mopar1rules Posted July 15, 2010 Report Posted July 15, 2010 In Portugal we use AutoCAD 2010. Very nice program. I use autocad at work as well. IMO, its the best 2D CAD program out there. The 3D portion of autocad is terrible tho. Those boolean commands and all......what a joke. Quote
blowit Posted July 15, 2010 Report Posted July 15, 2010 Yeah, I use solidworks and like it a lot. Seems pretty user friendly. I never tried catia, but always wanted to. I also wanted to try Pro-E. Yeah, I know what CAD/CAM stands for. I deal w/it everyday. Just never heard of corel:) One program that I think sucks and is a bear to use IMO is BobCam. We have some jokes going around about bobcam. Once you call them, you will never get rid of them. Price starts in the thousands and ends in the hundreds. Personally, they could not pay me to use it. We use Gibbs and Mastercam. I am familiar with Pro-E but trust me, if you are to invest in a Solids program, you will not thank yourself enough for Catia. Program is the best, period.. I am just waiting for their CAM side to catch up. Gibbs and Mastercam have solids benches but to be honest, it is like owning an Audi, them someone puts you in a Ugo.. Solids no worky so good. You also do not get analysis, assembly, sheetmetal, etc. Cat can do it all... Quote
Sands Posted July 15, 2010 Report Posted July 15, 2010 I use autocad at work as well. IMO, its the best 2D CAD program out there. The 3D portion of autocad is terrible tho. Those boolean commands and all......what a joke. For 3D, witch program you use? Quote
TIM LUTZ Posted July 15, 2010 Author Report Posted July 15, 2010 Sorry for all the confusion. Corel is mostly a 2D CAD program and all I am doing with it is mapping my ports in the flat so I can play with shapes and heights. Then I export as a .EPS into a CAM program call Flexi sign. From there it's out to a 3 axis router or a plotter. I'll cut my new port template from 5mil plastic or velum and use that to scribe my cylinders. That way they both match exactly. Quote
mopar1rules Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 For 3D, witch program you use? I use Solidworks. I like it. To me, its user friendly. Its nice when you change the parts dimensions, that it automatically changes the print for you too. Quote
mopar1rules Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 We have some jokes going around about bobcam. Once you call them, you will never get rid of them. Price starts in the thousands and ends in the hundreds. Personally, they could not pay me to use it. We use Gibbs and Mastercam. I am familiar with Pro-E but trust me, if you are to invest in a Solids program, you will not thank yourself enough for Catia. Program is the best, period.. I am just waiting for their CAM side to catch up. Gibbs and Mastercam have solids benches but to be honest, it is like owning an Audi, them someone puts you in a Ugo.. Solids no worky so good. You also do not get analysis, assembly, sheetmetal, etc. Cat can do it all... I never heard of Gibbs either. I use Mastercam at work too. Its drawing portion to the program is good for $hit IMO. I always wanted to try Catia. On the solidworks we have at work, we have the sheet metal and assemblies capabilities. Me and my boss have done numerous complete machine assemblies. I then made exploded drawings of the machines we manufacturer, for use in the owners manuals and such. Quote
blowit Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 I never heard of Gibbs either. I use Mastercam at work too. Its drawing portion to the program is good for $hit IMO. I always wanted to try Catia. On the solidworks we have at work, we have the sheet metal and assemblies capabilities. Me and my boss have done numerous complete machine assemblies. I then made exploded drawings of the machines we manufacturer, for use in the owners manuals and such. I agree that Solidworks is VERY capable and since it and Catia are made my the same co, you can bet they operate similar. Catia basically advances in the analysis area. Composites, simulation, wireframe, 3D point cloud configuration, HVAC design, wireharness design, CNC machining, etc. You can certainly get a lot of ad ons in Solidworks though. I am not real sure where the line is drawn where you are better to go to Catia. I think there are some really badass workbenches in Catia though. We really would like to have an all-in-one solution for CAD/CAM BUT, IMO, Catia is hugely lacking in modern machining paths and methods. They also are not even close to easy to use...I just hope someday, Catia will close the gap and we can get rid of MCX for good. Quote
