Jomar 351C Stud Girdles

quote:

Jomar 351C Pro Series Stud Girdles

I am interested in bying these. How much for shipping to Norway? Thanks Gudmund

This is a must if you are going to make horse power. Beautiful set!

quote:

This is a must if you are going to make horse power

I don't have them, but I have 600 HP. So maybe don't claim these certain truths, people might believe them...

They really are just additional insurance. The problem is they are cumbersome and slow you down quite a bit to work on the valve train.

I would say you only really "need" them for a mechanical roller lifter camshaft.

The 7/16" studs are pretty sturdy but if you race should be changed out periodically for safety. On the Windsors I've broken a few of the 3/8" studs. That's pretty common.

They are pretty though and you will only know if you needed them (past tense) if you brake a stud, then it's too late.

You will probably need taller valve covers then stock to use them.

Either way, this isn't a bad deal.

I thought about them for my new motor I am building, but I really don't plan on spinning it at >7000 RPM.

I also had not considered the a$$-pain factor Doug pointed out about working on the valve train. Also didn't realize they were most effective with a mechanical roller cam (I am doing a hydraulic roller).

The price seems good, and they look cool.

You may want those valve covers with the clear tops so you can show them off?

Rocky

I don't have them, but I have 600 HP. So maybe don't claim these certain truths, people might believe them.

Wow 600 horse power? .turbo? blower?In the "Hot Rod Magazine" engine build off a Cleveland won it with 575 horse power and 553lb-ft and 10.84 to 1 compression, flat tappet Comp 251 / 255 @ 50 cam You must have a really built engine. this one has only 415 c.i. built by John Kaase racing engines. The stud girdles is cheap insurance.

quote:

Wow 600 horse power? .turbo? blower?

408 stroker with CHI heads and intake and a roller hydraulic cam with a profile form hell. No forced induction

Stud girdles are in fact good insurance. Possibly the best feature is, you make 1.0 valve clearance adjustment, lock the stud girdle down and the settings do not change. That's good for hydraulic, flat tappet or roller cams. So if one does not need to dig in there very often, 'cumbersome' does not enter into the equation. I've had one on our car since the '90s without any adjustments being needed. I seldom rev to 6000.

quote:

Originally posted by pantera chris:
I don't have them, but I have 600 HP. So maybe don't claim these certain truths, people might believe them.

Wow 600 horse power? .turbo? blower?In the "Hot Rod Magazine" engine build off a Cleveland won it with 575 horse power and 553lb-ft and 10.84 to 1 compression, flat tappet Comp 251 / 255 @ 50 cam You must have a really built engine. this one has only 415 c.i. built by John Kaase racing engines. The stud girdles is cheap insurance.

I'm not sure where that hp number comes from? I personally have seen three iron 357's on the dyno that showed 550hp at 6500rpm. I don't remember the torque numbers.

I would expect them to be right around 500. Maybe 480, 490 @ 5,000rpm.

The 357's "Nascar engines" with the latest high port aluminum heads are in the 750 to 800hp areas. Those are dyno numbers, not imaginary. Granted, they are very high rpm engine and do not lend themselves well to a street car.


The current 289's (292) that are running in "Vintage Racing" are competitive in the 620 to 650hp area. If you can't make that then stay home, so I would say that the numbers showing in that particular engine competition are just standardized for their own purposes.

Also, if you can't turn 8,200 rpm consistently without blowing up, you don't belong out there.

I will also point out that big cube engines are about torque rather then just horsepower engines.

A good example is a 427 Ford in a Corbra chassis vs. a 289. Currently a 351c will make about 100 hp more then a vintage 427 BUT you will see the difference on the track with the 427 can just pull away at virtually any point that the driver can handle it.

The 427 CAN be difficult to handle because it will just break the tires loose at any point. The 351 is easier to handle because of that lesser ability. It locks in to a "groove" easier.


The 427's topped out at around 485hp in competition form in the Mark II GT40's. That is probably still where they are at now but don't tell the engine. It can still beat the tar out of you.

It is a 7,000rpm engine in that form. On a drag strip, that's a different animal.

quote:

I'm not sure where that hp number comes from?

