Extended Impeller RPM Chart

[Sleeper CP]

I have seen the old Berkley factory rpm chart posted on a few threads over the last month. The attached Extended RPM chart has been helpful to me over the years with my boat and a few of my friends. I have found it to be fairly accurate. I give lots of thanks to Jack Sea who spent some time 15 years ago doing it.
p.s. ( If someone would like to post this so that the image shows that would be fine. I'm to new at this to figure it out yet)
Sleeper CP

[HammerDown]

Nice...too bad shame I'm on the lower left side...lol

[Sleeper CP]

You can always re-evaluate and shoot for the middle of the chart.:D
Sleeper CP

[Jet Hydro]

http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=34380&d=1183591516

[Liberator TJ1984]

Happen to have an extended chart for Dominator Pump ???? :(

[Pops@Aggressor]

Happen to have an extended chart for Dominator Pump ???? :(
Dominator @ 6000 add +100 Rs, AT About same as chart, Aggressor Take the "AA" Chart as the "A" chart. should be very close.

[IMPATIENT 1]

pops, so if i'm turnin a dom(10in) bcut to 6800, i should look at thr 6900 on the chart?

[Sleeper CP]

Were you turning 6,900 when your oil pump took a dump? Are you just telling us that you are making 1,050 HP?;) Anyway, I hope you get it back together soon so you can find out, that really sucks:mad: .
Sleeper CP

[hotrod56cars]

I probably shouldn't be asking this - I'm giving away too much information - lol
Do you have a chart that shows lower RPM's/HP? :D

[Sleeper CP]

Hotrod,
Check out the thread "What's the difference between A,B and C cut impellers"
It's on the first page right now. Check out the post from Brad22 post #4 it is the factory Berkley chart. I don't know how to do it, but someone else will probably do the link to it on this page once they read your question.
And yes, You just picked up your skirt;)
Sleeper CP

[centerhill condor]

I'd be proud just to be on the chart!

[IMPATIENT 1]

Were you turning 6,900 when your oil pump took a dump? Are you just telling us that you are making 1,050 HP?;) Anyway, I hope you get it back together soon so you can find out, that really sucks:mad: .
Sleeper CP
lol, no i haven't even had the chance to step into the rear barrels hard yet before i had oil pump issues. i brought the oil pump to work with me today so i cut cut off the tack weld(i bolted and tac welded the pickup tube on). i pulled the plate and it had metal in the pump gears and the pressure spring was in 2 pieces:eek: :mad: :mad: :mad: i should've pulled it apart and isnpected it before bolting it on, but it was new and melling so i though "what could be wrong with it":rolleyes:
i can turn 6k on the primaries so i figured it may turn 67-6800rpms max, who knows till i get it back together and get a chance to stab the pedal.

[bp]

You can always re-evaluate and shoot for the middle of the chart.:D
Sleeper CP
just out of curiousity, do you have a dyno sheet, such that you can overlay uncorrected hp numbers over a chart such as this one?

[Sleeper CP]

Hey BP,
The short answer to your question is yes. I'm going to do this from memory so if I'm off by a little don't call me a liar.
The 512 engine that my brother and I dyno'd in 1992 made 710 HP at 6200. The air temp was in the high 70's almost 80 degrees the dyno adjusted up approx. 35 hp. So the uncorrected # would be approx. 675 HP. That engine turned an AA Berkley 5,400 off the NOS. From the chart it takes 600 HP to turn 5400 I think the engine made approx 640 hp at 5400. So it was in the ball park. You can see at that level every 100 rpm's is nearly 50 HP. On the Nos (200 hp) that engine ran 6200 with the AA. Look at the chart for the AA at 6200. Close enough for gov. work.
The first go around with the mild 565"er it made 783 at 6250 the uncorrected numbers were 50 less. It turned an American Turbine 9.25" dia. AAA impeller at 5,300 aprox. 650 hp. it was within the "ball park". As you can see 50 extra hp doesn't get you much at that level. On the bottle(250 hp) shot it turned the AAA at 6,200-6,300 1,025-1,050 hp close enough.
The second go around with the hotter 565 it makes 855 at 6,600. Dyno'd at an 84 degree day uncorrected numbers were 807 HP at 6,600. It could spin the AT A2 and Legend A2 within 100 rpm's of the chart at 5,800 rpm's and right on the money at 6,800 at 1,100 hp for the A2.
So it has been really close for my use. Hope that answers your question.
Sleeper CP

[Wet Dream]

I was guesstimating mine at 50 over. Not too bad I guess.

[bp]

Hey BP,
The short answer to your question is yes. I'm going to do this from memory so if I'm off by a little don't call me a liar.
The 512 engine that my brother and I dyno'd in 1992 made 710 HP at 6200. The air temp was in the high 70's almost 80 degrees the dyno adjusted up approx. 35 hp. So the uncorrected # would be approx. 675 HP. That engine turned an AA Berkley 5,400 off the NOS. From the chart it takes 600 HP to turn 5400 I think the engine made approx 640 hp at 5400. So it was in the ball park. You can see at that level every 100 rpm's is nearly 50 HP. On the Nos (200 hp) that engine ran 6200 with the AA. Look at the chart for the AA at 6200. Close enough for gov. work.
The first go around with the mild 565"er it made 783 at 6250 the uncorrected numbers were 50 less. It turned an American Turbine 9.25" dia. AAA impeller at 5,300 aprox. 650 hp. it was within the "ball park". As you can see 50 extra hp doesn't get you much at that level. On the bottle(250 hp) shot it turned the AAA at 6,200-6,300 1,025-1,050 hp close enough.
The second go around with the hotter 565 it makes 855 at 6,600. Dyno'd at an 84 degree day uncorrected numbers were 807 HP at 6,600. It could spin the AT A2 and Legend A2 within 100 rpm's of the chart at 5,800 rpm's and right on the money at 6,800 at 1,100 hp for the A2.
So it has been really close for my use. Hope that answers your question.
Sleeper CP
it's great that you have captured and retained this info, and it will be interesting to hear what the plot looks when you get it back together. with respect to the hotter 565, did you have an uncorrected dyno number for 5800?
i don't believe this chart is in the ballpark with a lot of boat combinations i'm familiar with. i do believe it should be within 1-3% to be considered accurate. i know that's kind of a shot, but it's just imo, and i don't really have time right now to get into the inevitable debate.

[IMPATIENT 1]

it's great that you have captured and retained this info, and it will be interesting to hear what the plot looks when you get it back together. with respect to the hotter 565, did you have an uncorrected dyno number for 5800?
i don't believe this chart is in the ballpark with a lot of boat combinations i'm familiar with. i do believe it should be within 1-3% to be considered accurate. i know that's kind of a shot, but it's just imo, and i don't really have time right now to get into the inevitable debate.
i agree, things like how much intake pressure your runnin, loaders, shoe depths and so on will make the pump load different from 1 boat to the next with the same pump set-up. overload the pump and it pulls down the rpms, get rite on the edge of cavitating and the rpms are gonna be higher on the same impellor cut and motor set-up.

[Sleeper CP]

with respect to the hotter 565, did you have an uncorrected dyno number for 5800?
i don't believe this chart is in the ballpark with a lot of boat combinations i'm familiar with. i do believe it should be within 1-3% to be considered accurate.
BP, the uncorrected #'s for the 565 at 5,800 were 743 HP. I could turn a Legend A2 at 5,800(review chart). Close enough for Gov. work for me. :)
For my experience, and that may not hold true for everyone and I not saying it will, this chart has been within "my ball park" approx. 200 rpm's either way. Let me do a little math: 6,000 rpm x 3% = 180 rpm. Well since I'm not building a missile here, just trying to push a boat at 100 mph I figured that was close enough.
It's not my chart and I don't have to defend it. Jac Seastrum put it together some years ago based off of information that he had accumulated over years of boat racing and wrenching as a "guide" to help people see if their set ups were " in the Ball Park". That's all it is just a guide and for my purposes it has been with in my margin of error, which would seem to be within yours(3%) also.
Another interesting thing about it is I have used it on Two Southwinds one with a 650HP 502, and the other with a 600 HP 472 Ford and another Cal. Performance with a 680 HP 502 all three boat set ups it was within 200 rpm's between 5,000 and 6,400. Close enough for me.
Lastly, Jack at MPD tells me that my Super Duper pump he just did for me will take approx. 800 HP to turn the trick Legend A at 6,000. If I'm doing my math right the re-vised 565 should make 835-850 at 6,000 and somewhere North of 910 at 6,600-6,800. So, we will see.:)
In any case I posted the Chart to be an aide for those who wanted more information than was available from the old Berkley chart. If it doesn't fit your needs ignore it.:idea: But for the average boat guy, about 95% of them I think it might be instructive.:)
Sleeper CP

[bp]

sleeper, over 5 years ago, i used to run an ssB that had been blueprinted by jack in 1985, then inspected and cleaned up again in 2001. i turned that impeller 6200, 6225 in great air, and i know for a fact my engine was making slightly over 800 uncorrected at that rpm at that time. unless i'm looking at this chart wrong, turning a berk b 6200 requires 640hp?
at the end of 2002, we installed a blueprinted legend b. i turn that 6000 in good air, and again, i know my engine is making slightly over 800 uncorrected at that point. again, unless i'm looking at this incorrectly, the chart indicates 575 hp absorbed at 6000. and, as we both know, when you start correcting hp against stp, the numbers go up.
also, i'm not pushing a 350-500lb race boat; it's a heavy lake layup... if it were in a lighter boat, it's possible that i might be seeing a little more rpm, but i don't know. it just is what it is, and does what it's been doing.

