First a few words, I just recently rebuilt my very first engine a 4.0 with some mods for my 2 door RRC. Please understand that this is a hobby for me and I just started to discover what a challenge rebuilding is all about and of course I just cannot describe the joys of seeing your first build actually burbling to life..
Well I have a chance of getting my hands on a Triumph 1500 , but I am actually looking for a way to build my second V8, but this time I want to build something a bit more unique.
Having drooled over "Hardcastles V8 Tuning" book, I have a pretty good idea for the build, however if I may impose I would need some help with this project.
I have another 4.0 block unknown origin, which I will dismantle for this project.
This will be a relative high RPM tune, given the aplication.
I am still in the process of getting things planned out for this project, but the general direction is a girdled bottom end, a Buick 300 crank (3.36" stroke with a 3.70" bore) with Ford 2.3 litre Turbo pistons on 2.00" Chevy rods for a 5 litre of displacement (taken from Hardcastle's book).
Now for valve train and heads, I am a struggling! One I would like to stay with hydraulic lifters, but would like to bring the RPM range to the mid 6k range.
Thats what I have so far, any comments, suggestions are welcomed.
Thanks
./RB
Hey man. Welcome. I totally dig your enthusiasm, and it brings back memories of when I got started on this path. Good times.
Ok the tough part with the Ford piston thing is there isn't enough liner to use them reliably since they are 3.78" bore. Even after sleeving it's pretty tight but may be possible if you want to risk it. I'd feel confident with the 305 bore though (3.736"). Lot's of options for pistons there too. I went with 60 over Ford 255 pistons (3.74"). Not really recommending that option. Lots of modification needed there if you want a bigger cam which it sounds like you do. I sorta wish I'd gone with the 305 route.
On that note one thing to watch for is the block's current deckheight. It turned out my block had been worked already and I ended up with pistons out the top. LOL! The other thing is CC the heads early. I discovered my Buick 300 heads were 45cc instead of the stock 54cc. WOW big surprise there it kinda changed everything about the build. That coupled with the positive piston deck of about 35 thou and I'm now running 12.5:1 compression and likely E85.
I'm thinking you are going to want to sleeve the block. Are you in the US? The US 4.0 blocks do some cracking behind the liners because of a high-temp thermostat that Rover put in to comply with emissions standards. They are almost always cracked because of this but it's possible that yours aren't. It's sorta worth doing it and you get more margin for bigger bores. It's not cheap. Just something to think about there.
You ARE going to want to do some oiling modifications. The main pick up in the block needs to be enlarged to 9/16" or 5/8" with a later larger bore pick up like a late Buick v6. Just be sure to measure it when you take the engine down. It may already be large. Mine was. I'm not sure if 5/8" is standard on the late blocks but it was on mine. NICE. The other oiling mods are optional but can't hurt: Have the cam bearings spun 180º and cut smaller holes in all but the gallery transfer bearing. I cut my holes at 1/16". The cams in these engines get plenty of oil and as the bearings wear over time become a massive hemorrhage of oil reducing the oil to the mains. The other place to limit is the rocker shafts. I converted my engine to oiling the rocker through the pushrods instead of the heads. This is another place the oil pressure is reduced as time goes on. The point is to keep as much oil going to the mains and journals as possible.
I got these mods from another book that's worth reading: How to Power Tune Rover V-8 for Road & Track
http://www.amazon.com/Power-Tune-Rover-Road-Track/dp/1903706173/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256564112&sr=8-1
I think an absolute must-have for higher RPM is the rocker gussets that D&D sells. Especially at higher RPM the rocker shaft ends can set up a harmonic and break.
Lastly, look into a cam optimized for your application early and stick to it. That effects EVERYTHING. I changed my mind midway through and did almost everything over. I guess what I'm saying is have fun with the planning part. Plot a clear course and stick to it like a religion. You will save a lot of money.
I'll also suggest spending the extra money and balancing the engine, and having the parts blueprinted to eachother. There is some easy power and longevity to be had there. I did that and I'm hoping it helps my engine last a while. As it is I'm probably going to frag my pistons with in a week and do this whole thing over. LOL! Seriously, I hope I don't break something.
Thank you for your response!
This is just a great board...
Ok so lets start with the piston choice!
Firstly I will be resleeving the block and with top hats. I found a nice shop who has the appropriate CNC machining to do this work. Now in the selection of sleeves . Can i choose a sleeve that will give me the 3.736 bore, or do I need to remove material from the block (which I would not want to do)!
