David Vizard, Uncle Tony's garage, Unity motorsport. Mission impossible Dodge 302 Head porting

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
Look, I could reach the goal easy with a 300 shot of N2O...
Why would you even bother to pull the engine apart, that's crazy when you can just give it a sniff of the good stuff!!!
 
Hysteric said:
These guys didn't need a bigger port:http://wright-here.net/files/articles/phr_1109_sbo/phr_1109_sbo_ocr.pdf

They made 1.37 HP per cube with only 195 cfm peak flow. They made 2.2 HP per cfm just so you know that's 430 ft ponds of torque and 435 Hp

"The intake port is way smaller than the original. , think the factory was 152 cc and now it's down to 145 and it's much higher. It's got a small cross section of 1.91square inches." Final flow numbers ended up around 195 cfm on the intake and 170 on the exhaust. Though not huge peak flow numbers. he claims they were almost at those numbers by .200-inch lift. Just perfect for limited camshaft and rpm range applications."

That 145 cc port has no problem making power..............Seems to be a Mopar thing because I can get a Holden 308 with smaller valves than a 318 starts with that will go mid to high 11's in a street car that the engine builder says is an everyday driver.

Qwkmopardan is another example of what you would call under headed for the cubes (410) but somehow makes enough power to run 9.6's. In some peoples brains that same head is needed on a 318 to make power.........

I could put up many other examples.......
Click to expand...
Dead link. What head are you talking about this time ? Stock 318 / 273 anything is 124-125 cc port all day, ported flowing 200-210cfm I have them 130-132 cc tops, at the most. 1.88 valve just blended tothe proper bowl size and middle matched to a performer was 137-142cc... magnums are 150cc. Splitting hairs with underdog aspirations.
 
Another thing about building the 1969 318, 9.2:1 cr 230 HP engine is the fact that they have the "Free Floating Rods" that are 32 Grams lighter that the common heavier press fit 645 rods.

Saves a lot of effort and more accurate than trying to lighten up the 645 rods by grinding.

Check out this weight comparison posted by ToolManMike back in Feb. 2022:

Full Float Compare.png
 
'68 - '69 318 used the 1618699 (699) full floating rods.

18699.jpg


'70 - '71 318 used the 2406782 (782) full floating rods.

-782-.jpg
 
My friend John of Talljohnsfunshop just did a vid about the rods... and using a high quality scale..shows a 40 gram diff between 273 floaters and 340 floaters.
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
An exercise in hype that had the usual cheerleader smackin his pom poms together and high kicking one leg
Click to expand...
Still struggling to grasp how some people manage to make power with heads that flow very little and are too small.........Here's the post again:

These guys didn't need a bigger port:http://wright-here.net/files/articles/phr_1109_sbo/phr_1109_sbo_ocr.pdf

They made 1.37 HP per cube with only 195 cfm peak flow. They made 2.2 HP per cfm just so you know that's 430 ft ponds of torque and 435 Hp

"The intake port is way smaller than the original. , think the factory was 152 cc and now it's down to 145 and it's much higher. It's got a small cross section of 1.91square inches." Final flow numbers ended up around 195 cfm on the intake and 170 on the exhaust. Though not huge peak flow numbers. he claims they were almost at those numbers by .200-inch lift. Just perfect for limited camshaft and rpm range applications."

That 145 cc port has no problem making power..............Seems to be a Mopar thing because I can get a Holden 308 with smaller valves than a 318 starts with that will go mid to high 11's in a street car that the engine builder says is an everyday driver.

Qwkmopardan is another example of what you would call under headed for the cubes (410) but somehow makes enough power to run 9.6's. In some peoples brains that same head is needed on a 318 to make power.........

I could put up many other examples.......
 
Hysteric said:
Still struggling to grasp how some people manage to make power with heads that flow very little and are too small.........Here's the post again:

These guys didn't need a bigger port:http://wright-here.net/files/articles/phr_1109_sbo/phr_1109_sbo_ocr.pdf

They made 1.37 HP per cube with only 195 cfm peak flow. They made 2.2 HP per cfm just so you know that's 430 ft ponds of torque and 435 Hp

"The intake port is way smaller than the original. , think the factory was 152 cc and now it's down to 145 and it's much higher. It's got a small cross section of 1.91square inches." Final flow numbers ended up around 195 cfm on the intake and 170 on the exhaust. Though not huge peak flow numbers. he claims they were almost at those numbers by .200-inch lift. Just perfect for limited camshaft and rpm range applications."

