note i say most
the graph in the above test certainly would be a bit smoother if i can iron out the bumps in the AFR
just for mike ive done another pull, it held full throttle down at 2000 rpm, it could of gone lower but not without adjusting the absorber itself and i didnt want it to mess with that as ive found the sweet spot for the current engine.
below 2400 it does loose out to a standard cam by about 20lbft but a standard cam wont give useful power all the way to 6800!
i use both this cam and the FR30, i must admit it would never occur to me to use both the in the same application.
Last edited by Graham; 30-05-2021 at 15:01.
so does this refute jasons claim that it would be a terrible fast road cam ? ( and if so maybe grind has changed ) , would it be a pig on smaller more progressive throttle low down ? all a bit off topic really but its not often you see results from newman etc. and thanks Graham , i wasnt looking to keep you working
no i don't think it would be a terrible fast road cam it might just depend on how fast you want!
on 45's this head/cam combo gave 165bhp and hung on to the power all the way to 6800, if you only want 140bhp or an engine to go to around 6K there are defiantly better cams. i have installed this cam in a Westfield you couldnt of asked for more drivability than that had, infact the last thing that needed was more low down torque it struggled to cope with what it had, at one point i thought the clutch was slipping, it wasnt it was 3rd gear wheel spin and i wasnt in hooligan mode
ive just run the engine up again on a 32/36, on a standard engine a 32/36 will match a pair of 40's all the way to 4,000 rpm, on this engine it was down from the moment go, at the top end it was nearly 30bhp down on the 45's, with not surprisingly the 40's being somewhere in the middle.
ultimately none of this truly reflects drivability, dyno testing is all done a full throttle, all i can go by is how easy it is to load the engine to full throttle, on the 32/36 you can just wack the throttle open, the 40's need a bit more finesse and the 45's you defiantly have to be a bit more gentle that said, that's exactly the same thing you find driving them on the roads and getting the idle jets right makes a vast difference here.
Last edited by Graham; 30-05-2021 at 16:14.
many thanks for the offer, i might take you up on it if we can get a number of cams together and do a back to back test, i have a newman P5. so thats basically an RL31 and HT1!
with this episode i wasn't actually looking to do any sort of development program, the plan was break in the customers cam, time it in and see what carburettors best suited it, i know he has 40's and now i can make a recommendation, if he isnt going much past 5,000 rpm and is happy to settle for 150bhp then he needs do nothing other than make sure he has at least 32mm chokes in the carbs, but if he wants the 166bhp this combo has to offer then he needs 45's.
Last edited by Graham; 30-05-2021 at 16:43.
Last edited by rallyrob; 30-05-2021 at 17:08.
all depends on who rollers! Pete Baldwins were easy, whatever he said you had at the wheels was about right at the flywheel. Dave walker used to say to me, if he saw 110bhp at the wheels @5000 on the way up he knew it was going to be a good-un. whatever is was probably a pretty strong motor back in its day. 4 star/super unleaded wont make much difference except it wont want as much timing on unleaded. back in the day 36 degrees advance on a pinto was common, this one ive just run wanted 28. if they want more than 32 these days then somethings defiantly wrong
My pinto back in the day use to run best at 36 degree's that with a GP1 head and valves and a pair of 48's .... Graham ive got a old tobacco tin with loads of tubes , mains , air's and slow running jets. Will dig it out and send it you as ive no use for them now ....
Without stealing Graham's thunder but yes definitely - can't do much about the fuel, changing down a gear is an option to get away from the det. zone or knocking off a couple of degrees will be a long term solution although no longer absolutely optimal for 90% of use.
Thank you all. Appreciate your comments.
I'll take a look at this on the weekend and get it out for a run
On a pinto timing is all out around 3000 to 3500 rpm 5000 rpm is to high up the rev range some may add to this cheers mario.
nothing wrong with doing it at such high revs for sure 100% the distributor will of maxed out the advance at that point, its just a bit hair raising thats all.
we did used to do rolling road timing swings at 5000rpm on engine with radical cams that made peak torque that high up the rev range, but there little need to do that these days
Bookmarks