So the Super Chicken has the AWD advantage. It also weighs less than my car and makes more power. I'm also certain that Paul is a better driver. All in all I'm lucky to be within a handful of seconds of his times. 
So the Super Chicken has the AWD advantage. It also weighs less than my car and makes more power. I'm also certain that Paul is a better driver. All in all I'm lucky to be within a handful of seconds of his times.
KevinGale wrote: I'm not so sure about the talented driver part. Power and sticky tires cover a lot of sins.
Kevin, I appreciate and admire your humility, but anyone that can control that amount of power (and girth) is not short on talent! I imagine that an AWD car of similar power would be easier to drive than your modified for the reasons you mentioned. I love watching your car on the hill!
It was a great Burke Mountain Hillclimb. Here is home at Mt Burke, Campsite #1
This is a prime campsite. First it is big enough for the motorhome and a trailer. I don't even have to take the trailer off the motorhome. Most sites are small and people have to park the trailers a half mile up the road. Most sites are not even big enough for a motorhome. Second this site is right in the heart of the action. Cars are staging right in front of the site.
I had to wait many years to get this site. For a long time I camped in the upper lot which was a long walk when I was creating results for timing an scoring. The Rutan clan claimed this site and after that John Marsha had it. But John retired from racing and I pounced on it. Probably helped that I've been around a few years and had some seniority. It also helped when I pointed out that everyone would get results quicker if I no longer had to make multiple hikes to the upper lot while working out timing and scoring problems.
I finished 4th at Burke but I'm still pretty happy.
For one thing Joey Kale is back. So I have another powerful AWD car to contend with. Still the winning time was a 2:02. I've run a 2:02 in the past but Sunday I stalled out with a pair of 2:05s. I probably would have taken another shot at it but on the bring down from the second 2:05 run I heard a noise. It sounds like something is loose related to the torque arm. Last time I chose to ignore this type of noise I had to fix a bunch of stuff after the torque arm broke or came free. So this time I opted to do the smart thing and load the car on the trailer. I'll have to figure out what is wrong before the next Burke next month.
Here is a shot of the car going by check 1. The car is really light at this point. Almost airborne. Check 1 is the combination of a corner and a slight rise. You can see some dust because I am shamelessly cutting the corner. I get both inside wheels completely off the pavement here.
And here is a shot at one of the hairpin turns. I'm not sure if this is check 3, check 4 or check 7. My guess is 4.
Checking tire pressures while loading for Burke.
I've worked out a system over the years.
Always, always make sure there are no leaks when mounting tires. I fill them then check the pressure after 24 hours. If a tire has lost any air I find the leak and fix it even if that means dismounting the tire and doing more prep work on the wheel. Usually the problem is the wheel needs a bit of sanding and paint in the bead area.
If the tire has no leaks it will hold pressure for months. So I know when I am grabbing tires for the next event they have just about the same pressure as I was running in them as the last event.
I don't want to start with that minimum pressure then I might have to add air at the event which is annoying. These big tires are really sensitive to outside temperature so the minimum at one event might be too low at another event. Also I generally like to start out with a higher pressure and gradually let air out until the car feels good.
The trick is to not add too much pressure. Too much is a problem in two ways. 1) If I'm suddenly in a rush I might need to take a run in the car without even having time to check the tire pressures. (Like when I have to run up to work at finish for a while because of a timing problem.) So the initial pressure needs to be close enough to run. 2) Letting lots of air out of all the tires to get back to a reasonable starting pressure is just a pain. I don't want 30 lbs in all the tires when I need 16 or less.
To get the correct starting pressure I could add air and check the pressure with gauge on each tire but I've found with trial and error that if I put the air chuck on the tire and count to 30 I get just the right amount of added air to each tire before I throw it on the trailer.
Burke Results. Showing class results for a change but FL placing is the same as the overall.
KG, I'm back on page 12-13ish and I see Butch King in a Chevy Silverado running top tenish....don't mean to hijack but that's got me way curious, any particulars? .....oh love the read so far...awesome
In reply to 759NRNG:
It's not a real Silverado. It is a stock car with a truck body and a 440 cubic inch smallblock.
Here are a couple pictures of Butch's truck. Looks like this was at an SCCNH AutoX.
Butch has ALL the power!!!!! The real shocker was how fast his Chevy Blazer was.
Was that blazer AWD?
In reply to 759NRNG:
Nope just RWD. Butch just really knows how to thrash.
