Theory's in general or just the I/E percentage theory?gmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 12:01 amDoes that still apply if it's a 9:1 engine or 15:1?GARY C wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:52 am It would be nice if someone had some actual power numbers instead of just what flows better, I think it has been established over and over that exhaust flow numbers and bigger exhaust valves rarely equate to more power. You will find several race heads on the market that have a 1.55 exhaust with a 2.225 or larger intake valve which also blows a hole in the Int to Ex percentage theory...
D0OE exhaust ports
Moderator: Team
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
-
- Guru
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:31 am
- Location: Heading for a bang up with Andromeda as we all are.
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
Here are some pictures that go with the last batch of flow numbers that I posted.
Like those numbers show the 1.60" valve picked up a ton up to a certain lift , but peak flow really went no where and that result was expected.
Then I did more work to the short turn arc and the cylinder side wall and the opposite side wall and lost 4 percent of the peak flow and this due to the flow sheer I now have and need to deal with starting at .400" .
The photos I posted are in opposite order.
The last shoot is how the seat area was cut at first to get the 1.60" valve in there.
I now realize that I should have posted up a picture of the valve itself , and I will get that done tomorrow along with more port work that will get the mid and high lift flow numbers back on track.
Like those numbers show the 1.60" valve picked up a ton up to a certain lift , but peak flow really went no where and that result was expected.
Then I did more work to the short turn arc and the cylinder side wall and the opposite side wall and lost 4 percent of the peak flow and this due to the flow sheer I now have and need to deal with starting at .400" .
The photos I posted are in opposite order.
The last shoot is how the seat area was cut at first to get the 1.60" valve in there.
I now realize that I should have posted up a picture of the valve itself , and I will get that done tomorrow along with more port work that will get the mid and high lift flow numbers back on track.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
You can cut a man's tongue from his mouth, but that does not mean he’s a liar, it just shows that you fear the truth he might speak about you!
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
On the exhaust side, as purchased. Appeared to be as cast from the factory and had a hair smaller than stock Chevy valve 1.50” vs stock 1.54”.
Exhaust
.100 45
.200 88
.300 106
.400 111
.500 112
.600 112
.700 112
Cleaned up the short turn, removed the sharp lip on the short turn, light bowl blend, and took out about 60% of the guide boss lump and blended it in. Wasn’t finished but it did better than I thought it would.
Exhaust
.100 47
.200 90
.300 117
.400 139
.500 145
.600 149
.700 150
.800 150
.900 150
1.00 150
I have since cleaned these up a little better, and shaped the valve guide lump a little better. Hoping to have flow test results in the next few days, then off to the machine shop.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
You said the ex percentage theory.GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 12:34 amTheory's in general or just the I/E percentage theory?gmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 12:01 amDoes that still apply if it's a 9:1 engine or 15:1?GARY C wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:52 am It would be nice if someone had some actual power numbers instead of just what flows better, I think it has been established over and over that exhaust flow numbers and bigger exhaust valves rarely equate to more power. You will find several race heads on the market that have a 1.55 exhaust with a 2.225 or larger intake valve which also blows a hole in the Int to Ex percentage theory...
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
Here is my original quote, I have never seen anything to prove it, there seem to be some pretty stout pump gas engines shown here with under 1.6 valve with 50 degree seats, CGT's Vortec 350 was a 1.5 with a 50 and made 480 hp and 460 ft, so I don't know what percentage one would use, many have been quoted over the years but I think many have moved away from looking at ex flow all together.
Bigger ex valves may have been shown to increase power on the OP's type of head and was why I wondered if anyone had actual dyno numbers showing this to be the case, preferably exhaust gains alone but it's not likely that anyone went to that extent.
It would be nice if someone had some actual power numbers instead of just what flows better, I think it has been established over and over that exhaust flow numbers and bigger exhaust valves rarely equate to more power. You will find several race heads on the market that have a 1.55 exhaust with a 2.225 or larger intake valve which also blows a hole in the Int to Ex percentage theory...
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
all I asked was if the compression ratio has anything to do with it?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 1:12 pmHere is my original quote, I have never seen anything to prove it, there seem to be some pretty stout pump gas engines shown here with under 1.6 valve with 50 degree seats, CGT's Vortec 350 was a 1.5 with a 50 and made 480 hp and 460 ft, so I don't know what percentage one would use, many have been quoted over the years but I think many have moved away from looking at ex flow all together.
Bigger ex valves may have been shown to increase power on the OP's type of head and was why I wondered if anyone had actual dyno numbers showing this to be the case, preferably exhaust gains alone but it's not likely that anyone went to that extent.It would be nice if someone had some actual power numbers instead of just what flows better, I think it has been established over and over that exhaust flow numbers and bigger exhaust valves rarely equate to more power. You will find several race heads on the market that have a 1.55 exhaust with a 2.225 or larger intake valve which also blows a hole in the Int to Ex percentage theory...
