When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Wallace calculator says 847.18.
True to form, you post track numbers and Chevy builds on an Oldsmobile board. Are you strictly here to troll Mark with Dale? That's what it looks like from here.
How about contributing some information that could help someone? WHY are Mark's builds so inferior to yours? HOW do you correct the anomalies ? WHAT should be the standard for hp/cu in IN AN OLDSMOBILE engine?
I see nothing but trolling from your worthless dribble.
Great questions.
Yes, let’s set the record straight. First of all, I check everything. Even a shop with multiple employees doing a full machining and build should do the same. And let’s not forget, Velcro does 90+% Chevys. Can you adjust bearing clearances “on the fly”. Yep, why? Simple. Chevrolets have a myriad of bearings available from a host of manufacturers, ie ACL, Clevite, Federal Mogul, King and even Vandervell. Not only do you typically have minor differences in shell thickness from one manufacturer to another, but you can also get .009 unders, .010 unders, .011 unders and so on. So you can see how much easier it is to get the clearances you want. I just did a Stroker BBO with an Eagle crank. The rods were already .010 under but on the big side. Being the fact that it uses a BBC rod I was able to get a .009 under bearing and got the clearance I wanted.
However on an Olds we don’t have that luxury, namely just 2 manufacturers for the most part, Clevite and Federal Mogul/Speed pro. And we don’t have all the different undersizes either, it’s either std, .010, .020 and so on so you better have a real good handle on your journal and housing sizes going in. Otherwise you won’t be able to get what you want by switching out bearings. And you’re not going to grind .0003 or even .0005 off the crank to get there. Once it’s out of the chucks it’s real hard to relocate.
And as far as piston to wall clearance goes, if your machinist can’t get this right then you need to find another machinist, period.
Crank mods- I can do these too. But in most cases it’s not warranted. And if the customer doesn’t want to pay for it, then are they to be forced to do so? There are thousands of Olds builds out there that are still running without any mods at all.
Dyno Proven numbers- Velcro , so if you Dyno a build but the owner has no intention of racing it, are you going to demand that they do? Or if they’re a shitty driver, are you going to demand that you drive their car to “validate” the Dyno numbers?
So as is typical with Velcro, basically his whole post is an apples to watermelons comparison.
Nice shop though.
Last edited by cutlassefi; October 14th, 2022 at 08:25 AM.
An Olds just like a Chevy drop oil pressure @ hi RPM if the pan isn't right.
Thanks, well aware, I'm neither new or young. Just interested in some insight of whether Moroso should be a preferred brand since I cannot dyno test them all. Really haven't paid enough attention to windage control in the past.
Please don't misunderstand/misread me.
I'm mostly online to see what others do and learn from those with more resources, and perhaps lend answers to some that they've not yet gotten or a different perspective, ( maybe even try to correct misguided advice). In other words - I have some background, but always learning. I do pay forward if possible.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
What I was getting at on setting clearance on the fly is: As you know a housing bore has a high side spec and a low side spec, as I hone that hosing bore I can set it exactly where I want the clearance to be, which allows me to get much more precise than using half size bearings. And actually I set the main journal clearance while the block is still on the line hone, so I can make adjustments, a definite advantage. And then the Sunnen dial bore gauge gives different number than a Mititoyo, not to say it can't work, but the Sunnen is better. Good to see you survived the storm!
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by 68post
Thanks, well aware, I'm neither new or young. Just interested in some insight of whether Moroso should be a preferred brand since I cannot dyno test them all. Really haven't paid enough attention to windage control in the past.
Please don't misunderstand/misread me.
I'm mostly online to see what others do and learn from those with more resources, and perhaps lend answers to some that they've not yet gotten or a different perspective, ( maybe even try to correct misguided advice). In other words - I have some background, but always learning. I do pay forward if possible.
No problem, never did mis read you. Feel free to PM me.
Wheres your fuel flow, I want to compare them to Bill's test.
7L so you say.................
As Requested.