As for heads I do not have any heads, maybe looking at a complete set !
You are quite correct about choosing a cam early in the planning phase, but I fear that I lack the skills in selecting the right cam. I do want a very streetable engine with a nice torque curve, though a bit higher in the rpm range.
The block main pickup was at 5/8 on my first rebuild , but I will check it.
What do you think of a girdle with the main caps integrated ? Would this not give you a bomb proof bottom end.
BTW the project is called "Mongoose" a Cobra killer ;)
First thing RB, and most important to do right away is, don't get in a hurry. Make sure you clearly understand your goals and options before you start. Now having said that, at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and begin buying parts. Nic, myself, and many others know full well that once you begin the build other options appear that you hadn't considered and may cause some regrets but don't let that deter you. Once you've drawn that line do your best to stay with it.
So, while a screaming high rpm motor is great, have you considered increased displacement as an alternative? For a measly extra 80 lbs of engine weight you can go up to 300, 340 or 350cu.in with an inexpensive build, stay under 400 lbs and crank out 300+hp all day long with great reliability and economy. No messing with sleeves, stroker cranks and all that, just the right match of stock parts. Check out the threads on 300's, 340's, TA heads, etc. Now for high speed, if you can afford it nothing is going to touch the new TA heads but they aren't cheap. Also, roller cams are the coming thing. For very high power potential we have the Buick 350/TA/roller cam build on the horizon. Things are happening pretty fast right now so you really want to get caught up before drawing that line. Finally, on your redline, a decent cam with the right springs *can* actually net you a 7 grand redline, provided the rest of the engine is up to it. That means forged pistons, maybe some rod work, studs, and definitely the oiling mods. Get a set of TA's double groove cam bearings, port the oil pump passages, and carefully set the pump gear end clearances. Watch your bearing clearances and keep them tight and true.
Jim
I was actually going to suggest the TA heads after reading Jim's post in the TA head topic. If I had not done all the work I did to my old 300 heads I'd be buying those in a second. They look frickin' awesome.
On the cam I'd call Woody at the Wedge Shop. He's got TONs of experience with Buick/Rover strokers. The cam I'm using may be what you're looking for. Streetable with a raised powerband.
http://www.thewedgeshop.com/
Wow! Great stuff!
Blown MG the reason why I selected the 4.0 V8 is because I did my first rebuild on that block and I am more comfortable with this block and some of its components. Unfortunately I know nothing of the 300, 340 or 350.
Though I am very intriqued by what you wrote. I just hope that I can find project where I may dwell on these blocks...
NixVega, BTW I had a 73 Vega. Tons of fun with them, though they rusted out badly in Montreal's winters. Its funny because everytime I stopped for gas, I would fill up the oil and put a quart of fuel in ;)
Good memories!!!
I will certainly get in touch with Woody.
Again thanks
Here is a picture of the intake and carbs;)
intake.jpg
Guess where I first saw this :)
Motorhead porn.
Rino,
Additional to the usual good advice above I'll throw something else into the pot.
If you willing to sacrifice a few cc's for a smoother higher revving engine then this combo I just discovered is interesting.
Firstly if you have a 4.0 block then the crank has the crossbolted 4 bolt mains which are vitually unburstable so a girdle plate isn't really necessary.
I would have the block pressure tested as the 4.0's seem to have more issues with cracking than the earlier blocks, top hat linering if within your budget would be a good idea.
The combination I have worked out is a 4.6 82mm/3.228". crank Rover 4.0 rods and a Manley forged oversize 3.7" 4.6 Modular Ford piston.
The Manley piston has a Compression height of 1.220" the Rods are 6.110 and the crank throw is 1.614" = 8.944" the Rover deck height is 8.96" which puts the piston 16 thou. down the bore at TDC The Ford pin is .866" and the Rover rod is .966" so will require a 100 thou bush which is simple to do, and with a rebalance you just bolt it together.
With all the money you would save you can spend elswhere on valve gear etc.
Kevin
Hi Castleid,
Thanks for the input. Nice very nice indeed!
But if I may, and understand that its just my lack of knowledge here, but would not adding a 100 thou bush be the weak link in that setup. Will the bush not have a tendancing of wearing unevenly ?