[bp]

here's another question; how quick or fast would a 730+lb boat be with 575hp absorbed by the pump? enough to run 105/high 9's in marble falls with the d/a at 5000'?

[Sleeper CP]

Well, it doesn't work for your application what can I tell you? :( . I listed 6 for you that it did work for. Not race boats but ok river runners. Mine runs 103., should and could be faster ,but that's all she'll do.
It seemed to be in the "Ball Park" for Pops @ Aggressor, but he may just have the same experience that I've had. From MPD's numbers it is off by 100 HP at a given rpm for his blueprinted pumps. Your 160 is excessive and this chart wont work for your application.
For the "average guy" it does give him more info to work with than the old Berkley chart does it not?:idea:

[squirt]

rpms seem alittle optimistic for the hp#'s on that chart, aleast that has been my experience. If it works for you ok, no worky for me.

[Sleeper CP]

rpms seem alittle optimistic for the hp#'s on that chart, aleast that has been my experience. If it works for you ok, no worky for me.
Just asking, how far off? I see why BP doesn't use it , his #'s are off a shit load. I forgot to ask him if he has a standard intake or a low profile unit.
Thanks, you get the point. I guess I should have started off with a big disclaimer saying it won't work for everyone, but it's better than the stock Berkley chart. I came close to saying that on the other thread before I moved it here.
Sleeper CP

[bp]

i just think jer's jpc would be a lot closer to accurate because he got a lot of input from a lot of different people, much more recently, and for a variety of pumps with different size impellers.

[Sleeper CP]

i just think jer's jpc would be a lot closer to accurate because he got a lot of input from a lot of different people, much more recently, and for a variety of pumps with different size impellers.
Who? It would be nice to see a performance chart produced by someone else. The Jac Sea chart is the only performance chart I have ever seen. I know people like Jac at MPD could make one real easy, but I know they see all of their race knowledge as proprietary(as it is) so they aren't going to share it for free.
Does you boat have a standard intake in it or low profile?
Sleeper CP

[sdpm]

Just asking, how far off? I see why BP doesn't use it , his #'s are off a shit load. I forgot to ask him if he has a standard intake or a low profile unit.
Thanks, you get the point. I guess I should have started off with a big disclaimer saying it won't work for everyone, but it's better than the stock Berkley chart. I came close to saying that on the other thread before I moved it here.
Sleeper CP
Everything Bob does is off the charts!:D
Both of you guys BP and Sleeper are number nuts! I would love to get you guys together with a 12 pk and watch all the s$it pour out.

[Sleeper CP]

Hi Neil,
Would you get to work so that you can make room for my f---ing boat.;) See ya tomorrow afternoon at the dyno.:D Now I have to log off so I can get some work done. Got to collect money from the customers so I can pay for the boat.:eek: :)
Jon

[hotbo]

wow that chart puts me down low:D
my mill on the desktop dynos at 516hp at 5500rpm.
i turn 5400 with a b-cut impeller.so thats saying im putting close to a whopping 400 to the shaft.that sucks ass.:D
i know the desktop maybe off some and thats fine with me i know i dont have alot of power but do you really lose this much to the pump that seem like alot to me???.

[bp]

Everything Bob does is off the charts!:D
Both of you guys BP and Sleeper are number nuts! I would love to get you guys together with a 12 pk and watch all the s$it pour out.
thanks neil, i needed that :) long trip starts tonight... and i'm not a number nut, i just don't care for things that are somewhat misleading. but we can talk numbers, like .000, .001, etc... i like those numbers ;)
Who? It would be nice to see a performance chart produced by someone else. The Jac Sea chart is the only performance chart I have ever seen. I know people like Jac at MPD could make one real easy, but I know they see all of their race knowledge as proprietary(as it is) so they aren't going to share it for free.
Does you boat have a standard intake in it or low profile?
Sleeper CP
jer, "lvjetboy".. haven't seen him around here for some time, but i think squirtcha kept up with the jpc. jer collected a lot of data from a lot of different people to develop the thing. yes, jack and dave could make one, but there are a lot of variables, and within a certain range, it's not really going to matter (as you mentioned before, how far do you go to pick up that last 50, or 30 hp?). also, as you mentioned, "ballpark", but to me, this old berk deal is still in the parking lot, with respect to absorbed hp/rpm. graphing the hp off the dyno can tell you where you are, and whether or not you want to go further.
my boat does not have a standard intake in it, but that's only about loading at speed, not about impeller sizing. my pump does remain hooked up.
wow that chart puts me down low
my mill on the desktop dynos at 516hp at 5500rpm.
i turn 5400 with a b-cut impeller.so thats saying im putting close to a whopping 400 to the shaft.that sucks ass.
i know the desktop maybe off some and thats fine with me i know i dont have alot of power but do you really lose this much to the pump that seem like alot to me???.
desktop isn't quite the same as actual dyno testing, but i digress.
what the chart says is, to turn a b impeller 5400, a little over 400hp is absorbed. that may be a little off.
in my view, and this is just imo, actual dyno testing on calibrated dyno's is more accurate than any of these charts, as long as a bunch of modifications aren't made after the engine comes off the dyno that would alter the hp. if you have the pump properly loaded, and you get the top rpm the pump absorbs, it can be compared to your dyno graph and you will know how much hp is being absorbed by the pump.

[Sleeper CP]

my boat does not have a standard intake in it, but that's only about loading at speed, not about impeller sizing. my pump does remain hooked up.
That's interesting I would think that the intake ramp would be one of the biggest contributors to the RPM's. But, I'm just quessing so please correct me if I'm wrong: If a standard ramp loads an impeller at 25 psi at the wear ring with 250 gpm(example only) and a low profile ramp loads it at 48 psi with 400 gpm(example only) there wouldn't be a dramatic change in RPM's ? load on the pump ? :idea:
Help me out here.:confused: :confused:
Jon

[pw_Tony]

:D :D :D http://i9.tinypic.com/663l0qp.jpg

[bp]

That's interesting I would think that the intake ramp would be one of the biggest contributors to the RPM's. But, I'm just quessing so please correct me if I'm wrong: If a standard ramp loads an impeller at 25 psi at the wear ring with 250 gpm(example only) and a low profile ramp loads it at 48 psi with 400 gpm(example only) there wouldn't be a dramatic change in RPM's ? load on the pump ? :idea:
Help me out here.:confused: :confused:
Jon
i've seen 30psi and 80psi. although the conditions were different, rpm was slightly different than expected, but not much. gpm is going to be what the pump will process through the nozzle, at the rpm the pump allows the engine to turn. why would a c allow the engine to spin a few hundred rpm higher than a b? because the c does not absorb the same hp at the same rpm as the b, and does not process as much gpm through the nozzle at that rpm.
my intake is not a standard berk. nobody has been able to tell me who manufactured it, and it had to be manufactured prior to 1985. wayback, there were several different companys making them, but this one has no name on it, and it is definately different than a miersch, berk, or any other that is familiar to people. mine is not a true "low profile", as has been developed through the years.
i've really got to go, and i'll be out of forum contact for 10 days. sorry, but if you have more questions, talk to jack or jeff bennett...

[hotbo]

i just spent 2 hours this morning talking to jack seastrum in person at his sons jet shop.wow that man knows alot im still cross eyed from all the talk:) cant even remember all the shit he told me and corrected me on.any how his impeller chart will be about the best dyno you can find imo.these readings do not lie and if you think they do it may be becuase it hurt your feelings,it did mine:D

[Sleeper CP]

That's awsome. I didn't know he was still around. So you told him it was posted and has created some controversy?
As I said, I owe him a lot of thanks. I will say though it will not work for all set ups but it has worked for mine.
Thanks for the post,
Sleeper CP

[hotbo]

That's awsome. I didn't know he was still around. So you told him it was posted and has created some controversy?
As I said, I owe him a lot of thanks. I will say though it will not work for all set ups but it has worked for mine.
Thanks for the post,
Sleeper CP
he very much still around.:D the impeller chart was testing over and over again many years.he told me how they did all this testing very interesting.the pumps were submerged 350 feet into a hole.:jawdrop: anyway he ia one hell ofa nice guy and has more knowledge than one can imagine.:D

[Sleeper CP]

Hotboa,
I would love to talk to the guy. If they were submerged at 350' and made to pump water, did they spin them with an electric motor and then convert amps to HP ?
Sleeper CP

[steelcomp]

Good thread here. I thought I'd throw my numbers in here just for comparison, but since there are just too many variables, I'm not really going to come to any conclusions, just offering a few more points on the plot.
My first engine was a 467, 12.4:1, flat tappet, .610/264/264, GM 990's that I ported, and a Weiand TR w/ (2) 800 dp's. My guess was somewhere around 650-675hp. Engine was never dynoed, and it turned a stock alum. Berk B 6200, and ran somewhere in the mid to upper 90's. Stock intake, old school race loader, somewhat of a shoe and ride plate, droop, etc. Then I had the bowl and impeller done by Jack @ MPD. RPM came down to 5500 which made sense since the B was now absorbing hp like an AB, or maybe even closer to an A. In 3500' air, the boat ran 93 in the 1/4 with far less cavitation out of the hole. IN better air, it would run 95-97 on the speedo which I verified as accurate at Ming.
Compare to the new engine, pump, bottom work, etc. New engine made a corrected 821 at 7100, and measured of 741.5. I had MPD do a stainess B/C, and was running the big A/T bowl (also detailed by MPD), custom low profile intake, inducer, custom loader, bluprinted bottom and entry, etc. I was able to turn the detailed B/C 6500, which equated to an observed 727hp (corrected 801) @ 2975' DA. We were running right there (2900-3000') at the track, so the power was right on as observed. The MPH was between 105 and 108.
Going back to the extended chart, it seems to be right on target with my particular numbers. The stock B at 6200 was absorbing right at 650hp, so my guess of the upper 600hp range for that number was close enough. For the detailed impellers, it's a little tougher, but to imagine that a detailed BC would absorb about the same hp as a B isn't unreasonable, and puts the hp for the detailed B/C @ 6500 right at 730-740 on the chart, using a B as a guide. Close enough IMO. However, if I go back and use the same logic with the detailed alum. B and the first engine combination, it dosen't work quite as well, putting the hp with the dtailed B @ 5500 near 590hp. Maybe closer to an A/B, but I also believe that at that race, I had both head gaskets failing, so power may have been down. It was at that point I decided on the new engine, so I wasn't ever able to eval. the difference.

