Anyone Tried 1/2" Head Bolts??

Is your timing fixed? Do you have a way of varying the timing relative to engine, IAT temp? Run more timing at the beginning of the run and then taper it back on the top end?

IMO, the deck thickness between the bolts of the Stage II head with coolant passages is not going to take you where you want to go. Time for solid billet.

Don't get me wrong though. I do respect the attempt and wish you all the luck.

Is it possible to solid block the heads???!!!
 
Mike, do you think maybe you're entering the realm of semi-controlled detonation with your tuneup? I've heard of some alcohol tuners being able to dance that fine line. But the consequences of stepping off that line is never good, and the bigger head bolts isn't going to be enough to save you, if that is what's truly happening.

That much performance gain from 2 degrees leads me to believe you're tuning to that edge. The slightest change in weather or any other tuning parameter can be disasterous when you're running that fine line.

There is no question that my tuneup is not perfect. I barely understand what this thing wants. With most engines the stronger the parts the wider the tuning window is. People just give it what it will stand. In most cases people have the head gasket as a fuse , which is also the limit!! If you increase the limits then you can get more aggressive with the tune. I have found the limit of this set up with 7/16" arp chrome moly fasteners. Now its time to increase that limit , and the only option I see is to increase the fastener YIELD!! That yield will now be nearly double what it was!! Proof is in the puddin!! Puddin is on the stove!!:D Mike:cool:
 
Is your timing fixed? Do you have a way of varying the timing relative to engine, IAT temp? Run more timing at the beginning of the run and then taper it back on the top end?

IMO, the deck thickness between the bolts of the Stage II head is not going to take you where you want to go. Time for solid billet.

Timing is fixed. As far as I know there is nothing will retard timing on an odd-fire ignition. I tried a msd timing retard box at the BPG race in 2009. Took me 2 days to finally figure out what the heck was going on with this thing. Turned out that the box couldnt even be hooked up to the ignition system without screwing it up. Besides Im pretty well convinced that it needs more fuel and not less timing. Mike:cool:
 
Timing is fixed. As far as I know there is nothing will retard timing on an odd-fire ignition. I tried a msd timing retard box at the BPG race in 2009. Took me 2 days to finally figure out what the heck was going on with this thing. Turned out that the box couldnt even be hooked up to the ignition system without screwing it up. Besides Im pretty well convinced that it needs more fuel and not less timing. Mike:cool:

More fuel will certainly help keep you away from detonation. Not sure if it will cut into your performance.
 
I edited to a post above. Not sure if you caught it. Have you considered solid blocking the heads?
 
I edited to a post above. Not sure if you caught it. Have you considered solid blocking the heads?

I have used hard block in my heads for probably 6 or 7 years. Last year I would burn the plating down about 1 thread after maybe 3 to 4 passes. I have had it where it doesnt even burn any plating to burning the ground strap 1/2 way off (Thats ugly) Of coarse no burning is way safe and is where I needed to be, but not patacularly fast. Mike:cool:
 
I have used hard block in my heads for probably 6 or 7 years. Last year I would burn the plating down about 1 thread after maybe 3 to 4 passes. I have had it where it doesnt even burn any plating to burning the ground strap 1/2 way off (Thats ugly) Of coarse no burning is way safe and is where I needed to be, but not patacularly fast. Mike:cool:
Sounds good. Lately, I've been shooting for the base of the threads (the flat part facing the chamber) being burned about 3/4 off.

What plug are you using? Do you have a pic? I'd like to see the ground strap.
 
Well the safe way to make more power is to burn more fuel, but still keep the peak pressure within safe limits. Fortunately burning more fuel doesn't necessarily mean higher peak cyclinder pressure as well (per the article). However, it certainly CAN mean more cylinder pressure, if we let it. Our job is to not let it make too much. Or, keep pushing and just live with some leakage problems :)

TurboTR
 
Well the safe way to make more power is to burn more fuel, but still keep the peak pressure within safe limits. Fortunately burning more fuel doesn't necessarily mean higher peak cyclinder pressure as well (per the article). However, it certainly CAN mean more cylinder pressure, if we let it. Our job is to not let it make too much. Or, keep pushing and just live with some leakage problems :)

TurboTR
In the world of methanol, more fuel doesn't always translate to more cylinder pressure or power. Depending on where the initial tuneup is, more fuel can mean more cooling of the charge during compression and combustion, lowering of peak pressures and a slow down of the flame speed.
Again, depending on where the initial tuneup is, sometimes less fuel with methanol can mean more power, faster flame speed and a higher peak cylinder pressure. Especially if you run the tuneup on the border of semi-controlled detonation.

