Desktop Dyno?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Feb 10, 2004 | 01:57 PM

Jobless

Thread Starter

Freshman User

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 30

Likes: 0

From: Monroe, WA

Desktop Dyno?

I just finished building my 390 and wanted to see if someone was bored sitting behind their computer.

390 bored .030 over (396ci)
Stock FE heads
Edelbrock Performer 390 intake
Double roller timing chain
Headers w/dual 2.25" exhaust
Edelbrock 750cfm carb
Stock connecting rods
Cam : Duration at .006" lift Intake 272 Exhaust 282
Duration at .050" lift Intake 194 Exhaust 204
Lift at cam Intake .265" Exhaust .280"
Lift at valve Intake .460" Exhaust .480"

Thanks

Brad

Feb 10, 2004 | 03:19 PM

gtex

Lead Driver

Joined: Apr 2001

Posts: 6,175

Likes: 21

From: Texas

that looks like the Edelbrock performer Cam. Check out their web-site, under Dyno results, they have a graph. It shows about 410lb-ft of torque. It doesn't provide a HP value, but I bet it's around 285 HP..

You're running a slightly bigger carb, but that won't provide any benefit with that cam. If you didn't already know, that's a pretty mild cam. It's very close to stock. Which means it will work well with your stock heads and valve train.

I may try to run the DD when I get home.

Feb 10, 2004 | 03:40 PM

Jobless

Thread Starter

Freshman User

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 30

Likes: 0

From: Monroe, WA

Yes it is the Edelbrock performer cam, I put it in strictly for towing not HP.

Let me know what the DD says...Thanks

Feb 11, 2004 | 01:00 AM

fling

Senior User

Joined: Sep 2003

Posts: 131

Likes: 1

Anybody know where I can get desktop dyno cheaper? Ive been looking for it everywhere. $40 is a little steep. Lemme know thanks

Last edited by Ratsmoker; Feb 11, 2004 at 11:55 PM.

Feb 11, 2004 | 12:13 PM

rusty70f100

Post Fiend

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 8,600

Likes: 4

From: Iowa

Jobless: I ran it through DD2k (known to be optimistic) and got 459 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm and 295 hp at 4000 rpm. This would be a low rpm stump puller, and a good running reliable motor IMO.

On EDIT: The crane 343901 or the edelbrock cam would be perfect for towing, but I'd lean toward the edelbrock cam. 459 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm means you could pull a barge up mount everest.

I do think you should look into a bigger cam, like the crane 343901 or the crane 343941.

Last edited by Ratsmoker; Feb 11, 2004 at 11:56 PM.

Feb 11, 2004 | 10:50 PM

Jobless

Thread Starter

Freshman User

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 30

Likes: 0

From: Monroe, WA

Quote:

Originally posted by rusty70f100
Jobless: I ran it through DD2k (known to be optimistic) and got 459 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm and 295 hp at 4000 rpm. This would be a low rpm stump puller, and a good running reliable motor IMO.

On EDIT: The crane 343901 or the edelbrock cam would be perfect for towing, but I'd lean toward the edelbrock cam. 459 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm means you could pull a barge up mount everest.

I do think you should look into a bigger cam, like the crane 343901 or the crane 343941.

Thanks dude.....I'm glad to hear it's gonna have some torque cause it's main use is pulling my Jeep on the flatbed trailer.

A bigger cam? So I can up the ponies, but wouldn't that decrease the torque?

Last edited by Ratsmoker; Feb 11, 2004 at 11:56 PM.

Feb 11, 2004 | 10:56 PM

gtex

Lead Driver

Joined: Apr 2001

Posts: 6,175

Likes: 21

From: Texas

My 2cent opinon.

Wth the bigger displacement V8s and especially the FEs. It takes a lot of cam and high flowing top-end parts to detract from the low end torque enough to notice.

Trending Topics

My 1976 F-250

3.9k

263.4k
7.3 or/vs 6.7

20

549
Another Crank no start -- sorry

27

483
VIN Meaning

17

330
Header tube temp question.

15

223

Feb 11, 2004 | 11:41 PM

rusty70f100

Post Fiend

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 8,600

Likes: 4

From: Iowa

Quote:

Originally posted by Jobless
Thanks dude.....I'm glad to hear it's gonna have some torque cause it's main use is pulling my Jeep on the flatbed trailer.

A bigger cam? So I can up the ponies, but wouldn't that decrease the torque?

Not a whole lot. With the 901, the horsepower is up to 312 at 4500 rpm, and the torque flattens out to around 430 ft-lbs from 2000 rpm up 'till 3500 rpm. It slowly tapers off from there.

With the 941, the horsepower is up to 331 at 4500, but the torque is down to 401 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm, peaking at 416 ft-lbs at 3500, slowly tapering off from there.

Honestly any of these cams would work good for towing, but I think the edelbrock cam would be perfect for towing. The torque is higher than the 901 up 'till a little over 3000 rpm, so going down the highway it'll be pulling hard. This cam should get excellent milage too. The lift is just right for long valvetrain life, no special tricks need to be performed.

Again DD2k numbers are not to be taken as gospel, but it is good for comparing different parts IMO.