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
"YOU can't make a measly 1.29hp/ci with a 4" crank and iron heads".
You're right. But apparently Bill T. can't either it seems, his made 1.19hp/ci. Mine made 1.13hp/ci as stated. Hmm, just .06 less than Bill's with a half point less compression, an out of the box Brawler vs a high dollar AED, and an RPM vs a Victor. You would think his would've made way more hp than lil ole me with a Victor than an RPM apples to apples right?
Here's another one that can't even come close to making 1.29hp/ci like you Peter. Paul Tester did a 403 based stroker build last year with one of my cranks, made about 470hp with more cam than you, Gen II Edelbrocks and an RPM. It was around 460ci, so that's barely 1.00hp per ci right? Why don't you question why he can't make anywhere near your numbers? Again seems like nobody can but you.
It would seem logical Paul Tester isn't dumb enough to PM me on FB without all the facts and based solely on his opinion of why my numbers are wrong, so it doesn't require a response. You're the one that decided to publicly makes this a debate by stating your opinion. And that's all you have so far is your opinion and anecdotal evidence. I was respectful enough of your reputation to be willing to listen if you had valid reasons why it was wrong, but all you could offer was what other people and yourself have done so far.
And I didn't chase you on FB. If you haven't figured it out yet, friend requests are somewhat random, friends of friends and so on. Yours came across my page, I simply clicked "Confirm". Feel free to reverse that if you like.
Again, it's like you don't even understand how this works. I posted a few things in the Olds forums, you sent me a request, I accepted YOUR request on my personal page with reservations, knowing of your reputation over the last several years. But I try not to judge a person by their internet reputation, so I let you in. As it turns out, you weren't interested in getting to know me, your just the typical looky-loo that is on the internet all the time watching what everyone else is doing.
Just had one on my dyno, it actually made 431, or 1.125hp/ci. Hmmmm.
I said a basic 383, not a lame duck 383. I have Vortec headed 355s that makes more steam on a Stuska than that POS. And that dyno owner claimed "I build that combo all the time, it makes 415-420hp." He got pretty excited when mine made 456hp/458lbs on his "stingy"dyno.
RPM AG, Chinese heads, cast Scat crank, 2-Bolt block, tiny HR. BASIC 388ci. 1.35hp/ci
BASIC W31, 353ci. 1.19hp/ci, iron intake, iron heads, tiny HR cam, pump gas.
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
Just in the last couple of weeks you’ve gone from asking me to pm you a Dyno sheet, that you said you wouldn’t share with anyone, to basically calling me a chest pounding idiot that doesn’t know what different manifolds will do. I’m done trying to figure you out. I don’t ever recall pissing in YOUR corn flakes but whatever.
Have a nice day Dale.
I'd recommend not pissing in other peoples corn flakes if you can't back your accusations with facts.
Sorry to hear your shop was flooded, I can imagine the frustration with dealing with that mess.
Peter, Apparently nothing is private with you, Dale and Velcro. I’ve learned that now. And trust me I never chased you on Facebook, I’ve never chased ANYBODY on Facebook. Again I don’t think YOU understand how that works.
Here you go. The Blueprint 383 I mentioned before. Advertised is 436/443. Here’s the Dyno sheet that came with the engine, serial numbers match. And here’s MY
Dyno sheet. Same pull rate, same correction factor, exact same engine, different Dyno. I get slammed if I even just suggest something. So you guys are the Dyno experts, you figure it out.
Last edited by cutlassefi; October 14th, 2022 at 01:24 PM.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
Here you go. The Blueprint 383 I mentioned before. Advertised is 436/443. Here’s the Dyno sheet that came with the engine, serial numbers match. And here’s MY
Dyno sheet. Same pull rate, same correction factor, exact same engine, different Dyno. I get slammed if I even just suggest something. So you guys are the Dyno experts, you figure it out.
When I see that STPIP BS I just shake my head..............