KG, I've noticed a common theme with you and Troyer....the less you have to fart with it the more smiles per mile you have. That being said, I was wondering if a hyd roller cam would make things even less stressful. Or is it that a 'grind' in a hydroller is not available(this side of custom grind$$$) with the same or closish numbers (lift,duration,lsa....)?
In reply to 759NRNG:
When shopping for a roller cam for my c4 challenge car I was shocked to learn Lunati would custom grind a cam to any spec for same $$ as one in stock. About $250
In reply to 759NRNG:
The mild solid roller is about as easy as it gets for a race motor. I check the valve lash about once a year and it's always fine. If I had to mess with it constantly I'd do something else.
I do have the stud girdles. On old motors with solid flat tappet cam I remember having to adjust valve lash all the time. Sometimes between runs. I credit the stud girdles. They lock everything together so in theory nothing can more or back off. Which results in a lot less adjusting.
Ovid_and_Flem wrote: In reply to 759NRNG: When shopping for a roller cam for my c4 challenge car I was shocked to learn Lunati would custom grind a cam to any spec for same $$ as one in stock. About $250
These days with CNC grinding machines the cam companies can pretty much make whatever you want for the same cost. John Reed and I played around a lot with engine simulation software to test lots of cam combinations before picking just what we wanted.
I was surprised when I took my heads off before Washington that my car is actually a solid flat tappet setup. I had thought that it was a roller when I bought it. I just recently installed stud girdles as valve lash was a pain. It seems to be holding better.
Any appreciable diff HP wise between solid vs hyd?
Hydraulic lifters will only support a certain amount of spring pressure. As cam profiles get more agressive and valve lift increases spring pressures also go up. At a certain point the hydraulic portion of the lifter will just collapse rather than lift the valve more. Sorry to hijack your post Kevin.
ME too KG....thanks C392... 
Hey KG what is the sweet spot with this bullet(RPM)...or is that a tripletiptopifitellyoui'mgonnahavetoyousecret? The bore vs stroke on this interests me ALOT..... I want to build a streetable SBC TQ monster coming on at 2000rpm(realistic?), but not having to spin the piss outa it. Where do I start?
In reply to 759NRNG:
No secrets.
Bore: 4.165" Stroke: 3.5" 11.43 to 1 compression
Here is the cam card. This is as I recall a mild roller grind that was designed to be easy on parts and live on the street.
My engine simulation software says this makes 400 ft lbs of torque at not much over 2000 rpm.
Crawled under the car (can't wait until I get a lift in the new garage) and checked to torque arm. I was right things were loose. The two bolts holding the torque arm to the rear end were loose enough that I took them off with my fingers. Another run or two and they would have come off. I had that happen at Burke once before. It ruins both shocks when the read end twists and means a ride down on the wrecker. So I am glad I was aware enough to know something was wrong. Here is the torque arm. 
Other than needing some paint the arm itself is fine. I elected to take it out because I noticed the rod end at the front that goes through the rubber biscuit was very loose. I could get it clunk moving it up and down. When I got it out I could see the end was a little out of round. So the rod end needs to be replaced. Here is the piece. Notice anything strange? 
Hmm I don't think I can probably order one of these. Notice the threading on both ends but not in the middle. This started life as a rod end and a long bolt. Looking closely I could see that they had been welded together and then ground down. The good news is that I have a rod end and a long bolt I can cut down. So I'll just weld them together and replicate the part. I'm also going to replace the bolts that loosened on the other end of the torque arm. The bolts I was using are course thread and I'm going to swap them out for fine thread to get more clamping and I'm adding a nyloc lock nut. Maybe the combination will stop the problem I have with these bolts loosening up over time.
Maybe an all metal locknut if this is a continuing problem?
What about a castle nut and cotter key? Its good enough for the oe woth steering linkage over 200k.....
Both are good thoughts. I think I'll try the fine thread and the nyloc first. They really should have been fine thread all along. They are a single shear mount so the extra clamping would be welcome. It's not a constant problem but these bolts have loosened a a few times and it did once cost me a pair of shocks.
I think I may also see another reason for the problem. Looking at the bracket that the torque uses to connect to the rear end and can see some deformation. The bracket is just 1/2" mild steel. I had the rod ends clamped directly to the bracket. I can see where the rod ends have made permanent dimples in the steel. In retrospect I'm not sure what I was thinking having a small hardened rod end bolted to a soft piece of steel. There should have been a hardened washer between them. So as the steel deformed under load or as the hardened steel just gradually ate away at the softer steel it would gradually reduce the clamping force until things just came apart.
At least that is my theory. We will see if adding washers, fine thread bolts and a nyloc makes the problem go away permanently.
You'll need to log in to post.