mopar1rules Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 I agree that Solidworks is VERY capable and since it and Catia are made my the same co, you can bet they operate similar. Catia basically advances in the analysis area. Composites, simulation, wireframe, 3D point cloud configuration, HVAC design, wireharness design, CNC machining, etc. You can certainly get a lot of ad ons in Solidworks though. I am not real sure where the line is drawn where you are better to go to Catia. I think there are some really badass workbenches in Catia though. We really would like to have an all-in-one solution for CAD/CAM BUT, IMO, Catia is hugely lacking in modern machining paths and methods. They also are not even close to easy to use...I just hope someday, Catia will close the gap and we can get rid of MCX for good. brandon, you don't like mastercam? Quote
blowit Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 brandon, you don't like mastercam? NOPE.... Just simple things that can REALLY screw you... I also have never liked their ops tree format. It is messy and confusing IMO. In some situations, ops have taken a new file name for some unknown reason and they will simulate just fine but will not post out. That right there is what crashes machines.... It is buggy and combine that with the fact that I cannot fix ANY model in a reasonable amount of time and the paths sure as hell will not update and I would say SUCK IT.... If you move some minor geometry, it will want rechained. That sucks. I realize X4 has some new stuff to help with chaining but surfacing and such still take a 4yr degree just to operate. I keep hoping that Catia is just biting it's tongue and will comeone with a BA platform but that is probably 10yrs down the road.... Quote
blowit Posted July 16, 2010 Report Posted July 16, 2010 Keep in mind that most high dollar operations really should be running a G code verification system like Vericut or Preditor. Problem is for simple operations, you can waste more time setting that up than actually testing at a machine on air. Mastercam, at the very least, should have a Gcode simulator that don;t suck so you can compare your program simulation to your gcode simulation side by side. Just makes toooo much sense... It is one thing to program things in MC, it is another to generate quality code that suits the machine. I still think there should be a better post editing tool or platform... If you have EVER modded a post, you will know what I am saying... I can spend days trying to edit a post... Quote
zach15 Posted June 22, 2011 Report Posted June 22, 2011 Assuming you have stock base gaskets that are approx. .025" thick, and your deck has not been milled: Raise the transfers 1mm for a duration of 119-121 and a distance from deck of 43mm Raise the exhaust 1.5mm for a duration of 189-191 and a distance of 28.5mm from deck Widen the exhaust port to 45mm chord assuming 64mm bore. 70% of bore would be a good safe number as long as you don't square up the port too bad. The best way to do this is with a degree wheel. Google printable degree wheel. I would recommend 120/ 188 for a mild port, or 120/ 190 and have you mill .020"-.025" off the head to make up for the loss in power stroke. I would actually recommend shaving the head regardless, and go with the 188 for more bottom end and 190 for more rev-out. I would also recommend raising the intake port roofs to 70mm from deck and lowering them by 2-3mm, and give the bottom of the window a very gererous radius. Narrow the bridge to 5mm. I would also recommend drilling the auxilliary intakes as well. Best way to do this is by drilling 3 small holes on top of each othervertically and tying them in with your porting tools; there is not a lot of lateral area to play with without going through the side of the case. A lot of builders add these ports; surely it must be backed up with a dyno.. i had to raise my exhaust port to 25.00mm to deck because i raised my transfers to high a couple years back all it was letting exhuast back in the transfers because they were to high at 48.3mm to deck now i was 12 when i did the first port jod yea im gonna up load a pic of it when i get it done but do you knows think its like a dune port with the exhaust port at 25.00mm to deck tranfers at 48.3 to deck intake at 68.5mm to deck and 10.5:1 compression to help make up for the high exhaust port oh and it has boost ports also i think its gonna have a lot of top end i have shearer inframes and 34mm flat slide carbs also. just tell me what u think about my port hieghts? Quote
mopar1rules Posted June 22, 2011 Report Posted June 22, 2011 How the hell did you come up with, or get your transfers that low? 48.3mm I don't even think is possible, as the stock dimensions are 43mm from roof to cylinder deck. Quote
zach15 Posted June 23, 2011 Report Posted June 23, 2011 How the hell did you come up with, or get your transfers that low? 48.3mm I don't even think is possible, as the stock dimensions are 43mm from roof to cylinder deck. sorry i meant to put 40.3mm not 48.3mm! Quote
camatv Posted June 23, 2011 Report Posted June 23, 2011 i'm still wondering ho wthe "templates" came out..] i have ran 196/130 on trail bikes and 195/130 also they seem to have plenty of bottom end. also ran 198/130 on most drag motors. with good resultes. maybe i am just used to arm ripping hp? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.