My experience with the pan print dyno is it gives correct HP as long is your inputs are correct-and that means the inertia factor and baro, temp, and humidity. You know I never see you posting any of those 455 500 plus HP builds with the pro comp heads any more since you got this dyno, WHY? Did you stop building 455 Olds?
"So you guys are the Dyno experts, you figure it out"
Ok-you like to play games with the inertia factor? I've always figured that seeing you refuse to show supporting data on your tests.
Last edited by VORTECPRO; October 14th, 2022 at 02:40 PM.
I just emailed my Dyno guy at L&S earlier today regarding setup. I explained how I was setting the inertia calculator in the dyno. He agreed it was correct.
i have another weather station hanging right next to the one connected to my Dyno, they read within a couple of degrees and tenths of Baro of each other.
My typical correction factor is 5-6%. This past Saturday when I ran that 383 it was about 3.5%. It was a decent day out here. Normally is after a storm.
And yes I still do 455’s. Last one made 514/571 with a pos Holley TBI system on it.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Now I don't want you to go all this on us when I post what I'am about to post
I think the pan print dyno (yours) gives a very realistic HP number when everything is entered right. I very much believe your numbers currently on the pan print dyno.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
I just emailed my Dyno guy at L&S earlier today regarding setup. I explained how I was setting the inertia calculator in the dyno. He agreed it was correct.
i have another weather station hanging right next to the one connected to my Dyno, they read within a couple of degrees and tenths of Baro of each other.
My typical correction factor is 5-6%. This past Saturday when I ran that 383 it was about 3.5%. It was a decent day out here. Normally is after a storm.
And yes I still do 455’s. Last one made 514/571 with a pos Holley TBI system on it.
What time of year?
Everything is entered right. I’ve sent some of my files to L&S for verification in the past. They confirmed the ones I sent were configured correctly.
Last edited by cutlassefi; October 14th, 2022 at 05:14 PM.
Here's another one that can't even come close to making 1.29hp/ci like you Peter. Paul Tester did a 403 based stroker build last year with one of my cranks, made about 470hp with more cam than you, Gen II Edelbrocks and an RPM. It was around 460ci, so that's barely 1.00hp per ci right? Why don't you question why he can't make anywhere near your numbers?
.
Why are you dragging Paul into this? The 403 your talking about is meant to be mild so it won't blow up, the customer knows this. Now let's see he did a 374 for my buddy with #5 heads with a light porting and used an intake that hasn't been made in more than 30 years with a Qjet and made 1.26+. Stick to your own pond before you drown.
Last edited by Duh; October 15th, 2022 at 11:16 AM.
Not at all. I like and respect Paul a lot.
Just a simple example that everything will not always make what you think it might, for one reason or another.
And that Stroker 403 Motorhome build had a decent amount of cam in for the target. Just an fyi.
I remember my last session 29.19, you really don't remember a record high baro?
This is one reason why you and I don’t get along.
Most times my customers give me a hp number they’d like to have, NOT an ET/MPH they’re trying to hit. I pretty much know what combinations will make what corrected power and tq. I always look at my weather, and being in Florida most of my life, I know what to expect different times of the year. So far I’ve had ONE day where my correction came in at less than 0, once. So unless something doesn’t look quite right for what would be typical for that day and season, I don’t pay too much attention to it.
For the umpteenth time, I don’t drag race, and 95+% of my customers don’t either, so the weather isn’t as important. And with more and more doing EFI, it’s even less so.
Last edited by cutlassefi; October 15th, 2022 at 11:29 AM.
Not at all. I like and respect Paul a lot.
Just a simple example that everything will not always make what you think it might, for one reason or another.
And that Stroker 403 Motorhome build had a decent amount of cam in for the target. Just an fyi.
What does this mean,, everything will not always make what you think it might?
is that your opinion on that build or someone else’s?
a link to it would be good since you’re talking about it…seems like a swipe at another builder to me.