[steelcomp]

sleeper, over 5 years ago, i used to run an ssB that had been blueprinted by jack in 1985, then inspected and cleaned up again in 2001. i turned that impeller 6200, 6225 in great air, and i know for a fact my engine was making slightly over 800 uncorrected at that rpm at that time. unless i'm looking at this chart wrong, turning a berk b 6200 requires 640hp?
at the end of 2002, we installed a blueprinted legend b. i turn that 6000 in good air, and again, i know my engine is making slightly over 800 uncorrected at that point. again, unless i'm looking at this incorrectly, the chart indicates 575 hp absorbed at 6000. and, as we both know, when you start correcting hp against stp, the numbers go up.
also, i'm not pushing a 350-500lb race boat; it's a heavy lake layup... if it were in a lighter boat, it's possible that i might be seeing a little more rpm, but i don't know. it just is what it is, and does what it's been doing.If the pump is loaded effeciently, how would the weight of the boat effect the RPM?
bp, I've been using a lot of your setup and power info as comparison for my deal, since the boats are -similar-...I don't see much difference in pump effeciencies... I just don't get the differences between our power/impeller/rpm's. Not intending to be arbitrary by any means...just seems to be quite a spread.

[IMPATIENT 1]

i don't think the chart is completely perfect, to many variables. if you took a standard 12jg berk pump with the basic off the shelf loader, droop, and divertor and was spinning a b-cut impellor, its gonna spin different rpms from a heavy lake vee, compared to a cp tunnel or liteweight gullwing. just moving faster across the water makes the pump load more efficient ,so in turn, a lighter hull with more lift would allow for more rpms than say a heavy lake vhull like a sanger or taylor would be able to accomplish.
only way you can get close to the chart figures is to know what intake pressure the sample pump had, then compare it to your own. how would a pump submerged in water have intake pressure? if the pumps not moving, where'd the pressure come from? i'm thinking if the pump was submerged , all the intake every saw was vaccuum or negative pressure. just my .02 but it makes sense i think. some boats can turn a b-cut 5400 in a lake v, pull out the entire set-up and shoe it into a light weight high lift hull and spin the pump 3300-500rpms more.
so by the "Submerged" test sample standards, you'd have to anchor the boat to the shore, go wot without moving and look to see how many rpms your turnin:D :D :D :D :D

[Sleeper CP]

.. I just don't get the differences between our power/impeller/rpm's..
Steel I've had three people tell me who BP is, and it's fair to say tgat he knows his $hit, but I don't get the differences either. But he does not have a Berk intake and it is a modified low- or mid profile intake. I wounder how much that has to do with his numbers.
I have said several times : The chart won't work for everyone, it is just a base line. I guess BP is one of those for whom it won't work. But it has worked for 6 boats that I am very familuar with. And believe me I'm glad it worked for me, because it helped a lot. Made it look like I actualy knew what I was doing.;) ;)
Sleeper CP

[steelcomp]

Steel I've had three people tell me who BP is, and it's fair to say tgat he knows his $hit, but I don't get the differences either. But he does not have a Berk intake and it is a modified low- or mid profile intake. I wounder how much that has to do with his numbers.
I have said several times : The chart won't work for everyone, it is just a base line. I guess BP is one of those for whom it won't work. But it has worked for 6 boats that I am very familuar with. And believe me I'm glad it worked for me, because it helped a lot. Made it look like I actualy knew what I was doing.;) ;)
Sleeper CPbp is sharp. He looks at things in simple, but very analytical terms. His intake, IMO, isn't the cause of the differences. I don't think an intake alone would show that much difference. Besides, in comparing his boat to mine, my intake is as custom as it gets, and I would venture a guess it works as well as any out there. I did a lot of research and talked to a lot of people before deciding on a final design on mine, and it took months to build. Granted, bp has years of set-up experimentation and trial and error in his deal, and I wasn't even getting started, but I still don't think the intake alone can be responsible for the differences in his rpm/impeller cut/hp absorbtion.
Maybe if he comes back on, he can offer some more insight.

[Sleeper CP]

It will be interesting to see what my new engine can pull my new MPD pump to.
From info I have picked up MPDs pumps are 1 cut above the chart. So my new A should be like a AA from the chart. The engine should be able to pull my MPD "A" to about 6,300 rpm's that's 900 hp. The engine will have the 250 hp Nos system on it , actualy I'll back it down to 200,so that will be 1,100+ hp from 6,300 to 6,800.
We'll see in a couple of weeks.
Sleeper CP

[hotbo]

like i said he told me way more than i can remember but the point is why in the hell would people argue with someone like that.:devil:
its makes no difference the weight of the boat.if you took the exact same pump motor loader,everything exact put it in all the boats you want big or small.you are going to still get same rpms no matter what.you will gain or loose speed thats it.tie your boat to tree hold it wot thats all it will turn:idea: .if it turns 6200 thats what its going to do.they tested them with 100percent load on the pumps he said thats how he came up with this chart.
he also said alot of people argue the hell outta it to:D but has someone come up woth one better:confused: if your pump is effecient no slip and no cavitation the chart will be close to what you have.i dont care what your dyno sheet said back home.your not in a controlled enviroment anymore and you have constint load on your motor with your jet pump best dyno money can buy is what jack seastrum said.think about:idea:
anyway iwas just saying it was very interesting to talk with the ole timer about shit we probably dont now much about and think we do.:D he is one nice guy and talked nice about alot of other nice guys.later trav.

[hotbo]

i don't think the chart is completely perfect, to many variables. if you took a standard 12jg berk pump with the basic off the shelf loader, droop, and divertor and was spinning a b-cut impellor, its gonna spin different rpms from a heavy lake vee, compared to a cp tunnel or liteweight gullwing. just moving faster across the water makes the pump load more efficient ,so in turn, a lighter hull with more lift would allow for more rpms than say a heavy lake vhull like a sanger or taylor would be able to accomplish.
only way you can get close to the chart figures is to know what intake pressure the sample pump had, then compare it to your own. how would a pump submerged in water have intake pressure? if the pumps not moving, where'd the pressure come from? i'm thinking if the pump was submerged , all the intake every saw was vaccuum or negative pressure. just my .02 but it makes sense i think. some boats can turn a b-cut 5400 in a lake v, pull out the entire set-up and shoe it into a light weight high lift hull and spin the pump 3300-500rpms more.
so by the "Submerged" test sample standards, you'd have to anchor the boat to the shore, go wot without moving and look to see how many rpms your turnin:D :D :D :D :D
what the hell do you know
:idea:
ive told you guys i cant remeber shit he told me.tom you can argue his chart all day long so can all of you.:D but in the end yall are arguing his chart for a reason.can you guys come up with one better.:confused: i didnt think so.:D so why argue about something apparently some of us dont know much about.lol!!!!

[IMPATIENT 1]

what the hell do you know
:idea:
ive told you guys i cant remeber shit he told me.tom you can argue his chart all day long so can all of you.:D but in the end yall are arguing his chart for a reason.can you guys come up with one better.:confused: i didnt think so.:D so why argue about something apparently some of us dont know much about.lol!!!!
because the chart is misleading, that's my point;)

[steelcomp]

like i said he told me way more than i can remember but the point is why in the hell would people argue with someone like that.:devil:
its makes no difference the weight of the boat.if you took the exact same pump motor loader,everything exact put it in all the boats you want big or small.you are going to still get same rpms no matter what.you will gain or loose speed thats it.tie your boat to tree hold it wot thats all it will turn:idea: .if it turns 6200 thats what its going to do.they tested them with 100percent load on the pumps he said thats how he came up with this chart.
he also said alot of people argue the hell outta it to:D but has someone come up woth one better:confused: if your pump is effecient no slip and no cavitation the chart will be close to what you have.i dont care what your dyno sheet said back home.your not in a controlled enviroment anymore and you have constint load on your motor with your jet pump best dyno money can buy is what jack seastrum said.think about:idea:
anyway iwas just saying it was very interesting to talk with the ole timer about shit we probably dont now much about and think we do.:D he is one nice guy and talked nice about alot of other nice guys.later trav.You obviously don't understand much about what you're talking about.
What exactly is 100% load on a given pump?
If you tied a boat to a tree and ran it, what would feed the pump?
Do you think your engine is going to turn the same rpm on a summer day that was 110 as it would early in the spring on a coastal lake at 75? Most dynos aren't a controlled environment either. That's why there's this thing called a correction factor.
It's impossible to exactly pre-determin (or even calculate) these kinds of curves as in this chart, simply because there are just too many variables involved in pump performance. Jer's JPC is a very comprehensive compilation of information, and IMO, probably a better reference than Seastrom's chart, but they're both still just estimates, and aren't going to be 100% accurate for every application.

