The real arguement in the thread isn't between small or large displacement.
We all like to use what we have.
What we have differs from one another, I have multiple ported sets of ported LA's, joe blow might have w2 or rhs, indy or eddy trickflow etc...
Now does that represent the low buck regular guy? Stereotypically...not really.
Does it represent the crowd I know, yes.
So onto stereotypes, yt and the clickbait of this... the "parts laying around" line...now this is David vizard ..so laying around could have been much better parts. How is there a w9 motor next them...and then out comes some obscure mostly cracked 302 casting smog heads? Mostly when regular guys have these laying around..its because they pulled and replaced them and never got to throwing them away. ..but the angle is "regular guy" "low buck"... now how do you really do that with an race engine author of the last 50+ yrs?..you dont... So in come the titanium retainers laying around, the 302 heads with over a month of r&d , valve changes, week long rod lightening & balancing etc.
So the thing about it being silly to boast or champion this is a multitude of things..
1. Big names yet lacking so much basic architecture/parts knowledge.
2. Its not low buck regular guy and falls into the home machine shop territory.
3. The head direction and lack of knowing anything about it...again, very entertaining I'm sure to those who do not know how or have access to the equipment. As for the rest of us... it was mostly a wtf??!! Cutting down a 2" to 1.90 when a 1.89 exists...good grief...
In case anyone had any regular guy aspiration of it..let me reassure you it isnt. Any hint of regular guy low buck ended at the connecting rod work and changing from the 1.78 to the cut down
[email protected]..It ended after 40 days of flowbenching it.
My videos, my numbers shown. All are 6 cfm light. I need to calibrate it, may send the flowcom back for that. I check with a rated oriface plate. That's how I know.
215cfm w/1.78 is really 221cfm for instance. It's been light for years. Take any head I've done and retest it, itll do more than my sheet lists every time. I'm not the best and not saying I am, just know it wont ever flow less than I say.
So the 1.88 port in my video, 4 angle max area 45 seat at .045.. bowl, ssr, gasket match...barely scrubbed the pinch....I bought a 1.89 LS intake valve the other day and dropped it right on that existing seat ... 238cfm... yawn.
Y'all better start a thread on that LS valve instead. Stock low buck, theres a limit. Stock valves were not intended as performance peices, especially tulips.
The magic could have been a set of SI 1.78 and been in the 230... maybe.
All that "small" and "tiny" talk..when they end up over 150cc and with a larger 1.9 valve. I call that overkill, overshooting to make the mark and not very scienced.
Yet its "praise Charlie "
"Wow that tiny hole is amazing "
Something you wouldn't want to hear from outside the door, that'for sure!
What really happened in this 40 something pages...was 3 guys from youtube started a build and it spiraled off into a couple other guys boasting and reveling in their fondness for a particular casting on a forum to the point of complete confusion that a port can still being considered tiny after being hogged 'too big imo' to 149+cc -SAME SIZE AS A MAGNUM . That's near 30cc's removed for those who arent familiar with the head. This tired winded rerun has been played out time and time again..NEVER do the author or his sidekick prove or show anything they claim to have done.
We all know a couple things..
Mopar heads have strong intake ports with much potential, probably about the best of all 3, they're valves just sucked and were titanic is all.
No magic here, no porting gods... Its a skinny 8mm LS valve vs a semi tulip titanic bowl volume eating pos.
fin