Last edited by CANADIANOLDS; October 15th, 2022 at 01:47 PM.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Hold on here, as I assemble an engine I can't get it out of my head you don't know your Barometer, the barometer is the first thing you enter and then the inertia factor before you start testing, I test on your pan print dyno I know. And its not a 6 percent correction its a 1.06 it has nothing to do with percents. Whats going on here is this your dyno or someone else's? Know wonder you don't want me seeing your supporting data! I'am not saying your HP data isn't accurate or even low, maybe your robbing your self on HP. I've never seen a dyno operator that couldn't tell me the baro their testing at, now on a chassis dyno thats another story.
Honestly Mark if your not entering the absolute (uncorrected) barometer into the dyno every time you test it not accurate, anyone will tell that.
Anyone can find out the baro on any day , in any part of the country, present or past…just incase your memory fails you….it’s posted every 5 minutes and is easy to find past baro numbers
every track in North America also has a link to live and historical data, even in winterhaven Florida 😜
as long as the Dyno sheet has the date and time of day, and it’s not fake 😁
then there is the correction factor entered..if the sheet has it, we can figure it all out😎
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by bccan
Buncha cranky *****. Any more chest thumping here and someone’s gonna break their breast prosthetics.
Moderator. Don’t waste time scolding me, just delete when you’re ready.
….
No...at this point I'am actually trying to get Cutlas EFI on track. I look forward to all dyno tests, the only thing I like more than a dyno test, is a dyno test followed by a drag test.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by fleming442
In the grand scheme of things, what are we talking here- 10, 20, 30, 50 hp?
Maybe none, but maybe showing less HP than in reality, it can go either way, Marks test on the Land and Sea (AKA pan print) dyno have seemed realistic to me, I just like to see the supporting data to see where the numbers come from. The numbers from Matt Scranton's dyno Mark tested on looked fictitious to me and others in the Oldsmobile community, to be fair to Mark it wasn't his dyno. The thing I'd like to see is the test where you make more observed HP than corrected HP, and thats possible in the area Marks dyno sits due to the weather condition and the altitude, the only problem I can see with observed HP numbers from the land and sea dyno is your turning a drive shaft which robs observed HP. Now that I live in Texas my dyno is not setup and I test on the exact type of dyno Mark has and I find the HP to be basically the same as my dyno in the cooler months, down HP in the summer due to my superior dyno cell, TQ seems a hair higher than my SF 901. And thats pretty good seeing I've tested on a lot of big name shops dyno and I always made more HP on other peoples dyno, example: Reher Morrison's dyno's I was 17 HP up! I will say this, on the Land Sea I test on now power was up 20 HP the first time I went in there, but they had the wrong baro entered, the operator was willing to learn and corrected the problem and is very helpful and now a friend. I do know he enters the uncorrected baro and exact inertia factor and temp before we start testing.
Last edited by VORTECPRO; October 15th, 2022 at 06:54 PM.
Care to explain, or just remain vague? What causes the pan to drop oil pressure? What modifications were necessary?
I would guess that Mark is Controlling windage in the oil pan thus controlling oil aeration. By doing so this will prevent a loss in oil pressure and aid in heat transfer.
Some builders like to use a standard oil pump V high pressure high volume pump as they feel that the hi performance pump can lead to oil aeration.
Below is a picture of Dale's halo with built in crank scraper used to control windage.
The class racers go to great lengths to control windage in side a stock pan as windage reduction = HP
I would guess that Mark is Controlling windage in the oil pan thus controlling oil aeration. By doing so this will prevent a loss in oil pressure and aid in heat transfer.
Some builders like to use a standard oil pump V high pressure high volume pump as they feel that the hi performance pump can lead to oil aeration.
Below is a picture of Dale's halo with built in crank scraper used to control windage.
The class racers go to great lengths to control windage in side a stock pan as windage reduction = HP
I understand controlling the windage makes horsepower. I want to know how the PAN affects pressure, outside of an improperly setup pickup, which should ALWAYS be checked on any engine. Aerating the oil is a bit of a stretch. It's cool; he dodged the question, much like most I ask. He'd rather throw some random factors out for me to punch in a calculator. It's so weird, but also just a "hey, look over here".
