Andrews "b"
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 12,878
Likes: 5,449
From: la la land jerzey
don't know what doug did to his heads on his shovel, but its kick only and starts real easy runs great and he takes it anyplace he is going and has forever
the guys from jersey back in the day racing hi gear fuelers, would say the ports are really to big --- but would port them on street bikes and put bigger valves with 5/16 stems to get more flow for street bikes because the guys wanted it - not because it did anything
any long duration / bigger lift - cam responds to compression - and the bigger cam you use in the combination of inches and compression the faster it will go --- its an air pump not rocket science
the guys from jersey back in the day racing hi gear fuelers, would say the ports are really to big --- but would port them on street bikes and put bigger valves with 5/16 stems to get more flow for street bikes because the guys wanted it - not because it did anything
any long duration / bigger lift - cam responds to compression - and the bigger cam you use in the combination of inches and compression the faster it will go --- its an air pump not rocket science
Thread Starter
|
Road Master
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 979
Likes: 38
From: new orleans,la
Kinetic energy (KE) = ˝ mv2 we know this from our intro physics classes where m is mass and v is velocity.
E = qV gives us the energy of a charged particle where q is the charge and V is the potential difference in Volts in which the particle falls and gains energy.
This engine uses Xenon atoms that have a mass m = 2.2 x 10-25 kg and a charge of the all-familiar q of 1.6 x 10-19 coulombs, a constant that we all know and have indelibly printed into our engineering brains.
We know that 1/2mv2(Kinetic energy) = q (charge) x V (Voltage)
So, now let’s calculate the speed of a Xenon atom in km/hr, assuming that the voltage grid V of the ion engine is 1,300 V:
Let KE = E and we now solve for v:
Kinetic energy = charge x Voltage
v2 = 2qV/m = 2(1.6 x 10-19coulombs)(1,300V)/(2.2 x 10-25kg) = 2.0 x 109
Taking the square root of 2.0 x 109 gives us v = 44.2 km/sec or 159,000 km/hr WOW! That’s fast.
E = qV gives us the energy of a charged particle where q is the charge and V is the potential difference in Volts in which the particle falls and gains energy.
This engine uses Xenon atoms that have a mass m = 2.2 x 10-25 kg and a charge of the all-familiar q of 1.6 x 10-19 coulombs, a constant that we all know and have indelibly printed into our engineering brains.
We know that 1/2mv2(Kinetic energy) = q (charge) x V (Voltage)
So, now let’s calculate the speed of a Xenon atom in km/hr, assuming that the voltage grid V of the ion engine is 1,300 V:
Let KE = E and we now solve for v:
Kinetic energy = charge x Voltage
v2 = 2qV/m = 2(1.6 x 10-19coulombs)(1,300V)/(2.2 x 10-25kg) = 2.0 x 109
Taking the square root of 2.0 x 109 gives us v = 44.2 km/sec or 159,000 km/hr WOW! That’s fast.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 8,055
Likes: 8,080
From: Canada
Kinetic energy (KE) = ˝ mv2 we know this from our intro physics classes where m is mass and v is velocity.
E = qV gives us the energy of a charged particle where q is the charge and V is the potential difference in Volts in which the particle falls and gains energy.
This engine uses Xenon atoms that have a mass m = 2.2 x 10-25 kg and a charge of the all-familiar q of 1.6 x 10-19 coulombs, a constant that we all know and have indelibly printed into our engineering brains.
We know that 1/2mv2(Kinetic energy) = q (charge) x V (Voltage)
So, now lets calculate the speed of a Xenon atom in km/hr, assuming that the voltage grid V of the ion engine is 1,300 V:
Let KE = E and we now solve for v:
Kinetic energy = charge x Voltage
v2 = 2qV/m = 2(1.6 x 10-19coulombs)(1,300V)/(2.2 x 10-25kg) = 2.0 x 109
Taking the square root of 2.0 x 109 gives us v = 44.2 km/sec or 159,000 km/hr WOW! Thats fast.
E = qV gives us the energy of a charged particle where q is the charge and V is the potential difference in Volts in which the particle falls and gains energy.
This engine uses Xenon atoms that have a mass m = 2.2 x 10-25 kg and a charge of the all-familiar q of 1.6 x 10-19 coulombs, a constant that we all know and have indelibly printed into our engineering brains.