Do you think it's matters?
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
The consensus seems to be that higher compression engines favor smaller ex ports and headers, I am just not sure at what point going bigger is better or if one would be safer staying on the small side and adding ex duration?gmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:20 pmall I asked was if the compression ratio has anything to do with it?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 1:12 pmHere is my original quote, I have never seen anything to prove it, there seem to be some pretty stout pump gas engines shown here with under 1.6 valve with 50 degree seats, CGT's Vortec 350 was a 1.5 with a 50 and made 480 hp and 460 ft, so I don't know what percentage one would use, many have been quoted over the years but I think many have moved away from looking at ex flow all together.
Bigger ex valves may have been shown to increase power on the OP's type of head and was why I wondered if anyone had actual dyno numbers showing this to be the case, preferably exhaust gains alone but it's not likely that anyone went to that extent.It would be nice if someone had some actual power numbers instead of just what flows better, I think it has been established over and over that exhaust flow numbers and bigger exhaust valves rarely equate to more power. You will find several race heads on the market that have a 1.55 exhaust with a 2.225 or larger intake valve which also blows a hole in the Int to Ex percentage theory...
Do you think it's matters?
I will say that the OP's exhaust port was the quietest one I have had on my bench, I will curious to see how it acts to the 1.6 valve.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
Oh , this head is being done in your shop on your bench?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:33 pmThe consensus seems to be that higher compression engines favor smaller ex ports and headers, I am just not sure at what point going bigger is better or if one would be safer staying on the small side and adding ex duration?gmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:20 pmall I asked was if the compression ratio has anything to do with it?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 1:12 pm
Here is my original quote, I have never seen anything to prove it, there seem to be some pretty stout pump gas engines shown here with under 1.6 valve with 50 degree seats, CGT's Vortec 350 was a 1.5 with a 50 and made 480 hp and 460 ft, so I don't know what percentage one would use, many have been quoted over the years but I think many have moved away from looking at ex flow all together.
Bigger ex valves may have been shown to increase power on the OP's type of head and was why I wondered if anyone had actual dyno numbers showing this to be the case, preferably exhaust gains alone but it's not likely that anyone went to that extent.
Do you think it's matters?
I will say that the OP's exhaust port was the quietest one I have had on my bench, I will curious to see how it acts to the 1.6 valve.
When you say quiet,, how are you testing that?
I have a db meter set up on mine I use sometimes...so I do have a reference.
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
Db meter is an interesting idea, I like that. I am not sure what exactly it is quantifying but it is a good idea. Thanks, Charliegmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:30 pmOh , this head is being done in your shop on your bench?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:33 pmThe consensus seems to be that higher compression engines favor smaller ex ports and headers, I am just not sure at what point going bigger is better or if one would be safer staying on the small side and adding ex duration?
I will say that the OP's exhaust port was the quietest one I have had on my bench, I will curious to see how it acts to the 1.6 valve.
When you say quiet,, how are you testing that?
I have a db meter set up on mine I use sometimes...so I do have a reference.
Servedio Cylinder Head Development
631-816-4911
9:00am - 9:00pm EST
631-816-4911
9:00am - 9:00pm EST
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
I always wondered if a DB meter could be a good tool for that, if you could build data with dyno comparisons there may be something to learn there but I am just going off of sound and stability.gmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:30 pmOh , this head is being done in your shop on your bench?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:33 pmThe consensus seems to be that higher compression engines favor smaller ex ports and headers, I am just not sure at what point going bigger is better or if one would be safer staying on the small side and adding ex duration?
I will say that the OP's exhaust port was the quietest one I have had on my bench, I will curious to see how it acts to the 1.6 valve.
When you say quiet,, how are you testing that?
I have a db meter set up on mine I use sometimes...so I do have a reference.
I live close to him so I agreed to flow the head for him, he is doing his own porting.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Re: D0OE exhaust ports
I don't know what it's quantifying either..other than I think less screeching relates to reduced pumping losses.Carnut1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:38 pmDb meter is an interesting idea, I like that. I am not sure what exactly it is quantifying but it is a good idea. Thanks, Charliegmrocket wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:30 pmOh , this head is being done in your shop on your bench?GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:33 pm
The consensus seems to be that higher compression engines favor smaller ex ports and headers, I am just not sure at what point going bigger is better or if one would be safer staying on the small side and adding ex duration?
I will say that the OP's exhaust port was the quietest one I have had on my bench, I will curious to see how it acts to the 1.6 valve.
When you say quiet,, how are you testing that?
I have a db meter set up on mine I use sometimes...so I do have a reference.
I'll post some pics and readings from what I gathered when experimenting .