Could we not get a rod at 6.120 with a .866 and have 3thou planned on the deck giving us a 2 thou clearance.
I thought that the piston should be at bore at TDC.
But I do like to save :)
Nice stuff, now you guys got me thinking, which is something I do not do often ;)
./RB
Rino,
Bushing the rod should have no effect as far as strength or wearing, 16 thou. deck clearance is much better than the standard rover engines which are normally 30 - 40 thou.
As for the strength of the standard Rover rods, a friend has just done a season of drag racing using a standard Rover 4.6 crank and rods and uses a 250 shot of gas to achieve over 600 ft/lb of torque and has had no problems, he does have forged pistons.
The pistons are priced at around $300 and come with flat tops for a very high comp and other styles but you would need to check depending on what compression ratio and camshaft you intend to run, a wide overlap (hot) cam will reduce the effective (dynamic) compression ratio. Bore size of piston is 3.7" same as Rover standard size so if bores are good no need to rebore just have the block cross hatch honed. They may do oversizes if you need/want a slightly bigger bore.
Is this an engine you want to run on the street?
The main issue with the larger capacity Rover engines is their ability to breath, if a set of TA heads is within your budget this would make a very nice engine.
You mentioned the Hardcasle book which is ok for basic if a little dated information, for more detailed and up to date data I would recommend the Des Hamill book "How to Power Tune Rover V8 Engines"
Kevin.
How do you specify the 94mm bore version? The stoke bore of the 4.6 is 90mm. I've found a bunch of references on the net to 94mm blocks... This piston would work for the 350 crank in a rover block too! I just gotta work some numbers.
Great find Kevin.
Nick,
You beat me to it. I was just checking the Manleysite and you are quite correct re the ford 4.6 bore size at 90mm and 4mm is a hell of an increase in bore size.
I looked at the e-bay site again and they state 3.7" Big Bore so I don't think it's an error, hope not because one of our guys has just ordered a set for a 4.6 rover.
Link to e-bay seller.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270321335131&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT
Kevin.
Further checking of the Manley catalogue reveals that they do in fact do custom forgings up to 3.7" for the Ford 4.6 modular forged piston.
Link.
http://www.manleyperformance.com/dl/2009/pistons.pdf
Scroll down to page 106.
Kevin.
LOL! I just found that too. Well about a half hour ago when I started writing the new thread about these parts. You really got me goin', Kevin!! Holy shit. What a find. Thanks man.
Nick,
Yes a good find, perhaps more important on our side of the pond because a set of forged pistons for the the big bore Rovers are around £800.00.
If only our engine parts were at the same price you guys can buy them for, anything in the UK is x 2 at least.
Kevin.
Dag-gonnit Kevin...and I was just going to stick a decent cam in my 4.6.
Tony,
I think you have plenty of cam choice over on your side and more access to custom grinds if required.
I used a Crower 50232 in my 4.35 and really like it, I have Buick 300 heads with big valves and the usual mods to seats and bowl areas.
It will pull down to 1500 RPM in 4th gear peak at 5500 and is said to be strong to 6500 if required. I've only had the engine to 5000RPM as running in and it gets there very quickly at nowhere near WOT
Kevin.
Kevin,
The more I read and search, the more I like your setup!
Though I cannot find alot of info on the TA heads yet, or maybe I am not looking at the right place..
So far my build as been steering some interest of our offroading group and a few want to a rebuild for their portal equipped trucks.
Your setup looks quite right for this, since I need torque at the mid range..
I am still debating EFI for the portal project, since the only other viable option for induction is a Holley TA and I am not too happy with that, also I can recoup the coil pack and go full Megasquirt with the EDIS spark code, but this option is not field servicable..
If I can get snorkels for weber side draft ;)))
TA is about halfway through the process of writing the program and setting up to machine the new head castings for the first production run. There might be one set of those heads still available and they will probably ship around the end of Nov or shortly afterwards. Price will be in the $2000-$2500 range.
Jim
Kevin - yeah, I've been checking out some cams. A lot of the guys here are using the 232 which can probably be attributed to it being a favorite of Dan LaGrou - with the torque these engines already have on the bottom end, it seems the 232 is a good fit for a drivable light car by moving the curve to upper lower and mid range. I do like a decent idle and I like 'em slightly lumpy too. Wondering if performance wise it would be okay to use the 232 with stage 1 rover heads and then grow into with the T/A heads later?
