What would it take to make 1.44 lbs-ft per cid ?

[273]

Just so you can understand the context

I do understand the context, you might if everything wasn't about your obsessions with the small.

from a Chrysler equivalent perspective its making 2.23 HP per Cube

You mean cfm ? 2.23 hp per cfm.

with a 318 head on a 318 engine. You can get far more flow from a 318 head than 195 cfm.

If everyone could easily get 450-500 hp out of 318 heads, you don't think people wouldn't be champion that.

I'm sure if the Robinson Crew wanted more air they could quite easily get it.

I imagine they could.

Its USING ALL THE AIR ITS GETTING. Like I keep saying you can give an engine more air it doesn't mean it will USE it.

No **** you act like this profound information. But doesn't mean it won't use more either, this engine has the cam cr etc.. To make more power and the fact that it basically flatlines above 5000 to 6500 rpm kind of shows that.

Look at the EM's 477 hp 323 mopar it keeps making power right up too it's peak hp of 477 hp @ 6500 rpm, makes 435 hp at 5,400 rpms same as the Old's peak hp @ 5,900 rpms and more hp everywhere above 5000 rpms, and below 5000 rpms both have there moments but make similar.

Sure the 323 (7 cid difference) is using a heads with a lot more flow and making less hp per cfm but has an overall better power curve and probably less port cc's per cfm.

https://www.motortrend.com/articles/0901phr-mopar-318-magnum-engine/

 

[Hysteric]

That Magnum R/T head starts @ 180cc. Those ported Magnum R/T heads will be flowing at least 260-270cfm with a much bigger port.

260 cfm @ 2.23 cfm per HP equals 579HP a far cry from 477!

 

[273]

That Magnum R/T head starts @ 180cc. Those ported Magnum R/T heads will be flowing at least 260-270cfm with a much bigger port.

So?

260 cfm @ 2.23 cfm per HP equals 579HP a far cry from 477!

Who cares the 323 ain't making the same hp per cfm, it's all about the hp curve and the 323 is better, that's what powers your car.

 

[Hysteric]

So?

Who cares the 323 ain't making the same hp per cfm, it's all about the hp curve and the 323 is better, that's what powers your car.

Let me see.

145 cc vs 190 cc+
195 cfm vs 260+ cfm.

And only a 42 HP difference.......

I wonder if the Robinson Crew could find an extra 19 cfm to make 477........And they would still be much much smaller than the R/T heads.

Those tiny ports are killing that engine.....

 

[273]

Let me see.

145 cc vs 190 cc+
195 cfm vs 260+ cfm.

And only a 42 HP difference.......

I wonder if the Robinson Crew could find an extra 19 cfm to make 477........And they would still be much much smaller than the R/T heads.

Those tiny ports are killing that engine.....

Your ridiculous. Do you actually have anything helpful to add to the conversation?

 

[273]

The LS Cathedral ports, if I found the right port length about 5.5", the stock heads seem to be in the average fps of 250-260. 260 is supposedly the ideal 250 seems to be the largest port size you want to go with 240 fps maximum. So if right the LS seem to be on the large side. Eg. If was a mopar head a 300 cfm head with 250 fps would be 234 cc. 44cc more than a trick flow 190 head.

 

[RAMM]

An American V8 is not going to be close to 450 fps. Pretty darn good as in Top dollar can be 350 fps. 'Em are going to cost.

My pitot probe says otherwise. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

As per Darin Morgan; velocity, velocity, velocity.
In addition, any porting should also involve increasing swirl. This is mixture motion. A tight quench like 0.025" is another aid. Combine that with Somender Singh grooves to direct compression air/fuel coming out of the quench to aid swirl and toward the spark plug. Brian Salter described this in a Live with David Vizard and Andy Woods. Building as high compression in as possible and use water injection to control detonation. Distilled water with 2% water soluble oil. Methanol is to prevent freezing.

You build an engine with .025" quench you'll be RE-building it sooner than you think. You've exposed yourself as someone who has never practiced what you preach with the Somender Singh groove bullshit. I've actually done it and it killed performance like you wouldn't believe. Why? Crevice Volume. It kills power and efficiency, which Vizard acknowledges. Distilled water? Most guys use windshield washer fluid. Can you point us to any of your builds as examples of your theories to provide proof of concept? J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

The LS Cathedral ports, if I found the right port length about 5.5", the stock heads seem to be in the average fps of 250-260. 260 is supposedly the ideal 250 seems to be the largest port size you want to go with 240 fps maximum. So if right the LS seem to be on the large side. Eg. If was a mopar head a 300 cfm head with 250 fps would be 234 cc. 44cc more than a trick flow 190 head.

Clear out your inbox 273. JRob

 

[273]

Now I'm not saying this chart is right, but as I figure out each decent heads port velocities they seem to fall in the 250-300 fps average range and the more impressive heads do seem to be closer to 260 fps. Now I could be calculating wrong, port length and even cc are hard info to come by.

Now stock 273/318/360 heads all seem to be in the 260's and they responded decently but not like LS and some of these other heads, For one I've only basically been looking at intake side, not the exhaust, chambers, port shape, the overall curve, port flow coefficients etc... But far as I can tell 250-300 is a good range to shoot for and closer to 260 the better but an hard number to hit cause it's seem it far easier to gain cfm than port volume which tends to push it towards the higher average fps.

The other questions I got, how does the fps change if you operating at an rpm higher or lower than ideal for a certain cid does that raise or lower fps ? Same with VE% what effect would that have on fps ?

