so why did he reduce the bore?????? trying to make a specify CID?????John wrote:By the way he didn't destroke it as all 199's had a 3 inch stroke, but he did reduce bore diameter.
John
I can see the 3.00" stroke, but why the small bore

Flash
so why did he reduce the bore?????? trying to make a specify CID?????John wrote:By the way he didn't destroke it as all 199's had a 3 inch stroke, but he did reduce bore diameter.
John
John wrote:"I can see the 3.00" stroke, but why the small bore.............a larger bore would have had a much better...............Well there wouldn't have had to be valve relieves cut into the bore and it would (in my opinion) breathed a lot better with less shrouding of the valves.......aspesialy the exh. valve."
Actually those cuts were to unshroud the valves and improve flow.
John
Aaaaaaa that make sence thenJohn wrote:Yes 3000 CC with supercharger.
John
Yeah I love that stuff, like I was saying if those guys can get 500-600hp and 400 to 600 pound feet from 300 to 400 CI engines we should be able to coax out way more than the 250-260 we are. The breathing mods porting and intake modification are indeed some of the more visible things.tirod wrote: I just picked up the latest Pop Rod "Engine Masters" magazine, it has a lot of good teardown info. Lots of the trick stuff isn't in the crank and rods so much - in fact these guys are buying off the shelf to cut costs. Apparently the devil is in the details - using heavier forged nitro pistons, combustion chamber porting, optimizing carb tuning, 1.9 ratio rocker arms with flat tappets and almost stock springs, or completely massaged intakes with matched spacers. Lots of extensive dyno time.
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests