Actually Dave should consider rod length more than stroke. As to t he test,
I suspect that this has been done many times in the past and research might
find the data. Small bore and long stroke make it hard to fill the cylinders
at high running speeds.
mayf
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Turk" <kturk@ala.net>
To: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 8:53 PM
Subject: Bore stroke combinations
> David and I were chatting on the phone bout this idea... and now I've got
a
> much better idea about what he was talking about...
>
> He's actually done this test... the results of which will be published at
a
> later date... his real request was why do you think one is better then the
> other... . he is looking for your personal perspectives... he is
researching
> it to find truth.. and only the dyno and corrected conditions can give him
> that... empirical data...
>
> The reason he's limiting it to a particular Cam and head combination is so
> neither can be optimized for a purpose and to try and limit the test to
Bore
> and stroke only.... it's obvious that a combination can be optimized one
way
> or the other... and either combination can be set up as both a high rev
motor
> or a torque motor....
>
> My understanding of his goal is to decide if there is any merit what so
ever
> in a particular bore and stoke over another combination.... without
> artificially pimping one set up over the other...propping it up so to
speak
> with optimized cam's for a given combination...
>
> This is a PURE bore and stoke test.
>
> Now what say you?
>
> Keith
|