[Sleeper CP]

Hey Hotboa,
I have said before "... it's not my chart and I don't have to defind it, but I have found it to be fairly accurate." With that said, I think the chart will work for 95% of boat's on the water. It won't work for all boat's on the water.
We are now splitting hairs discussing whether or not it will work on "my race boat". It won't work on every boat, but it is a base line to work off of. I have no arguement with BP that his boat made at or close to 800hp uncorrected and the chart assumes he is only making 640 or something like that( I think it was 160 hp off) it doesn't mean the dyno lied and it doesn't mean the chart is wrong. It only means the two don't match in this application.:) :idea: That's all.
Sleeper CP

[hotbo]

You obviously don't understand much about what you're talking about.
What exactly is 100% load on a given pump?
If you tied a boat to a tree and ran it, what would feed the pump?
Do you think your engine is going to turn the same rpm on a summer day that was 110 as it would early in the spring on a coastal lake at 75? Most dynos aren't a controlled environment either. That's why there's this thing called a correction factor.
It's impossible to exactly pre-determin (or even calculate) these kinds of curves as in this chart, simply because there are just too many variables involved in pump performance. Jer's JPC is a very comprehensive compilation of information, and IMO, probably a better reference than Seastrom's chart, but they're both still just estimates, and aren't going to be 100% accurate for every application.
ha thats funny shit right there,hell i dont know what im talking about.never once said i did just repeating what they told me that day.so your saying jack and his son are idiots.i dont think they are at all matter of fact i like the hell outta them and they seem to have been in and around the buissness longer than some of us.:idea: i never said that its 100 percent dead on and if i did im wrong about that.but i do think if your pump is loading right it will be close but then again im form arkansas.i must not know much.:D

[cyclone]

the shape of the keel, the loader design, the shoe design and its biting edge in relation to the keel and size of the opening, are all relevant to the peak rpm the motor will turn.
that chart is a decent guideline but is not foolproof because the moment you change one aspect of the hardware, take the loader for example, inlet pressure will change and the rpm will vary. So basically, an 800 hp motor in one boat might turn a b-impeller x amount of rpm but that same motor in a different hull will likely not turn the impeller the same rpm.
as for taking the same engine, pump, hardware etc and having it run the same in a different hull...that is completely wrong. The weight of the boat and the shape of the keel will affect the way the pump is loaded at high speed and in turn, will affect the peak rpm the motor achieves. A boat that is heavier, or has a different keel will not load the pump the same as a lighter boat. Is the weight a huge factor, yes if it affects the running attide of the hull. But the entry from the keel to the pump is probably a larger factor determining the loading of the pump than the hull weight.
That is why when you switch from one hull to another you have to start over and re-set your hardware to find the sweet spot.
just my 2 pennies. i'm by no means an expert.

[hotbo]

the shape of the keel, the loader design, the shoe design and its biting edge in relation to the keel and size of the opening, are all relevant to the peak rpm the motor will turn.
that chart is a decent guideline but is not foolproof because the moment you change one aspect of the hardware, take the loader for example, inlet pressure will change and the rpm will vary. So basically, an 800 hp motor in one boat might turn a b-impeller x amount of rpm but that same motor in a different hull will likely not turn the impeller the same rpm.
as for taking the same engine, pump, hardware etc and having it run the same in a different hull...that is completely wrong. The weight of the boat and the shape of the keel will affect the way the pump is loaded at high speed and in turn, will affect the peak rpm the motor achieves. A boat that is heavier, or has a different keel will not load the pump the same as a lighter boat. Is the weight a huge factor, yes if it affects the running attide of the hull. But the entry from the keel to the pump is probably a larger factor determining the loading of the pump than the hull weight.
That is why when you switch from one hull to another you have to start over and re-set your hardware to find the sweet spot.
just my 2 pennies. i'm by no means an expert.
well ithink your pretty sharp.:D im just a novice arguing only really for 1 reason to get opinions from every aspect.thats what ignorant people like myself do to learn more about stuff.all im aware of is i have learned that when i talk to someone like them i listen and everyone is not going to agree on the same stuff.i just try to fing a happy medium.thanks guys for all different aspects of this.i have around a bout way of geting the info im really after.:idea: i have called every shop almost from coast to coast before trying to figure something as simple as a cam change before and you know what its worth it.:D

[bp]

If the pump is loaded effeciently, how would the weight of the boat effect the RPM?
bp, I've been using a lot of your setup and power info as comparison for my deal, since the boats are -similar-...I don't see much difference in pump effeciencies... I just don't get the differences between our power/impeller/rpm's. Not intending to be arbitrary by any means...just seems to be quite a spread.
your boat's lighter, and you elected to have the impeller cut to run closer to your hp peak. keep in mind, thrust (force) is mass x velocity. if we were to, say, put your engine/pump combo in a 1200 lb daycruiser, the force you would have to generate to attain the same rpm would be much greater than for a 400-450lb bahner. even if suction pressure/loading is the same, the amount of force needed is significantly higher. ergo, if the pump is loaded in the daycruiser, the pump will require greater hp absorption at a lower rpm for max thrust, and max rpm will be less. of course, we could play with hardware and get the daycruiser optimal, but with everything the same, rpm will be less.
i think i already mentioned this, but my old ss berk b was not "stock", as in out of the box with only the vanes cut. the legend b that i changed to is not "stock", and neither is the heritage c that i have used at times in the past. some guys just cut the vanes to the size desired, and that's it.
hotbo, i am not, nor will i say anything about jack seastrum. what i will say is that the chart is not entirely accurate in today's world of extensively blueprinted impellers/bowls, or additional design mods that amt, legend, or the other company have developed with respect to impeller efficiencies. add extensive blueprinting to the design changes, and you get significant improvement in efficiency (which means more absorbed hp at lower rpm for a given impeller cut). those gains in efficiency mean that the boat will go faster at less rpm for a given cut, and more hp is needed to achieve the same rpm.
btw scott, saw your old boat last weekend - in the other lane:) i think mitch is real happy with the boat, just wasn't too happy with himself...

[Sleeper CP]

Hi BP,
Hopefully you had a good road trip. I'm interested to see how the new engine handles my MPD pump. Lots of info on the engine posted on thread : Ford Lovers 565 Dyno Sheet.
The weather was not to great on dyno day so the dyno was correcting up 70 HP. Corrected #'s at 6,000 were 874 HP and 765 lbs. ft trq. observed #'s were 806 and 706. Jack told me that it would take 800 hP to turn his A s/s Legend to 6,000. That would be about 900 at 6,300( Corrected at 900hp observed at 830). So if I turn between 6,000 and 6,300 I'll be happy. It will be interesting to see where it falls compaired to the chart I don't expect the chart to be accurate for this application anymore.
Sleeper CP

[bp]

the other cool factor is that you'll be going faster with less rpm, and cruising should be less rpm, less gas, etc.
the road trip was as good as it could be, good points weekend. stroker got too antsy and redlit first round. i ran a flat, steelcomp's old jet, and then two hydros. smokin':D all good guys. oregon has lots of mountains to go up and down, plus road construction at every turn, so have to stay on top of it. cal's roads are straighter and bumpier. 1025 miles from there to here (lhc); long cruise. next month will be longer to texas.

[Sleeper CP]

the other cool factor is that you'll be going faster with less rpm, and cruising should be less rpm, less gas, etc..
Yeah we'll see. I'm really happy with the numbers from the new engine. What I think is the coolest thing though is that with a BSFC of .366 it makes 80HP more than the old engine while using less fuel doing it. A lot less fuel.
Sleeper CP

[bp]

sleeper, my bsfc was very good too on the dyno. since we're still unpacking, can't lay my hands directly on the old dyno sheets to get the number. the only thing i would add is that the bsfc is generally wot specific - make sure you're not too lean in midrange/cruise rpm.

[steelcomp]

your boat's lighter, and you elected to have the impeller cut to run closer to your hp peak. keep in mind, thrust (force) is mass x velocity. if we were to, say, put your engine/pump combo in a 1200 lb daycruiser, the force you would have to generate to attain the same rpm would be much greater than for a 400-450lb bahner. even if suction pressure/loading is the same, the amount of force needed is significantly higher. ergo, if the pump is loaded in the daycruiser, the pump will require greater hp absorption at a lower rpm for max thrust, and max rpm will be less. of course, we could play with hardware and get the daycruiser optimal, but with everything the same, rpm will be less.
i think i already mentioned this, but my old ss berk b was not "stock", as in out of the box with only the vanes cut. the legend b that i changed to is not "stock", and neither is the heritage c that i have used at times in the past. some guys just cut the vanes to the size desired, and that's it.
hotbo, i am not, nor will i say anything about jack seastrum. what i will say is that the chart is not entirely accurate in today's world of extensively blueprinted impellers/bowls, or additional design mods that amt, legend, or the other company have developed with respect to impeller efficiencies. add extensive blueprinting to the design changes, and you get significant improvement in efficiency (which means more absorbed hp at lower rpm for a given impeller cut). those gains in efficiency mean that the boat will go faster at less rpm for a given cut, and more hp is needed to achieve the same rpm.
btw scott, saw your old boat last weekend - in the other lane:) i think mitch is real happy with the boat, just wasn't too happy with himself...
True what you say, but my 500lb bare hull isn't a lightweight by any means. Funny thing is (in reference to weight) after I took over 130lbs of fuel tanks and fuel out of the boat, it's quickest 1/2 track still remained with the heavier set up, and I saw no significant change. Also, my peak HP is still lower than yours, even if I was running closer to it. (Still 600rpm from peak.) I see the differences in our boats as being fractional, where the differences in rpm's and power are greater, but maybe I'm just wrong here. I know your impellers aren't any where near "stock", and that could be significant. I don't know to what extent jack went on mine...he says they all get the same treatment in a full prep, but I think there are definately different levels of "full prep" mods, even within the same classification (A,B,C, etc)
Of course, my boat was (is) faster. :D :D
I talked to Mitch on Tues. He was beside himself. It was nice of you to go to him afterwards and admit he had you. An .024 redlight for him was a pisser, for sure, but hey...that's racing. You lucked out on that one, but good win, none the less. Congrats on going all the way. :D

[steelcomp]

Yeah we'll see. I'm really happy with the numbers from the new engine. What I think is the coolest thing though is that with a BSFC of .366 it makes 80HP more than the old engine while using less fuel doing it. A lot less fuel.
Sleeper CPImproved effeciency will always make more power.