That 145 cc port has no problem making power..............Seems to be a Mopar thing because I can get a Holden 308 with smaller valves than a 318 starts with that will go mid to high 11's in a street car that the engine builder says is an everyday driver.

Qwkmopardan is another example of what you would call under headed for the cubes (410) but somehow makes enough power to run 9.6's. In some peoples brains that same head is needed on a 318 to make power.........

I could put up many other examples.......
Click to expand...
Just state what the head being used is and stop using dead links. "about blank"
Are you a broken record or what.. you are the only one having a hard time accepting let alone stepping outside your bubble.
Definitely will not find you outside of 318 and 11's land..
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
Just state what the head being used is and stop using dead links. "about blank"
Are you a broken record or what.. you are the only one having a hard time accepting let alone stepping outside your bubble.
Definitely will not find you outside of 318 and 11's land..
Click to expand...
Struggling still.....

Meanwhile intelligent people will continue to make power with less airflow irrespective of brand while you advocate for more flow and bigger heads because you cannot grasp how to use what you already have.

430HP/435 from 195 cfm of flow..........with 145 cc's
 
Hysteric said:
Still struggling to grasp how some people manage to make power with heads that flow very little and are too small.........Here's the post again:

These guys didn't need a bigger port:http://wright-here.net/files/articles/phr_1109_sbo/phr_1109_sbo_ocr.pdf

They made 1.37 HP per cube with only 195 cfm peak flow. They made 2.2 HP per cfm just so you know that's 430 ft ponds of torque and 435 Hp

"The intake port is way smaller than the original. , think the factory was 152 cc and now it's down to 145 and it's much higher. It's got a small cross section of 1.91square inches." Final flow numbers ended up around 195 cfm on the intake and 170 on the exhaust. Though not huge peak flow numbers. he claims they were almost at those numbers by .200-inch lift. Just perfect for limited camshaft and rpm range applications."

That 145 cc port has no problem making power..............Seems to be a Mopar thing because I can get a Holden 308 with smaller valves than a 318 starts with that will go mid to high 11's in a street car that the engine builder says is an everyday driver.

Qwkmopardan is another example of what you would call under headed for the cubes (410) but somehow makes enough power to run 9.6's. In some peoples brains that same head is needed on a 318 to make power.........

I could put up many other examples.......
Click to expand...
Interesting. Definitely not what I'd call a budget build though.
 
It's interesting that they started with an engine that most wouldn't build. It's interesting the out of the box thinking that went into the power they made.

Having said that, I'd bet if someone contacted them and wanted a 400hp engine built, that wouldn't be what they'd use.
 
replicaracer43 said:
Using a head that requires a lot more work, (ie money) than some cheap aluminum head that would make the same power for less money
Click to expand...
Using a bigger engine requires a lot less work and would make more power for less money.
 
Hysteric said:
Struggling still.....

Meanwhile intelligent people will continue to make power with less airflow irrespective of brand while you advocate for more flow and bigger heads because you cannot grasp how to use what you already have.

430HP/435 from 195 cfm of flow..........with 145 cc's
Click to expand...

Show that engine .500 lift instead of .633 with 1.8 rockers and see where it ends up. Max flow at .200 lift gives the engine plenty of fill time at maximum rate.

What type of ouput would you expect if that Olds had a set of heads that were able to hit 195 at .200 and flow in the 220-240 range at higher lifts? More, less, same HP? You know the answer to that.

It's all relative to the amount of $'s and time you want to throw at something.

Pick your parts, pay your money.

Won't ever click on anything from that garbage garage youtube site except on accident.
 
Last edited:
justinp61 said:
Because you're looking for a mental jousting match, not a discussion on the topic you started.
Click to expand...
Are we not discussing the topic?

crackedback said:
Show that engine .500 lift instead of .633 and see where it ends up. It's all relative to the amount of $'s and time you want to throw at something.
Click to expand...
Show that engine only 195 cfm and see what power it makes...........
 
crackedback said:
Show that engine .500 lift instead of .633 with 1.8 rockers and see where it ends up. It's all relative to the amount of $'s and time you want to throw at something.

Pick your parts, pay your money.
Click to expand...
Yep, custom pistons, low tension rings and ten pounds of epoxy. Like I said, interesting, but not what most folks are going to do.
 
justinp61 said:
Yep, custom pistons, low tension rings and ten pounds of epoxy. Like I said, interesting, but not what most folks are going to do.
Click to expand...
Did that 10 pounds of epoxy make the ports bigger or smaller?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Back
Top