Jim - any idea what the T/A heads flow will be throughout the lift range. Will the Edelbrock performer provide sufficient breathing at the top end or will they stage these heads?
Tony, I'm afraid there may be a snag. According to one report Mike Sr. (TA) has decided to charge about 3 grand for the heads. That will price them over what most of us are willing to pay I'm afraid, and my own interest in promoting them has dwindled accordingly. As for the flow, all I can say is that they are supposed to be slightly better than their V6 heads.
Jim
Jim,
Thats bad news on the price and would make them about £2450.00/$4000.00 in the UK with shipping, duty and our dreaded VAT.
That is twice the price of the Real Steel Merlin heads which includes their own rocker covers, these heads are good for 330+ BHP out the box on a 5 Litre engine with the RS Tornado cam.
Kevin.
The profile of the 232 seems a bit off for our engines. I mean the LCA is so wide at 112º. It keeps the compression up pretty high due to the valve timing and that is probably attributable to the low RPM manners. Anybody else want to chime in here? I know a lot of guys really like this grind but it seems not to optimize performance based on our rod ratios and flow characteristics.
I know that Dan Jones ran some numbers for performance and he was coming up with much tighter LCAs (like 108º) for our uses. There is a lot of trade off, of course but with the cars we're putting these engines into we can get away with sacrificing some low end torque.
I'm sure there will be arguments both ways.
Long rod engines can tolerate lower LSA's. The Ford 292 Y-block has rods that are 6.324" long and a stroke of 3.3". It typically has a cam with 110 or 108 LSA.
Long rods leave the piston near top-dead-center longer, and that mitigates the effect of valve overlap.
Short rod engines really should have wider lobe separation angles to reduce the valve overlap. Also, engines with fuel injection, or engines that are emissions tested need the wider LSA to reduce the escape of unburned fuel.
I read Dan Jones' post about cam profiles and the work that David Vizard has done. I'll have to spend a little more time to understand the research that David did. But I also know that the cam grinders usually have a pretty good handle on what works.
I notice that the Crower cam profiles like the 50228 and 50229 have more exhaust duration. I assume this is because the exhaust ports don't flow very well and the additional exhaust duration is meant to compensate for this.
It seems that the lifters for Buick/Olds/Rover V8s are the same diameter as the Chevy lifters. I know that they make mushroom lifters for Chevy engines. Dan Jones mentioned the issues with profiles and lifter diameter and suggested that mushroom lifters are an alternative. If I can't find a roller cam system that works and is reasonably priced, I think I'll look into mushroom lifters. Having better cam profiles improves low-end torque enormously.
Whoops LSA not Lower Control Arms. You can tell I've been doing a lot of suspension mods lately. LOL.
Nick,
I'd agree i have sacrified some ultimate power and Dan did recommend I looked at tighter LCA cams, but i took the view that a little less top end power was good trade off for the better drivability I get with the 112 deg LCA, the 50232 has good lift and duration and will allow the engine to rev quite freely even past the peak power and doesn't drop off sharply as some cams do.
A bonus, difficult to describe but is that the engine has a nice feel to it in that it seems to match the car nicely, my mechanic who helped me do the original conversion and does a bit of work I can no longer handle, took the car home as his workshop was full (well thats what he said) and was wildly exited about how it drove to the extent that he want's first refusal should I sell it.
If i'd been building an engine purely for a track day or drag race car I'd haver chosen a different cam and taken the heads to at least the next level.
Anyway I thought 260 BHP per ton would be quick enough for my aged abilities.
Just horses for courses.
Kevin.
Nic, no need feel-bad about "L"ooser "C"am "Arrangement", many of us been dare-dun-dat. OK., onward. About $3k. plus rocker assemblies plus covers to clear same plus intake man. to fit/work, from TA.? Almost makes the Wildcat stuff palatable, except "he" won't sell to me anymore, I was "rude". My BAD! It's consensus time. How many want roller, hyd./mech.cams and lifters for BOP.'s? Anyone checked 300/340/350 iron blocks if they ,"bleed-off "oil feed pressure using std. sbc. roller lifters? If they don't, Bingo! Just about any cam maker will produce billet rollers , with a "decent" order for a resonable price. Small base circle and lifter dias. make a roller shine in these motors. Last time I talked with "Real Steel", they had a pre-paid waiting list of 15 hopefulls and didn't want to discuss details like airflow or port velocety on their product. Back in the 60's, Buick built a prototype "Hemi", Hot Rod mag. feature. Never made production-duh. What "if", there was a resonably priced, "Hemi" head for these engines? True it wouldn't be as narrow as stocker, but not as wide as old- school designs.Shallow hemi would allow resonable chamber volume while allowing adequate size valves in a 3.7" bore. This casting would also fit, "other" motors which woul help for volume of sales. Your constructive comments are welcomed, roverman.