You have to be careful with methanol and timing. At a certain mixture strength, the flame speed will be at its max. That would require less ignition lead. As you move rich or lean from that target mixture, more timing is required due to a slowing flame speed.
There are other such nuances you come across when tuning methanol.

For instance, my car. I know that 11.5-11.8 is a killer number to shoot for on the a/f readout (I'm using gasoline numbers on my system). But, I wouldn't dare run that number on the top end. I shoot for 10.7-11.3. That's a safe range for me. I know I'm probably losing out on some power, but I can't afford to run my machine at a tuneup level where the range of mistake gets very tight.
 
Here are pics of the old and the new studs/nuts , and the last 2 sets of plugs I used. They are NGK R5724-10 with the ground strap modified to shorten it up as much as possible. Mike:cool:
 

Attachments

  • MVC-064F.JPG
    MVC-064F.JPG
    61.3 KB · Views: 322
  • MVC-065F.JPG
    MVC-065F.JPG
    86.9 KB · Views: 321
  • MVC-066F.JPG
    MVC-066F.JPG
    82.6 KB · Views: 317
Is there a reason why you have to use a projected nose plug? You could get an even shorter ground strap with a regular nose plug.
The heat line on some of those ground straps is a little scary.
 
Is there a reason why you have to use a projected nose plug? You could get an even shorter ground strap with a regular nose plug.
The heat line on some of those ground straps is a little scary.

I dont think they are actually projected tip. I have used retracted tip before and there is a performance difference , with the retracted tip not doing as well.
Agreed that those are hotter than the preffered look. These were plugs I used at the BPG race trying to move towards a 1/4 mile pass. Never made it past 1150' but the exh temps were at 1350 deg. So hopefully with what I have learned about my fuel system and the changes im making to it , and the head bolt mod I can get after it a bit more. Mike:cool:
 
I am curious why your cylinder pressures are so high? I don't want to sound offensive, but a 3.99 in a dragster should be under 1300hp @ 1800 lbs (guessing on the weight). I don't think the head studs are the real source of your problems.
When I tuned on the other Buick alky dragster, the only time cylinder pressure was a real problem was when we didn't run water in the head and cracked a combustion chamber.
 
I am curious why your cylinder pressures are so high? I don't want to sound offensive, but a 3.99 in a dragster should be under 1300hp @ 1800 lbs (guessing on the weight). I don't think the head studs are the real source of your problems.
When I tuned on the other Buick alky dragster, the only time cylinder pressure was a real problem was when we didn't run water in the head and cracked a combustion chamber.

Cal, No offense taken. Just trying to pass along what Im doing. Cylinder pressure was a problem with barrys dragster as he looked to me for what to do with head gaskets and what I was using/doing after he had problems. I believe after the BG head torching, he went to copper gaskets and o-ring trying to resolve it. Also dont forget that Barry ran 40# of boost and Im now at 60#+with this blower. Bound to be a huge difference on something!!
Dont forget that this 1471 supercharger probably is using around 400 crank HP to turn over 7000rpm @ 60# boost. So if you couple that with the 1300Hp its going to take to 3.99 ,thats 1700Hp it needs to make. Also the amount of timing reqd for this thing to run is sure to be causing some of the pressure.
As stated all along, Im quite sure the tune is not a Hartline approved tune but Im doing the best I can with what I have.

PS Cal I need to talk to you about the XFI package for my bug project:eek:
When is a good time to call you?? PM please!! Mike:cool:
 
I'm not saying I could tune it any better! Those injectors and valves are way out of my league :eek:
You need to get a more efficient blower j/k :tongue:

PM sent!
 
I'm not saying I could tune it any better! Those injectors and valves are way out of my league :eek:
You need to get a more efficient blower j/k :tongue:

Thats how I feel about the EFI!! Outta my league!! I have the most efficent blower on the market - period. Next step would be a screw charger. Mike
 
This is what I call a non-projected, regular gap plug. This is what you should be running. That hot ground electrode will get you in trouble for sure.

Notice how fat the ground strap is for better heat transfer. This plug is the closest thing you will find to a retracted or surface gap plug without the drawbacks.
 

Attachments

  • IMGP1229rs.jpg
    IMGP1229rs.jpg
    90 KB · Views: 292
  • IMGP1231rs.jpg
    IMGP1231rs.jpg
    89.5 KB · Views: 282
Top