[Cs19]

Nice work BP ;)
Congrats on the win, Im sure that trophy made the drive home that much easier.
Where will you be racing in Sept?

[steelcomp]

Nice work BP ;)
Congrats on the win, Im sure that trophy made the drive home that much easier.
Where will you be racing in Sept?Question is, where will you be racing in Sept?? :D

[Cs19]

Question is, where will you be racing in Sept?? :D
I will be on the rope in Sept. not sure where yet.

[Sleeper CP]

thing i would add is that the bsfc is generally wot specific - make sure you're not too lean in midrange/cruise rpm.
Thanks for the concern. I usally don't adjust for temp change at the river. So at 105 degrees I'm probably 2-3 jets fat. Better safe than sorry:eek:
Sleeper CP

[bp]

Nice work BP ;)
Congrats on the win, Im sure that trophy made the drive home that much easier.
Where will you be racing in Sept?
thanks chris. several things made the drive ok.. points, new fuel tank in the truck, points, and this is the first time i've gone home to lhc which was a little longer but easier... o, did i mention points?
i'll be in sd in sept. hows your boat doing?

[Cs19]

Boat is doing well, its comimg out nice and clean and its almost done, no rush though, just taking my time.

[minnesota_duane]

i'll be in sd in sept. hows your boat doing?
SD South Dakota? If so where abouts, would love to see some boat drags.

[bp]

Of course, my boat was (is) faster. :D :D yes, i agree. but you know i don't try to go as fast as i can all the time. the only time i have done that was at the njba nats in october '04, when i already had 10 sowed. my best was 109.98/9.68 to r/u in the 9.50 bracket. the thing's had several changes since then, and i know it can be quicker/faster. perhaps you could convince mitch to make the tow to f'bird in november, and we can see how much faster it is :D
I talked to Mitch on Tues. He was beside himself. It was nice of you to go to him afterwards and admit he had you. An .024 redlight for him was a pisser, for sure, but hey...that's racing. You lucked out on that one, but good win, none the less. Congrats on going all the way. :D
yes, he did have me, with his -.094 redlight to my 0.16. that's only a 2 tenth jump, and he had me by a boat at the light. luck? i outraced his azz. he had a nice 10.018, but that's leavin the door open. he had an 02 against chris to win the previous race, and 02/03's are redlights waiting to happen. ask stoker about that. if people are shooting for those, they gotta expect, and live with, the redeye. sdba guys do that all the time and don't give it a second thought; you could look it up... for me, i didn't travel 2000 miles to beat myself.
sleeper, i'm referring to the intermediate circuit, not the mains. just a suggestion to keep an eye on it.
duane, SD refers to the thunderboat regatta in san diego, ca., in september. http://www.thunderboatregatta.com/ ... the ihba race runs an invitational in mission bay the same weekend. this is the last ihba race before the world finals, so it's important for points.

[minnesota_duane]

Damn, would have loved to see you race that boat and take a look at it to see how much diffrent it is than my Baker hull wise. Probably a world apart but similar anyway. I haven't done anything with mine yet been redoing my Hawaiian so I can take the kids tubbing, thats been one freakin disaster after another. Maybe I can get after it this winter.

[Sleeper CP]

Well now you have a reason to come to San Diego in Sept. Duane.
Sleeper CP

[Sleeper CP]

Check out the chart on page one of this thread.
Sleeper

[Sleeper CP]

Bump
Sleeper CP

[bp]

so, have you had that thing in the water yet?

[Sleeper CP]

Hi BP,
Hope all is going well for you. My brother and I should be done with the work by Sunday Morning if not tomorrow evening. We will hit one of the local lakes on Sunday (fingers crossed) for shake down runs. We hope to be at Aha Quinn on Saturday and Sunday the following weekend. I'm ticked off at myself that I didn't send our radar gun off to get repaired last month:( It might have been fun to take it, but it adds alot of responsibility so maybe it's better that I didn't.
Neil and I set it up 1 notch or so more conservative than Jack and Segni both suggested on the ride plate and nozzle angle. Since neither my brother or have have driven this thing hard for almost 4 years and we both have kids to come home too we decided to run conservative and then we can loosen it up if needed. But then again how squirrelly can a CP get at 85 mph?;)
We can't wait to see if we can break 85 with it:rolleyes: I'll let you know how it goes.
Did you see the thread on the boat that I posted?
"Sleeper" CP
Big Block Ford Lover

[Pops@Aggressor]

[QUOTE=
Neil and I set it up 1 notch or so more conservative than Jack and Segni both suggested on the ride plate and nozzle angle. Since neither my brother or have have driven this thing hard for almost 4 years and we both have kids to come home too we decided to run conservative and then we can loosen it up if needed. But then again how squirrelly can a CP get at 85 mph?;)
"Sleeper" CP
Big Block Ford Lover[/QUOTE]Your Kid's will Love you for it!
There not called get wets for nothing.

[Sleeper CP]

Your Kid's will Love you for it!
There not called get wets for nothing.
Luckily we have never had a problem with the 19' Gullwing doing anything funny. Even at side stepping the throttle at 90 it would just stay nice and straight.
Sleeper CP

[hotrod56cars]

There's a lot of "about's" and "around's" in here, try to bear with me. A friend of mine has a Eliminator SS with a 513 c.i. Ford, full roller engine, lift on the cam is in the mid .600's (gross) with gross duration around 320, the builder of the engine estimate's the HP around 550 HP. The engine is spinning the Berkeley 12JC (changed to a split bowl, droop, Place Diverter, ride plate, shoe, loader grate, new aluminum "A" cut impellor) at 4900 RPM at W.O.T., mph around 80 mph. On the chart that put's the engine's HP around 380/390, not anywhere near the guestimated 550 HP. Considering the engine is a full roller and should have a pretty high red line and that it's only spinning at 4900 RPM, a significantly different impellor cut should help this boat out a lot, right? But wouldn't that cut on the boat's optinum impellor be like a "C" or a "D" to get the RPM's that high?
.

[bp]

Luckily we have never had a problem with the 19' Gullwing doing anything funny. Even at side stepping the throttle at 90 it would just stay nice and straight.
Sleeper CP
nor should you.

[Sleeper CP]

nor should you.
Hi BP,
When we got the CP Gullwing a lot of people talked about them hooking, it took a year to figure out that the 18' tunnel was the one to look out for.
HotRod: There must be something wrong with that engine, a 513" Ford even with old cast iron heads and a roller cam can do much better than 550 HP.
BP believes the cart is as screwed up as Hogans goat, but it has worked for way to many boats that I have been involved with for me not to believe it is accurate in "most" applications. Not all but most.
If that engine is a full roller engine it should be able to pull that impeller beyound 4,900 rpm's. Your friend may want to turn it to an A/B and see what happens. Does it have headers or logs?
BTW when I hear "full roller" it reminds me of " 3/4 race cam" , which reminds me of ""I dont know wtf I'm talking about." I am not talking about you, so don't take that wrong, but unless an engine is dyno'd it is hard to say what it will do once it gets in a boat. But something does not seem correct with your friends set up( engine/pump combo:confused: I wish I knew more so I could offer a simi-educated opinion:(
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover, 1,000+ HP safely used since 1992:D
Oh I mean 514" Ford Lover

[pw_Tony]

I wish my boat was even on the chart!
But the normal Berk chart works for me..... you guys are just too fast

[Sleeper CP]

I wish my boat was even on the chart!
But the normal Berk chart works for me..... you guys are just too fast
It does say " extended rpm chart" doesn't it;)
But someththing is jacked up with his set up. I would like to know the cam specs,carb,intake man, comp ratio and if it is running logs. That is one sick Ford, I wouldn't really give a rats _ _ _ if it was a Chevy, but I just can't have that.;)
Sleeper CP

[steelcomp]

I heard that 19's like to fly a little easier than 18's much over 100.