 

[273]

Clear out your inbox 273. JRob

All cleared out.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

You build an engine with .025" quench you'll be RE-building it sooner than you think. You've exposed yourself as someone who has never practiced what you preach with the Somender Singh groove bullshit. I've actually done it and it killed performance like you wouldn't believe. Why? Crevice Volume. It kills power and efficiency, which Vizard acknowledges. Distilled water? Most guys use windshield washer fluid. Can you point us to any of your builds as examples of your theories to provide proof of concept? J.Rob

What we need is a HUGE GOLD STAR for posts like this.

If you do this for a living you can sniff out the guys who read but never test.

They talk like they know something and because everyone else is reading the same junk assed books it just reinforces the error.

Great post. And factual. You just can’t beat great AND factual.

 

[273]

Chad from Speier Racing Heads, where I got most of this fps info and formulas from, he seems to be 100% all in on it, I've seen other head ports argue him they seem to think it's more just guidelines.

Point is Chad for I think he said for stock eliminator seemed to shoot for 330 fps and he said some classes go as high as 350 fps I'm guessing it's got more to do with the rules than what's ideal. I just bring it up that there probably cases for not being ideal even if there is an ideal, I'm sure stock cars and road racing cars run higher fps etc..

Now I'm not saying this guy is right or wrong I really don't know too much about him.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

Chris from Speier Racing Heads, where I got most of this fps info and formulas from, he seems to be 100% all in on it, I've seen other head ports argue him they seem to think it's more just guidelines.

Point is Chris for I think he said for stock eliminator seemed to shoot for 330 fps and he said some classes go as high as 350 fps I'm guessing it's got more to do with the rules than what's ideal. I just bring it up that there probably cases for not being ideal even if there is an ideal, I'm sure stock cars and road racing cars run higher fps etc..

Now I'm not saying this guy is right or wrong I really don't know too much about him.

His name is Chad. His stuff is record setting fast.

He is one of three reasons why I burr finish everything.

Larry Meaux and Darin Morgan are the other two reasons.

 

[273]

His name is Chad. His stuff is record setting fast.

He is one of three reasons why I burr finish everything.

Larry Meaux and Darin Morgan are the other two reasons.

I really like Darin Morgan the dude just loves to spill out information and he's really good at explaining it.

 

[Hysteric]

I heard Darin say stuff that was flat out wrong. He stated that carb tuners change emulsion bleeds to change the droplet size of fuel on some presentation. WTF.

Maybe the real question people should be asking is why too much velocity is a problem. What's the velocity in a supercharged or turboed engine?

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I heard Darin say stuff that was flat out wrong. He stated that carb tuners change emulsion bleeds to change the droplet size of fuel on some presentation. WTF.

Maybe the real question people should be asking is why too much velocity is a problem. What's the velocity in a supercharged or turboed engine?

You can use elmulsion to change droplet but I’d rather do it with the booster.

I only use one emulsion hole on some of my stuff.

 

[273]

I heard Darin say stuff that was flat out wrong. He stated that carb tuners change emulsion bleeds to change the droplet size of fuel on some presentation. WTF.

Maybe the real question people should be asking is why too much velocity is a problem. What's the velocity in a supercharged or turboed engine?

I said you got anything helpful to add, guess not.

 

[Hysteric]

You can use elmulsion to change droplet but I’d rather do it with the booster.

I only use one emulsion hole on some of my stuff.

How can it? Emulsion lowers the density of the fuel to adjust the flow rate and control AFR not change droplet size.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

How can it? Emulsion lowers the density of the fuel to adjust the flow rate and control AFR not change droplet size.

Yes it will. Try it sometime. You can see it on the dyno very clearly.

 

[Hysteric]

Yes it will. Try it sometime. You can see it on the dyno very clearly.

I already had that discussion with Greg about it. His response was that the fuel and air stratify as it leaves the main well into the booster channel. I tend to agree that's possible but I have also read papers that clearly show bubbly 2 phase flow. Neither flow states can control droplet size as they have to go around corners and the flow is turbulent.

Never hear Bruce talk about his carb design laminar flow and why?

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I already had that discussion with Greg about it. His response was that the fuel and air stratify as it leaves the main well into the booster channel. I tend to agree that's possible but I have also read papers that clearly show bubbly 2 phase flow. Neither flow states can control droplet size as they have to go around corners and the flow is turbulent.

Never hear Bruce talk about his carb design laminar flow and why?

I’m well aware of 2 phase flow.

I’m not sure I’ve read everything Bruce has written. What I’ve found I’ve read.

Any links to his stuff that’s not easy to find on Mark’s site would be appreciated.

 

[Mean416]

@273 have you learned anything on this thread?

Seems to me the focus has been on velocities flows etc.

I'm not convinced velocity is an input or an all important variable.

I haven't seen much about runner length optimization for a given combo. That's a big deal.

You seem to love your formulas. Maybe a tunnel ram should be part of the "equation".

 

[Newbomb Turk]

@273 have you learned anything on this thread?

Seems to me the focus has been on velocities flows etc.

I'm not convinced velocity is an input or an all important variable.

I haven't seen much about runner length optimization for a given combo. That's a big deal.

You seem to love your formulas. Maybe a tunnel ram should be part of the "equation".

A tunnel ram should all be part of the equation.

 

[Hysteric]

@273 have you learned anything on this thread?

Seems to me the focus has been on velocities flows etc.

I'm not convinced velocity is an input or an all important variable.

I haven't seen much about runner length optimization for a given combo. That's a big deal.

You seem to love your formulas. Maybe a tunnel ram should be part of the "equation".

Whats the velocity of a turboed small block running 20 PSI?