From the dyno sheet that followed the engine. Built by pros, tested and optimized on their dyno. not built by amateur enthusiasts claiming HP++++. But OK, I must admit I exaggerated a bit, it says 593.2 HP@5900 and 564.7 ftlbs@4900. That's 600 HP in my book, has a nice ring to it. But thanks for asking

And since it's for sale now, so I only drive it carefully, I say, never beaten, and never will be beaten...

quote:

I personally have seen three iron 357's on the dyno that showed 550hp at 6500rpm. I don't remember the torque numbers.

I would expect them to be right around 500. Maybe 480, 490 @ 5,000rpm.

I agree. That's what you Americans call a happy-dyno, way too high numbers, but customer goes home happy.

They aren't happy customers when they get lapped by a car with 100 less horsepower.

I personally never liked this dyno number business.

I liked the NHRA factor numbers better. They always seem to work out and tend to explain the results often.

The variables are more understandable and more equal to both cars.


I will say that in the days of 351c Pro Stock Pintos and the like, 750 to 800 hp was a proven commodity at every event.

Your smoking something over their in Denmark, your the one with happy dyno numbers, lets see your dyno sheet. I think you should contact "Hot Rod Magazine" and bring your engine over. As far as "Grumpy Jenkins" and his Pinto's where did you get those numbers? they were running 14 to 1 injected. NASCAR the 357 engine is running every known to man advantage including a dry sump 121/2 to 1 and fuel injection, 0 or 5 weight oil and super high tec internals, horse power does not just materialize by waving a wand dipped in B.S.

quote:

As far as "Grumpy Jenkins" his Pinto's were blown.

No, haven't smoked anything, but still don't understand what you write?

600 HP normally aspirated is not a miracle these days, technology, not least in wild rollercam profiles, has come far

I'll be happy to post my dyno sheet if you ask nicely...

Let's see it, what cam are you running?

Dunno, proprietary info I'm afraid. But it's only 7-8 inhg with a nice 4 corner idle @ 1000 rpm, and I have next to no power below 2200 rpm. So I guess plenty duration and overlap

I though so, Proprietary ? I hope that this is a learning experience for the B.S. brigade. The U.S.A. is the home of horse power, telling the truth will set you free.I only posted the H.R. article to bring everybody back to earth, sorry if your parachute didn't open. I think your hawking of that book is against the rules i hope.

quote:

Originally posted by pantera chris:
As far as "Grumpy Jenkins" and his Pinto's where did you get those numbers? B.S.

From Dyno Don Nicholson his-self! 9,200 rpm starts! Definitely NOT for the faint of heart!

Jack Roush never quoted a number that I remember?

Jenkins was a Mouse trainer. Strictly SB Chevy.

Sorry for the FOPA He ( Grump) @the 68 NHRA win was insane! In a Nova. When Dyno dropped out no one could duplicate his Cleveland expertise!
.

Well yes, he was the man on Clevelands. I don't think anyone ever asked him how many engines he blew up and if all the debris has re-entered the Earths atmosphere yet but I always felt safer with a helmet and face guard watching the scene.

Of course he got lots of parts free from Ford Engineering for him to "test". Some was even salvageable when he was done with them and even recognizable too?

My stock 351 pushes 900!

900 what?

I have those finned aluminum valve covers with DeTomaso script on. Is there anyone that know if these girdles will fit under? Thanks Gudmund

Gudmund, many 351-C stud girdles will fit under cast aluminum 'DeTomaso' valve covers. The only girdles likely to cause trouble are the more bulky 'Grand National' racing types once made for NASCAR. You will need to remove the stamped steel baffles from inside. I have run a different make of stud girdle (no longer available) together with full roller rockers under those covers since the late '80s with no problems at all. I also use early 'large' PCV grommets for both oil filling and PCV and have no oil leaks around them. If there's any sort of clearance trouble with any cast valve cover, I suggest trimming the girdle to fit, not the valve covers, or gluing two valve cover gaskets on top of each other to cheaply raise the things up 1/4" for clearance.

Worst case scenario if the stud girdle is too tall and you want to keep the De Tomaso valve covers is to get a set of valve cover spacers.

Julian