[hotrod56cars]

Hi BP,
...
HotRod: There must be something wrong with that engine, a 513" Ford even with old cast iron heads and a roller cam can do much better than 550 HP.
BP believes the cart is as screwed up as Hogans goat, but it has worked for way to many boats that I have been involved with for me not to believe it is accurate in "most" applications. Not all but most.
If that engine is a full roller engine it should be able to pull that impeller beyound 4,900 rpm's. Your friend may want to turn it to an A/B and see what happens. Does it have headers or logs?
BTW when I hear "full roller" it reminds me of " 3/4 race cam" , which reminds me of ""I dont know wtf I'm talking about." I am not talking about you, so don't take that wrong, but unless an engine is dyno'd it is hard to say what it will do once it gets in a boat. But something does not seem correct with your friends set up( engine/pump combo:confused: I wish I knew more so I could offer a simi-educated opinion:(
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover, 1,000+ HP safely used since 1992:D
Oh I mean 514" Ford Lover
The 4900 RPM thing didn't seem right to me yesterday out on El Cap, but I really don't know sh!t. Full roller in my post meant his engine has a roller cam, roller lifters, and roller rocker arms. His boat has Bassett twisties on it. It's got tons of power and does haull assss up to about 80, but quits at 4900 RPM/W.O.T.. The shop right next to JP Marine built the engine in the Eliminator (I can't remember the name of the shop right now) and JP Marine did all of the pumpwork. I really wasn't looking for an online fix for his boat, just a general opinion that his set-up is/isn't quite right.
The Eliminator's owner and I are supposed to meet at El Cap tomorrow, it'll be my maiden voyage in my Mach 1 and he'll have his Eliminator.
.

[pw_Tony]

Maybe he has an AA impellar?:confused:
That would be a little closer on the chart

[Sleeper CP]

When you said Mach 1 I had to think for a minute. If I remember correctly your doesn't have 3,000 plus HP and wont run 150 plus, correct?;)
Yeah, something is just not right with that combo. Find out compression does it have a single carb or TR?
Sleeper CP

[steelcomp]

When you said Mach 1 I had to think for a minute. If I remember correctly your doesn't have 3,000 plus HP and wont run 150 plus, correct?;)
Yeah, something is just not right with that combo. Find out compression does it have a single carb or TR?
Sleeper CP
Maybe something bigger than a single 650?? :D

[Sleeper CP]

I heard that 19's like to fly a little easier than 18's much over 100.
Steel, the number I heard was over 110, I need all the margin I can get with the new combo
Sleeper CP
514" Ford Lover( hoping for 85)

[steelcomp]

Steel, the number I heard was over 110, I need all the margin I can get with the new combo
Sleeper CP
514" Ford Lover( hoping for 85)With today's running attitudes and different hardware, you may be right, but still need to be careful over 100.

[hotrod56cars]

He definately has an aluminum "A" impellor.
Correct, my Mach 1 is definately not the Mach 1 that does 152 mph. :D I'm hoping mine does 70 mph. :D A lot of tomorrow will be cruising around and putting some time on my flat tappet hydraulic cam and lifters...
Edelbrock Performer, single Holley DP mech. secondary, I think it's a 850 cfm.. Compression is 10.25:1.
.

[Gearhead]

I have used Jac's chart for many years and it is fairly accurate when using the raw data (uncorrected data) from a dyno session as the uncorrected is what power you have on a given day. Corrected is close at standard temperature and pressure conditions and again aligns with Jac's chart with our dyno. I have an extended version of this extended chart that has also worked well with higer power applications.
We all want lots of power. It is a testosterone thing! A fully loaded jet pump is much like a loaded dyno. If the pump is fully loaded, the actual torque and HP align with the chart. It may hurt your feelings, but it will tell you where you are. With a full power curve, you can graph it on this chart and as long as your power curve is above or at an impeller curve, then you can pull that impeller size. For best acceleration, try to select an impeller where your engine power curve stays at or above the impeller curve then crosses the impeller curve at peak horsepower.
In bad air conditions, errror to the smaller impeller as you would with a torque converter in a drag race car situation where you adjust to the higher stall speed of the torque peak. The reason you adjust to the higher stall speed on a converter is you want to make sure you can reach peak torque on a bad air day. An engine will accelerate quicker from peak torqu to peak horsepower than it will accelerate to peak torque from a lower rpm. Same thing on an impeller, the boat will accelerate quicker to peak HP when you are in the torque curve rather than too large of an impeller and having to accelerate from below the power curve up.
I don't mind helping to interpolate your engine power curve to the impeller charts if you can provide me both raw and corrected dyno data from a reasonably calibrated dyno.
Sleeper should be thanked for posting the chart. Most of the data he has posted is reasonable..... even if he is running a Ford.... sorry about that.... just could not help it... I do run a BBC in the boat but somehow got tied up in running a Dodge B-1 in Comp Eliminator for over ten years due to what looked to be superior port designs, so I don't have much room to talk!
Gear

[steelcomp]

Winning the race and setting a record...(that's Greg Shoemaker in the Daytona, Dick Griffin in the gullwing at Ming)
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/520/1729Bakersfield1.jpg
...then one second later, at about 106...
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/500/1729Your_Gullwing.jpg

[Sleeper CP]

Steel,
Thanks for the pic. What year was that, wow? ( oh the pic says Bakersfield 78) Hopefully the fact that my bros and my boat weighs in at 990lbs with the pump and interior plus the Big ass Fordmotorsport block it won't want to do that.
I think Ron Segnis "Blue Bomber" CP 19 around 450 lbs blew over at Bakersfield at about 116.
Great pic though I hope he was alright.
Is that speed coat on the bottom?
Sleeper

[Gearhead]

Steel,
It had to be that Jacuzzi pump that caused the lift off! :)
I do wonder how he had his hardware set as that is pretty unusual for the 19 gullwing. With the Jacuzzi... I would guess the picture is from somewhere in the '75 to '77 year range. There were a few fast Jacuzzis running in '79, but most were by the wayside by then.
That plate does look to be a high angle!

[Sleeper CP]

Yeah Gearhead, I've heard worse than your comment over the years. But she is a fine running machine. Can't waite to hit the water with the new combo, I just hope I don't have to de-tune the new engine.
I got a few questions from some friends off line about why the new engine makes power to 7K. The answer is the HP is just a byproduct of the torque that we were trying to make I was trying to get to 750 lbs ft. at 6,000 (850 hp) as max trq. To be able to spin the impeller off the Nos at that rpm. The number ended up being 765 lbs. ft at 6,000 for max trq. I was working with a few new variables; new heads w/ Ti intakes, new rockers T&D shaft w/ 1.8 ratio, one more point of compression 11.8 vs 10.8 and a new hi-rise single intake manifold. So, all told we came in pretty good.
But the engine was built to be a two speed engine as like the three combo's prior to it. It should be able to turn the new pump to 6,200-6,300 off the bottle and rev to 6,800 or so on the bottle. I can't wait to see how it matches up against the chart. MPDs pumps are one step stonger than the chart shows. His A should turn like a AA on the chart.
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover

[hotrod56cars]

Thanks Steel for the great pictures!
That Eliminator, the engine was built by New Tech, maybe NuTech, in Lakeside.
.

[Sleeper CP]

Thanks Steel for the great pictures!
That Eliminator, the engine was built by New Tech, maybe NuTech, in Lakeside.
.
Well the guys at NuTech know what they are doing. I've heard good things about them, but something is not right:confused:
Sleeper

[pw_Tony]

Sleeper should be thanked for posting the chart. Most of the data he has posted is reasonable..... even if he is running a Ford.... sorry about that.... just could not help it... I do run a BBC in the boat but somehow got tied up in running a Dodge B-1 in Comp Eliminator for over ten years due to what looked to be superior port designs, so I don't have much room to talk!
Gear
Dat's right! Lol :D

[steelcomp]

Griffin hooked up with Earl Smith in the late 80's and was one of, if not the first to start running the gullwings, and ES tunnels. He kicked everyone's ass for a couple years untill the rest cought on. There wasn't any Jacuzzi in sight, that was all Berk stuff, and his engine builder, Bob Johenck was no second to anyone. I think the bottom was speed coated, yes.
Story was, Grif hit a roller right at the finish line at that race and that's all he remembers.
They flew 'em high and dry back then. I think he was running a 496, somewhere in the 800+ range, and very light boats. That Daytona of Shoe's was a flat keel boat, and they never could get that thing to run with the gullwings and tunnels. Grif won the NDBA Comp Jet championship in either 79 or 80, and driver of the year, set a bunch of records, etc. Pretty well known character back then. Boat was called Thumper. He still has the first (or second...he's not sure) 19' gullwing that Earl Smith pulled from the mold which he bought from Youngblood. It's about 300lbs, and very much a potatoe chip. It just might show up next year. :D

[pw_Tony]

Is it just me or does his leg look a little broke in that pic?

[steelcomp]

Is it just me or does his leg look a little broke in that pic?
It's not...he wasn't hurt that bad in that crash, but it was definately the last time he raced a 19.

[bp]

Steel,
Thanks for the pic. What year was that, wow? ( oh the pic says Bakersfield 78) Hopefully the fact that my bros and my boat weighs in at 990lbs with the pump and interior plus the Big ass Fordmotorsport block it won't want to do that.
I think Ron Segnis "Blue Bomber" CP 19 around 450 lbs blew over at Bakersfield at about 116.
Great pic though I hope he was alright.
Is that speed coat on the bottom?
Sleeper
sleeper, i remember ron getting wet during the short period he ran a cp tunnel, which was the reason he went back to the 18' gullwing.
a cp 19 is not the same layup as an earle smith 19; the earle smith 19 looks like a longer cp 18. with cp's, the sides of the 19 are distinctly different, and the cap is entirely different, with the deck being shorter allowing a lot more passenger space in a cp 19. the cp 18 is a shorter version of the earle smith 19; the cp 19 is a different boat. dale anderson ran his cp19 in the 113-115's with 0 problems, and so did brett.
cp19s are nowhere near as prone to blowover as other hull designs. however, -any- boat that's run with excessive attitude at higher speeds runs the risk of blowover. daytona's have blown over at 80 when set up with poor balance in combination with excessive attitude. just for grins, go to the "east" section of this forum, look for the "thunder on the green" thread, and scroll down to the pic of KenF running against a whacker.
gearhead, was that boat in your avatar at marble falls this year? i saw a boat that was at least very similar to it on the rope in M.E.