They seriously won't sell to you? Weird. That's a good point about the roller cam. I read somewhere on this board that the SBB shares the same lifter dia. with the SBC. Is that true? Maybe we could just use some GM rollers and have a cam ground for it?
Do you mean like spark plug through the middle of the valve cover hemi? The spark plug placement isn't bad in the stock Buick. Not great valve placement though. Having the valves opposed and centered would be nice though.
Somebody else was mentioning using lotus 4-valve heads on our engines. Interesting. Am I off topic? Maybe we should have a brainstorm thread. LOL!
Nic, et-all, Yes when you order sbb lifters for more $, their probably sbc's. .842" dia.flat tappet and small base circle all hurts the lift rates and flow," under the curve". We could have .12" larger base circle with 350 sbb. bearings, except for that nagging rod- bang- the -cam, syndrom. If someone could post, bott./top widths,(side to side), of 300 and 340 intake manifold, it would aid my research. Yes I posted on Lotus heads on our fav's. It will require (4) new cams and ,best using deck adapter plates. Mega strokes available with cam outta there. No josh'n on a "real quasi hemi", plug in middle. Not "pure" hemi because of shallow chamber. shouldn't need custom rockers. There "may" be a useable int. man. available. To be continued. roverman.
"Thats bad news on the price and would make them about £2450.00/$4000.00 in the UK with shipping, duty and our dreaded VAT.
That is twice the price of the Real Steel Merlin heads which includes their own rocker covers, these heads are good for 330+ BHP out the box on a 5 Litre engine with the RS Tornado cam.
Kevin."
So Kevin, is there any way you could determine what our price stateside would be for the Real Steel heads? Also are flow rates available? I would like very much to get enough information to make a realistic comparison to the TA heads for an application such as a SBB iron block street motor like a 340 or 350. TA's price out the door is yet to be set in stone and there is yet a small window where they might be influenced.
Jim
Jim,
There cheaper than I thought, £1225.00 retail in the UK deduct the VAT for export = net £1065.00/$1757.00 add shipping and taxes your end, probably around $2000 which is value.
I think the heads require a specific stud kit and i'm still curious about the inlet port shape, seems odd with the cut off corner.
Heres R S price list which includes the dyno test for the 5 litre engine with the Merlin Heads.
Supply of the heads only recently commenced and they had a longish waiting list.
http://www.realsteel.co.uk/section1.pdf
Kevin
HOLY VAT! I'm gonna stop complaining about my property tax. I had discounted these heads way back because I figured the cost was too much. I think at the time the £ was trading at $2ish. I had no idea the VAT was deducted. Why wouldn't it be. Duh.
I've always liked the look of those heads. Nice combustion chamber shape.
Yeah, real ugly valve covers though from a shot Greg put up on the V8Buick board. Surprising since the engine they show on their home page has such nice ones. We really need port flow numbers though and chamber volume would be good too.
Jim
"According to one report Mike Sr. (TA) has decided to charge about 3 grand for the heads."
Disappointing - like throwing cold water on a male dog in heat in the middle of an SPCA homecoming parade :(
Merlin heads, out of box making 330 hp. w. 5L and Tornado cam? Flat hydraulic? Interesting, because TA-Mike Jr. just posted,"from a customer with personal experience", "Nobody uses the Merlin heads because they only flow 140 cfm.". Wer'e to believe the TA head will flow approx 300 cfm. in a 3.7" bore? I need to build a" Pro Stock" car suitable for the TA heads. It's getting tough to separate myth from malace, roverman.
And the latest:
"The ports come cast "small" and are opened up by either us machining them in the CNCs or by porting so the heads from us wont have the huge ports opened up, its that they have the ability to be as big as a V6 port (but flow more from the changed valve angle)."
So for your 3 grand you get as cast "small" ports? Such a deal! I'm sorry but for our purposes it looks like the Merlin is a better deal. 330hp is PLENTY of power in an MGB.