We know that 1/2mv2(Kinetic energy) = q (charge) x V (Voltage)
So, now lets calculate the speed of a Xenon atom in km/hr, assuming that the voltage grid V of the ion engine is 1,300 V:
Let KE = E and we now solve for v:
Kinetic energy = charge x Voltage
v2 = 2qV/m = 2(1.6 x 10-19coulombs)(1,300V)/(2.2 x 10-25kg) = 2.0 x 109
Taking the square root of 2.0 x 109 gives us v = 44.2 km/sec or 159,000 km/hr WOW! Thats fast.
Sponsor
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,084
Likes: 829
A MUCH better cam(s) for a 74", or 80" Shovelhead in the Andrews line-up is a #1, or #2.
They come up on the all-important torque very quickly, better throttle response, fuel economy, and smooth operation, from our experience.
Intake closing number on those 2 cams is closer to(not a match)the OEM compression ratio, than the super-late closing B grind.
Age old, bigger is better, was the thought I suppose, that had those being incorrectly installed, as even in automotive application, folks would over-cam an engine.
Many cams, many choices, we like those 2, and our clients appreciate our decisions.
One the flip-side, our 108" Shovel racer ran a Lieneweber L-6, L-7, @ 15.0 cr,(wild sound from those!) and a Andrews .660".......made more power with the Andrews, on the dyno, and the time slips backed that up.
Obsevations, and facts, from 40 years of working on HD's, and over 30 years of 65-75 hr work weeks.
Scott
They come up on the all-important torque very quickly, better throttle response, fuel economy, and smooth operation, from our experience.
Intake closing number on those 2 cams is closer to(not a match)the OEM compression ratio, than the super-late closing B grind.
Age old, bigger is better, was the thought I suppose, that had those being incorrectly installed, as even in automotive application, folks would over-cam an engine.
Many cams, many choices, we like those 2, and our clients appreciate our decisions.
One the flip-side, our 108" Shovel racer ran a Lieneweber L-6, L-7, @ 15.0 cr,(wild sound from those!) and a Andrews .660".......made more power with the Andrews, on the dyno, and the time slips backed that up.
Obsevations, and facts, from 40 years of working on HD's, and over 30 years of 65-75 hr work weeks.
Scott
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,603
Likes: 3,374
From: Cental, MI
Lots of Cam Knowledge out there... want Controversy and Ignorance???? Lets talk Octane in yer Fuel!!!
That's always entertaining...almost as much fun as Talking Oil!!!!!!!!
That's always entertaining...almost as much fun as Talking Oil!!!!!!!!
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,008
Likes: 464
A MUCH better cam(s) for a 74", or 80" Shovelhead in the Andrews line-up is a #1, or #2.
They come up on the all-important torque very quickly, better throttle response, fuel economy, and smooth operation, from our experience.
Intake closing number on those 2 cams is closer to(not a match)the OEM compression ratio, than the super-late closing B grind.
Age old, bigger is better, was the thought I suppose, that had those being incorrectly installed, as even in automotive application, folks would over-cam an engine.
Many cams, many choices, we like those 2, and our clients appreciate our decisions.
One the flip-side, our 108" Shovel racer ran a Lieneweber L-6, L-7, @ 15.0 cr,(wild sound from those!) and a Andrews .660".......made more power with the Andrews, on the dyno, and the time slips backed that up.
Obsevations, and facts, from 40 years of working on HD's, and over 30 years of 65-75 hr work weeks.
Scott
They come up on the all-important torque very quickly, better throttle response, fuel economy, and smooth operation, from our experience.
Intake closing number on those 2 cams is closer to(not a match)the OEM compression ratio, than the super-late closing B grind.
Age old, bigger is better, was the thought I suppose, that had those being incorrectly installed, as even in automotive application, folks would over-cam an engine.
Many cams, many choices, we like those 2, and our clients appreciate our decisions.
One the flip-side, our 108" Shovel racer ran a Lieneweber L-6, L-7, @ 15.0 cr,(wild sound from those!) and a Andrews .660".......made more power with the Andrews, on the dyno, and the time slips backed that up.
Obsevations, and facts, from 40 years of working on HD's, and over 30 years of 65-75 hr work weeks.
Scott
Would those cams make a noticeable difference over the Andrews "A" cam?
In other words, I'm already running the "A", would it be worth changing it since I already have it open for other stuff anyway?
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 21,116
Likes: 7,638
From: Poolville
So, with that said, on a stock 1976 74" FLH would you go with the #1 or #2?
Would those cams make a noticeable difference over the Andrews "A" cam?
In other words, I'm already running the "A", would it be worth changing it since I already have it open for other stuff anyway?
Would those cams make a noticeable difference over the Andrews "A" cam?
In other words, I'm already running the "A", would it be worth changing it since I already have it open for other stuff anyway?