[Gearhead]

BP,
No it was not me at Marble Falls, although I saw there were a few 18 & 20 Youngblood picklefork style boats running there. Since I refurbished this old boat, I have pretty well been running lakes in the Ark-Ok-Tex area. The picture within the post section is a run at Smokin' In The Cove '06 where I ran the National Anthem pass on Sunday.
I did not think or intend this lake boat to be a race type boat... but it runs so well for an old nostalgia jet.... you know what they say about old jetboats....
All in all it has been a lot of fun to be back in a boat making a few passes. after a number of years out of the performance boat business. An invite a couple of years back to tune a Pro Gas Jet at a sanctioned event rekindled a flame that I had avoided for a long time.
Gear

[Sleeper CP]

BP,
Thanks for the info from above on the CP's. Ours has always felt very safe, but we are not running 110 either. I looked at the pic that you refered to, a bit to loose for my comfort level.
Neil told me of a guy that blew over a Daytona at about 80 and killed himself at the drags ,because of a very bad set up. :eek: :(
The engine sounded great in the boat this afternoon. We'll hit one of the lakes around here on Thursday before we head off to Aha this Weekend.
Sleeper CP
514" Ford Lover;)

[pce680]

Griffin hooked up with Earl Smith in the late 80's and was one of, if not the first to start running the gullwings, and ES tunnels. He kicked everyone's ass for a couple years untill the rest cought on. There wasn't any Jacuzzi in sight, that was all Berk stuff, and his engine builder, Bob Johenck was no second to anyone. I think the bottom was speed coated, yes.
Story was, Grif hit a roller right at the finish line at that race and that's all he remembers.
They flew 'em high and dry back then. I think he was running a 496, somewhere in the 800+ range, and very light boats. That Daytona of Shoe's was a flat keel boat, and they never could get that thing to run with the gullwings and tunnels. Grif won the NDBA Comp Jet championship in either 79 or 80, and driver of the year, set a bunch of records, etc. Pretty well known character back then. Boat was called Thumper. He still has the first (or second...he's not sure) 19' gullwing that Earl Smith pulled from the mold which he bought from Youngblood. It's about 300lbs, and very much a potatoe chip. It just might show up next year. :D
I Got my flat keel eliminator to run in 1978.Set the NDBA Comp Jet record at 108.28 MPH at the NDBA Nationals at Firebird.Also won the NDBA Championship in 1978.Don Ziegler won it in 1979 and Grif won it in 1980 I believe. Ron Pitts

[pce680]

Winning the race and setting a record...(that's Greg Shoemaker in the Daytona, Dick Griffin in the gullwing at Ming)
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/520/1729Bakersfield1.jpg
...then one second later, at about 106...
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/500/1729Your_Gullwing.jpg
Shoe tore the sponsor off his Eliminator ( Under Dog ) shortly after this race at a NJBA race at Parker,AZ.

[IMPATIENT 1]

i'm gonna blow this up and put it in my shop:D

[Sleeper CP]

sleeper, i remember ron getting wet during the short period he ran a cp tunnel, which was the reason he went back to the 18' gullwing.
,
I called Ron to see if he was going to make Aha this weekend and he will not be able too, family stuff with the wife a kids.:(
He got wet twice racing; the time mentioned above was the second time. He said the pop off on the boat released at about 80 and the damn thing spit him out. He said " if this thing spit me out at 80 what's going to happen at 116" so he got rid of it. I think he said he only raced it three times or only had it for three months. Then he went searching for his current TX-19 ( 425 lbs).
His old blue bomber blew over at Bakersfield going into a frontal cross wind. He said it was blowing so hard he was turning into it so it didn't blow him into the other lane. I asked him if he had thought about lifting he said " Not while I was in front":D
Sleeper CP

[Sleeper CP]

Here is a quick overview on the Extended RPM Impeller Chart.
http://s201.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/Sleepercp/th_scan00011.jpg
(Look at chart below in next post) I'll edit this later.
You'll notice that the top hand written line is the corrected hp of the engine.
796 hp at 5,600, 874 at 6,000, 903 at 6,400 and 930 at 6,800. The second line of hand written numbers highlighted in pink are the observed hp numbers on an 84 degree temp day. The dyno was correcting up aprrox. 70 HP - 76 hp.
Jack at MPD and Greg Shoemaker have both told me that their detailed S/S impellers will bite one cut size larger than this extended chart shows. So a fully detailed MPD A impeller pump/combo will look like a AA on this chart.
My brothers and my single carb 565" Ford made (observed) 735 HP at 5,600
772HP at 6,800 and 806HP at 6,000 obseverd on an 84 degree day.( The corrected 6,000 rpm number was 874 HP and 765 lbs ft.) We would expect that it would turn the MPD A impeller at 6,000 rpms.(But that would be on an 84 degree day)
This weekend at Aha Quin, I was underwelmed when it ran 90 mph at 5,700 off the bottle. I was expecting closer to 6,000 rpms. I knew the air was bad because it was 110-116 degrees. I was talking to Greg Shoemaker at 10:45 Sunday Morning and he pulled out his weather station it was reading 104 degrees and was correcting up to 4,700 ft. elevation( actual elevation is 375 ft) the air got worse from there. So the engine was way down on power.
Yesterday I did the math on it. I called my dyno guy, Jim at HP Engines & Dyno Service and asked him what the additional correction factor would be from an 84 degree day to a 112-116 degree day. He said depending on the humidity and baro pressure it would probably be an additional 7-8 percent decrease in power. So I'll take a 7.5 percent correction factor and apply it to the dyno chart and the impeller chart. The engine made 752 HP at 5,700 rpm's on a 84 degree day. I subtracted out 7.5% or 56 hp. That means the engine would be making 696 hp at 5,700 rpms. That happens to be where the Blue dot is highlighted on the chart right at 700HP.
The MPD impeller would take 700 hp to turn 5,700 rpm's. I would consider that to be pretty accurate.
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover
p.s. Off to do some adjustments. Two new shoe's, two intake grates and ride plate change for next week... also a carb switch to see what happens.
See ya at the river

[Sleeper CP]

Re-vised chart
http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/Sleepercp/scan00011-1.jpg?t=1189020353
Sleeper CP

[bp]

i was at lost lake saturday, so i know it was kind of warm.
so, based on your assumptions, this chart was one size off? according to this chart, if you're turning an A 5700, you're making about 575hp. even if you get it to 6000, chart says 690hp.. are you ready to call bullshiat yet?:D, or are we just gonna continue with this chart being "right on"...
this last weekend, air was bad. when air is bad, at some point for your engine, it needs to be jetted down just a bit. you mentioned your exhaust was black, probably because you were running a 1500-2500 d/a jetting.
in my deal, i've found a "magic" d/a where i need to jet down, if i'm not already. it depends on temp, b/p, humidity and dew point. i'll toss ya a curve; at marble falls, all three mornings, temp was below 80, d/a around 3400-3500. i saw 5780 off the bottle. in the afternoon runs, d/a went up to 4600-4800, and i saw 5880 off the bottle. i never made any changes to the engine all weekend. any thoughts?:idea:
one other thing; you have a big engine, and big engines don't change as much as smaller engines do, with respect to weather changes. your richness caused more problems than the d/a; had you changed jets, you would have picked up a little. but from the rpm point you should have been at, you most likely won't pick up a shiat load of rpm just because the air gets better. i'll toss out a guess, that if you get it jetted correctly for the conditions, you could see a max of 5950 at 1000' of d/a. maybe 6k, but i'd guess slightly less. bakersfield usually has pretty good air in october:sqeyes:
of course, you'd be all the way up to 690hp:D but, you'll have to show me a jet boat as heavy as yours run 90+ with 690hp; cuz i aint gonna believe it...

[steelcomp]

Jack at MPD and Greg Shoemaker have both told me that their detailed S/S impellers will bite one cut size larger than this extended chart shows. So a fully detailed MPD A impeller pump/combo will look like a AA on this chart That wasn't real hard to understand. If he's spinning an MPD A 5700, it looks like right at 700hp on this chart.
in my deal, i've found a "magic" d/a where i need to jet down, if i'm not already. it depends on temp, b/p, humidity and dew point. i'll toss ya a curve; at marble falls, all three mornings, temp was below 80, d/a around 3400-3500. i saw 5780 off the bottle. in the afternoon runs, d/a went up to 4600-4800, and i saw 5880 off the bottle. i never made any changes to the engine all weekend. any thoughts?
Magic?? :notam: Your jetting was obviously pretty far off in the AM, and more favorable to the afternoon weather if you picked up rpm with only 1200'-1300' da change. I wouldn't change jets with 1200' DA change unless jetting was already on the edge before the DA change. DA changes really have to be huge to get much out of a jet change AFA noticable power/performance, especially in a jet. If you're jetted for 1500' and rnning at 4500', then yes, that's a bit extreme, but going from 3500-4800 and gaining rpm, IMO, wasn't about jetting, and not at the rpm level we're talking.
JMOFWIW.

[cyclone]

Food for thought: i swapped out impellers, which came from the same manufacturer, with the same cut size, and saw a difference of almost 400 peak rpm between the two. the difference was one was a mag bronze and one was stainless. both impeller were prepped by the same guy.
the point is that there are few absolutes and the most we can do is generalize about why jet pumps do what they do and when they do it.