Jim
Jim,
Don't know where TA got the flow information, as to date Real steel have only recently delivered a few sets of heads and unless one of those buyers had the heads flow tested and then passed on the information can't see how they would know.
Anyway 140cfm looks to be very conservative given the dyno figures, the cam is not extreme as can be seen by the torque curve and should be comfortable to drive on the road.
I'm not sticking up for the Merlins because their British, I'm more disappointed that TA are not producing a cost effective and competitive product as we had hoped.
Kevin.
Art,
Tornado Hydraulic cam.
BYAJG120 Tornado Camshaft Price:£131.65
Used with our "5litre" Stroker kit, and our Merlin F85 cylinder heads, we obtained 337bhp at 5500rpm, and 352ft lbs of torque at 4500rpm.
The torque curve is quite flat, & the engine pulled like a train. Installation: use DW550 valve springs and DW520 retainers, spring seat
machining may be required. Machine valve guides as per instructions, use AZ1005 adjustable pushrods or AZ500 fixed pushrods to set
lifter preload. All preload setting info supplied with each camshaft.
Rpm Range Duration@ .050" Lift-1.60 Rockers
1800-6500rpm In.224deg Ex.231deg In; .508"Ex; .512" 110 degrees Lob seperation angle.
Kevin.
Kevin, Thanks for reply. Might be interesting to try a hyd. roller and possibly roller rockers to free-up the valve train. I wish there was an "Engine Masters" challenge for the Rover, using ALL thats available. Perhaps reduce some of the mis-information out there. roverman.
Rino,
For your usage I would say long stroke is the way to go, you guys need lots of low down torque, my engine is relatively short stroke, the 4.6 engine or a stroker engine to 4.8 or 5.0 would be a lot better and my cam is also a bit too far up the rev range for your usage.
Don't forget my engine is in a relatively lightweight 2200lb car.
Kevin.
Art,
Yes, the problem is we are always trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear (hope that translates) and then there's the cost factor.
The rollercam kit from Lanocha or was it wedge shop, is pretty pricey but is i believe made specifically for the Rover with shrouded rollers to avoid excess oil being thrown all round the engine, on their unit you can only see a small part of the roller, The cam is understandardably expensive as a custom steel unit.
Kevin.
Art,
Yes, the problem is we are always trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear (hope that translates) and then there's the cost factor.
The rollercam kit from Lanocha or was it wedge shop, is pretty pricey but is i believe made specifically for the Rover with shrouded rollers to avoid excess oil being thrown all round the engine, on their unit you can only see a small part of the roller, The cam is understandardably expensive as a custom steel unit.
Kevin.
Well I have been away for a short while, but I must say the quality of the posts is just well amazing!
My deal for the Triumph fell through, the owner decided to keep his car :(, But like I said before, I have 2 engines to rebuild :) , they pay the parts, I throw in the free time.
Now with the Rovers, and since these will be portal axel equipped, calculating the final drive ratio, they should be revving at about 3500 rpm at 57 mph!!! So I can play a bit with my cam options, due to the mechanical advantage that I have.
But yes low rpm torque is a MUST, but I need for these engines to rev a bit and stay in one piece.
So this build will be a bit of a challenge for me, however I will not start the build until I have worked it all out on paper first..
I agree that there is no replacement like displacement, but in this case I feel that a stock 4.6 with a well redone bottom end, some top hats and a worked out valve train to be able to sustain higher revs and, with some nice heads, could be the ticket here, induction wise I will go with a humm edlebrock perfomer and a holley 470 cfm TA, a custom grind on the cam to meet my needs, a nice set of headers.
Now for ignition I am considering a Ford Edis, but have yet to find a good programmable controller.
Since I am not planning on revving anywhere past 6000 rpm, I can consider an HEI.
A question to the group, with the different angles these trucks run at, is there any issues with oiling, that I should consider??
Again many thanks,
./RB
This is what I built for my EDIS:
(http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/4432/2881/23578940419_large.jpg)
(http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/4432/2881/23578940356_large.jpg)
It's a MegaJolt controller. Tiny box. You build it for like $70. They build it for $140. Here's a link:
http://www.autosportlabs.net/Main_Page
It's got a couple nice features like a switched curve for two settings. It can be used with a TPS or MAP referenced function. Fun to build. I was trying to look for the forum where we discussed this before. I think it was something about crank triggers... Hope that helps.