Maybe none, but maybe showing less HP than in reality, it can go either way, Marks test on the Land and Sea (AKA pan print) dyno have seemed realistic to me, I just like to see the supporting data to see where the numbers come from. The numbers from Matt Scranton's dyno Mark tested on looked fictitious to me and others in the Oldsmobile community, to be fair to Mark it wasn't his dyno. The thing I'd like to see is the test where you make more observed HP than corrected HP, and thats possible in the area Marks dyno sits due to the weather condition and the altitude, the only problem I can see with observed HP numbers from the land and sea dyno is your turning a drive shaft which robs observed HP. Now that I live in Texas my dyno is not setup and I test on the exact type of dyno Mark has and I find the HP to be basically the same as my dyno in the cooler months, down HP in the summer due to my superior dyno cell, TQ seems a hair higher than my SF 901. And thats pretty good seeing I've tested on a lot of big name shops dyno and I always made more HP on other peoples dyno, example: Reher Morrison's dyno's I was 17 HP up! I will say this, on the Land Sea I test on now power was up 20 HP the first time I went in there, but they had the wrong baro entered, the operator was willing to learn and corrected the problem and is very helpful and now a friend. I do know he enters the uncorrected baro and exact inertia factor and temp before we start testing.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Again it all starts with the dyno testing, if you have an engine on there thats losing oil pressure as RPM goes up you could have a windage problem, vacuum pumps will also effect this to some degree. Std or low volume oil pumps are used because they use less HP. Oil pump pick up design, placement and clearance are critical in my engines. A picture of my oil pan and pick up for my Buick.
Last edited by VORTECPRO; October 16th, 2022 at 04:21 AM.
I’ll look at a couple of session files and see what the baro is on each.
But you obviously don’t have any idea of the weather here in this state. I’ve had engines on three different dynos in the past few years, mine included. ALL showed observed hp at less than corrected except a handful of times. Yes we’re at sea level but otherwise the air sucks about 11 months out of the year. A correction of essentially 2000’ of altitude is very typical, especially in late summer early fall.
My fan moves 37,000cfm unfiltered, so a bit less thru the 10 2x2 filters it draws thru.
But I’m also pulling air from a much larger building, although I’m right next to a 10’x12’’ roll up door. Weather is taken right near the carb intake area.
And just an fyi, you do know the new SF Powermark dynos now use a driveshaft right?
Last edited by cutlassefi; October 16th, 2022 at 06:05 AM.
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
I’ll look at a couple of session files and see what the baro is on each.
But you obviously don’t have any idea of the weather here in this state. I’ve had engines on three different dynos in the past few years, mine included. ALL showed observed hp at less than corrected except a handful of times. Yes we’re at sea level but otherwise the air sucks about 11 months out of the year. A correction of essentially 2000’ of altitude is very typical, especially in late summer early fall.
My fan moves 37,000cfm unfiltered, so a bit less thru the 10 2x2 filters it draws thru.
But I’m also pulling air from a much larger building, although I’m right next to a 10’x12’’ roll up door. Weather is taken right near the carb intake area.
And just an fyi, you do know the new SF Powermark dynos now use a driveshaft right?
I'am very aware of your weather where your at. I also test on a SF power mark dyno as well, I'am no big fan of that either. Its a great thing when the observed HP is higher than the corrected, I've never been in conditions to experience that. Maybe that will happen for me when I get my dyno running in Texas.
I understand controlling the windage makes horsepower. I want to know how the PAN affects pressure, outside of an improperly setup pickup, which should ALWAYS be checked on any engine. Aerating the oil is a bit of a stretch. It's cool; he dodged the question, much like most I ask. He'd rather throw some random factors out for me to punch in a calculator. It's so weird, but also just a "hey, look over here".
If you don't control windage you have oil aeration, the stock pan was never designed to run the rpm that a performance Oldsmobile engine operates at. Any pan that fits in a stock frame configuration has to deal with windage because of the close proximity of the spinning crank to the pan. The question is how much aeration is occurring and what is the effect.
There was a great thread were a class racer screwed his own engine together using the same parts as a professional builder. What he learned was that it is a far more involved process than just having the same parts. I will see if I can find the thread.
I wan't to make this very clear I respect the professional engine builder, but I have just as much respect for the guy that builds his own engines.
Last edited by Bernhard; October 16th, 2022 at 09:50 AM.
I would guess that Mark is Controlling windage in the oil pan thus controlling oil aeration. By doing so this will prevent a loss in oil pressure and aid in heat transfer.
Some builders like to use a standard oil pump V high pressure high volume pump as they feel that the hi performance pump can lead to oil aeration.
Below is a picture of Dale's halo with built in crank scraper used to control windage.
The class racers go to great lengths to control windage in side a stock pan as windage reduction = HP
that one made about 1.6 hp/ cube. I’m not proud of that as it was a last minute change of plans. Was suppose to be an engine masters build. It was the last year of the EMC before it collapsed and everything was a **** show.
so within a month , the iron heads got canned, I threw on some old Battens I had, a cam that was no where near right I had sitting here, some fabbed up crap Dyno headers that were way to big on the primaries for 373”
I was late getting it together,, late leaving Ontario for North Carolina..got a speeding ticket flying through the mountains in West Virginia…had to call a lawyer right then and there at the side of the road to get out of spending the night in jail and having my truck impounded!!,, with the engine in the back.
apparently the worst place in the USA to get a a speeding ticket, each 1 mph over the 10mph max over is 1 day in jail😳. I was 15 over, so it was suppose to be 5 days in lock and vehicle impounded??
needless to say my week there was spent mostly on the phone to the lawyer I hired to be able to drive back home. And be able to re enter the U.S. in the future
had to go to driver re education camp , $800, hired a lawyer here, paid multiple fines in West Virginia, paid lawyer there, in the end it was almost $3000.00
I’ll never forget that experience…😁. I’m a criminal now
I'am very aware of your weather where your at. I also test on a SF power mark dyno as well, I'am no big fan of that either. Its a great thing when the observed HP is higher than the corrected, I've never been in conditions to experience that. Maybe that will happen for me when I get my dyno running in Texas.
I’m not sure where in TX you are but you may have a day or two where observed is more than corrected.😉
Location: Colorado Springs Colorado/Thousand Oaks Ca
Posts: 1,719
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
I’m not sure where in TX you are but you may have a day or two where observed is more than corrected.😉
The two dyno's I test at are @ 800 feet elevation, so about the best Baro I've seen is 29.19 so I don't believe we will see more observed in the room HP. That power mark had a 1.07 correction the last time I was on it, but its STPIP correction seems like BS to me.
Wow! I had been what I thought a pretty good customer for you for several years! Not only with my 434 using your stroker kit and built by Pete, but my previous build with Milan for my 461 Street Sweeper build on the old ROP that I sourced parts from you. Not to mention several people I've sent to you with the last being a guy from the burbs of Chicago that you built a 434 earlier this year. The peak numbers and all that b.s. is the last thing on my mind. To publicly bash my build again a previous loyal customer is 🐎 💩. I put more than several thousands dollars in your pockets over the past few years, and lined you up with others who spent a ton of. Money with you. I'll never purchase anything from you again. And it's a gotdamn shame because you have done well by introducing parts to the Olds community. A good business man stays quiet and keeps it moving. And to top this off Pete never mentioned this thread or the other thread to me I stumbled on it by browsing. Thanks for your upstanding behavior Mark.
Originally Posted by cutlassefi
Lol!!
A post was done earlier about a guy (Peter) that used one of my Stroker kits. His Dyno sheet showed 552hp and 592tq corrected.
The combination was a 434, 10.5:1, 227/233@.050 cam, ported small block irons, RPM Intake and an 830 carb. I argued that based on my own experience his numbers were unrealistic. A couple of people said no.
October 14th, 2022, 07:58 AM