[Sleeper CP]

so, based on your assumptions, this chart was one size off? according to this chart, if you're turning an A 5700, you're making about 575hp. even if you get it to 6000, chart says 690hp.. are you ready to call bullshiat yet?:D, or are we just gonna continue with this chart being "right on"...
of course, you'd be all the way up to 690hp:D but, you'll have to show me a jet boat as heavy as yours run 90+ with 690hp; cuz i aint gonna believe it...
Hi BP,
I won't write too much until you re-read my post and we are all on the same page. Steelcomp already highlighted what I think you must have missed.
Once again ,the chart was spot on.
I hope Shoemaker(GS Marine) doesn't send my brother and me a bill. We pulled on his ear for about a total of two hours on Sunday. He gave us what I consider some really good set up idea's for the boat. To be able to run 105-110 and be as safe as we can doing it. He is really a very nice guy.
When Greg pulled out his weather station, before it reset, I told him I was considering a 4 size jet change. When the station read 4,700 ft. at 104 degrees before 11:00 am he said that would probably be safe. I changed 4 sizes and the plugs where absolutley "white" after 8 full passes and a little running time, so I went up 2 sizes. I think the soot is from a mid throttle condition. I'll chase it down next time out.
Any way post back up after you have read all the info that I posted. I think you'll see what I was talking about.
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover

[Sleeper CP]

so, based on your assumptions, this chart was one size off? according to this chart, if you're turning an A 5700, you're making about 575hp. even if you get it to 6000, chart says 690hp.. are you ready to call bullshiat yet?:D, or are we just gonna continue with this chart being "right on"...
of course, you'd be all the way up to 690hp:D but, you'll have to show me a jet boat as heavy as yours run 90+ with 690hp; cuz i aint gonna believe it...t
BP,
Math is math, it is not subjective. I have no problem with the fact that our engine is down 125HP from the corrected numbers on a 114-116 degree day.
If you took our boat out in the winter on a 60 degree day at sea level with a 700 hp engine it could push it to 90 mph. The math doesn't lie.
But that 700 hp engine wont do it on a 90 degree day or a typical 105-110 degree river day.
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover

[Sleeper CP]

Food for thought: i swapped out impellers, which came from the same manufacturer, with the same cut size, and saw a difference of almost 400 peak rpm between the two. the difference was one was a mag bronze and one was stainless. both impeller were prepped by the same guy.
the point is that there are few absolutes and the most we can do is generalize about why jet pumps do what they do and when they do it.
Which performed better? Did the additional 400 rpm give you a better ET or mph.?
Sleeper CP

[IMPATIENT 1]

i turned the dom b-cut to 6900-7k last weekend with 10lbs boost, pump was loaded well when i done it. felt goooood till the block gave out:mad:

[hotbo]

i was at lost lake saturday, so i know it was kind of warm.
so, based on your assumptions, this chart was one size off? according to this chart, if you're turning an A 5700, you're making about 575hp. even if you get it to 6000, chart says 690hp.. are you ready to call bullshiat yet?:D, or are we just gonna continue with this chart being "right on"...
this last weekend, air was bad. when air is bad, at some point for your engine, it needs to be jetted down just a bit. you mentioned your exhaust was black, probably because you were running a 1500-2500 d/a jetting.
in my deal, i've found a "magic" d/a where i need to jet down, if i'm not already. it depends on temp, b/p, humidity and dew point. i'll toss ya a curve; at marble falls, all three mornings, temp was below 80, d/a around 3400-3500. i saw 5780 off the bottle. in the afternoon runs, d/a went up to 4600-4800, and i saw 5880 off the bottle. i never made any changes to the engine all weekend. any thoughts?:idea:
one other thing; you have a big engine, and big engines don't change as much as smaller engines do, with respect to weather changes. your richness caused more problems than the d/a; had you changed jets, you would have picked up a little. but from the rpm point you should have been at, you most likely won't pick up a shiat load of rpm just because the air gets better. i'll toss out a guess, that if you get it jetted correctly for the conditions, you could see a max of 5950 at 1000' of d/a. maybe 6k, but i'd guess slightly less. bakersfield usually has pretty good air in october:sqeyes:
of course, you'd be all the way up to 690hp:D but, you'll have to show me a jet boat as heavy as yours run 90+ with 690hp; cuz i aint gonna believe it...
once again someone has no respect for a chart that cuases so much conflict if you would read what sleeper stated maybe you would understand.?not tryin to sound like a asshole hear but if you think you can make a better chart please do so,so that we can all be inlightened on a better chart that you must have.:idea: this chart is pretty damn close to alot of stuff out there sure it will vary some but not so much it is useless.later trav.

[Sleeper CP]

Re-vised chart
http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/Sleepercp/scan00011-1.jpg?t=1189020353
Sleeper CP
Take a look at the above chart: A 700 hp @ 6,000 rpm BB (corrected numbers) will loose approx 16% of it's power at 112-115 degree day. That is a 112-115 hp loss. So instead of being able to turn a typical "A" impeller 6,000 rpm's or a fully detailed race "B" 6200-6400 that engine will only be making approx 585 HP, so the "A" will only spin to 5,600- 5,700 rpm's.
Sleeper CP

[bp]

That wasn't real hard to understand. If he's spinning an MPD A 5700, it looks like right at 700hp on this chart..
so the chart is right on unless it's an mpd impeller? plus, the socalled 700hp is AN ASSUMPTION, based on a generality, not factual data. this chart shows 575 to turn an A 5700; that's what the thing shows, i'm not making it up. 700 is a long long way from 575. so, where would the chart land for an mpd aa? and, 700 isn't where the line crosses at 5700; but even if it were that close, you could say reasonable accurate.
Magic?? :notam: Your jetting was obviously pretty far off in the AM, and more favorable to the afternoon weather if you picked up rpm with only 1200'-1300' da change. I wouldn't change jets with 1200' DA change unless jetting was already on the edge before the DA change. DA changes really have to be huge to get much out of a jet change AFA noticable power/performance, especially in a jet. If you're jetted for 1500' and rnning at 4500', then yes, that's a bit extreme, but going from 3500-4800 and gaining rpm, IMO, wasn't about jetting, and not at the rpm level we're talking.
JMOFWIW.
jetting was perfect for a normal 3500 d/a in the am (i was NOT jetted for 1500'). which was one of the reasons i had a 100rpm gain in the afternoon when d/a went up.
d/a changes don't have to be huge to get something out of a jet change, but in my engine, which is much larger than your old engine, d/a has to cross a certain point. if i -don't- change around that point, i'll see a significant fall off in performance as d/a continues to climb, and the engine is running too rich. below that, it won't necessarily be too lean with one size difference, but the little increase will allow the engine to produce a few more rpm.
jetting DID have an impact on the morning performance in 3500' d/a, and also why rpm increased in the afternoon with 1200-1300' higher d/a. this happened on 3 consecutive days. i now know why it happened, and am debating with myself over what to do about it next time, if anything. if you can figure out why it happened, i'll say that's correct; otherwise it's my info.
hotbo, there IS a better calculator out there that lvjetboy started years ago, collecting actual data from everyone he could. it may not be "absolute", but it's much closer for every type of impeller out there. as i said before, this chart -may- have been close in 1992, but with changes developed in the industry over the past 15 years, it's not that close in many applications. the bottom line for me is that i can give you example after example in which this chart is off 100-200hp. it really doesn't matter to me, and you can believe whatever you feel good about.

[Sleeper CP]

so the chart is right on unless it's an mpd impeller? plus, the socalled 700hp is AN ASSUMPTION, based on a generality, not factual data. this chart shows 575 to turn an A 5700; that's what the thing shows, i'm not making it up. 700 is a long long way from 575. so, where would the chart land for an mpd aa? and, 700 isn't where the line crosses at 5700; but even if it were that close, you could say reasonable accurate.
.
As far as the MPD impeller goes(and a G&S Marine) the reason the impeller bites one size larger is that they re-shape the face of the impeller for a bigger bite. Kind of like changing the pitch of a propeller by putting more "cup" into it. It reduces slip and has a more aggressive bite.
What 700 hp is an Assumption? If it was from my engine on Saturday it's not much of an assumption. If I know the temp , and have an observed number with a known temp I can apply another correction factor to the number and get rather close.
"this chart shows 575 to turn an A to 5700" That is true, but this chart is only a base line for stock or detailed impellers. Not full race impellers. And I already know from two sources(actually from the horses mouth) both Jack and Greg told me straight out that one of their fully blue-printed impellers are more efficient than and have a bigger bite than the impellers used on the chart and therefore require more power to turn than the chart shows. Typically their impellers are one size different. I can accept that, they told me so, I don't think either one of them would have a reason to lie to me about that. And it would make since that one of their fully detailed impellers would perform differently than a stock one. I for one hope so for what it costs, either wise I would just stick a stock impeller in the bowl and go.
I'm sure they have seen the chart before and are fully aware of it.
Lastly, on the question of a MPD "AA" my guess would be: Approx 650 hp at 5250, 750hp at 5550, 850 hp at 5850 and 900 hp at 6000 and 1100hp at 6600. These are actual at the shaft HP numbers. So as this discussion got started yesterday; adjusted for temp, the 900 hp at 6000 would be an engine that could produce approx. 1,075 corrected hp. That would be approx. 900 hp on a 112-116 degree day. Just a guess:idea:
Sleeper CP
565" Ford Lover

[pw_Tony]

Bump ;)

[junkyardhunter]

its dead in here :skull: