Wet Flow Test Pic...................AFR Chevy 235

[blaktopr]

I am happy to see the other pics and test results.
If I may,
I feel the chamber types have an effect on what the wing effects in the chamber. I see the wing as a method to change the pressure differentials in the bowl area before the throat. Behind the wing, (downstream in the port and depending on its shape and area in the bowl) is a high pressure front. This front is attracted to the ridge of the vane where speeds are higher than with it not there. The speeds over the SSR and how equal the pressure is in the port, may dictate the effect of the wing in different heads.

Larry's post about running methanol kinda shows me the effect of the wing as you begin to drop in airspeeds in the port. The amount of liquid saturation of that over gas can be quite substantial. You may be killing your airflow by 20CFM or more which will change the speeds in the port. These speed changes will effect both how the car reacts plus how the port disperses the liquid.

I kinda wonder how this all effects the MCSA if at the throat. The discharge as it pertains to its relationship to the valve and with that, it's true MCSA looking at the size of the air tract (so to speak) versus the physical dimentions of the throat area. Im kinda thinking of the vena contracta (sp?) deal. Like the airflow through an orifice.

Something like that. I may also be off my rocker.

[maxracesoftware]

I am happy to see the other pics and test results.
If I may,
I feel the chamber types have an effect on what the wing effects in the chamber. I see the wing as a method to change the pressure differentials in the bowl area before the throat. Behind the wing, (downstream in the port and depending on its shape and area in the bowl) is a high pressure front. This front is attracted to the ridge of the vane where speeds are higher than with it not there. The speeds over the SSR and how equal the pressure is in the port, may dictate the effect of the wing in different heads.

Larry's post about running methanol kinda shows me the effect of the wing as you begin to drop in airspeeds in the port. The amount of liquid saturation of that over gas can be quite substantial. You may be killing your airflow by 20CFM or more which will change the speeds in the port. These speed changes will effect both how the car reacts plus how the port disperses the liquid.

I kinda wonder how this all effects the MCSA if at the throat. The discharge as it pertains to its relationship to the valve and with that, it's true MCSA looking at the size of the air tract (so to speak) versus the physical dimentions of the throat area. Im kinda thinking of the vena contracta (sp?) deal. Like the airflow through an orifice.

Something like that. I may also be off my rocker.

a few of the old Pics i have are capture's of screenshots while Video is playing
the Bowl Swirl-fin in majority of Tests were more extreme than AFR's

i was shipped the ProStock Truck Head
because they Flow tested and saw just a litlle over 20+ CFM gains with the Swirl-fin
but on their Dyno and down the Dragstrip was absolutely no difference they could see, it was like they didn't change anything , is what they told me.
So they shipped me the Heads to test and see if i could tell why 20+ cfm wasn't showing any gains
this was on Race Gas

then i had 3 other type Heads/Engines with that much fin do the same thing

--------------

on the methanol tests ( MFI )
the Swirl-fin was more extreme than AFR's
it killed HP

[automotive breath]

...When you cut the ditch in the head did you have any back to back results that showed increased HP
The burn patteren is almost perfect and wanted to know how or if the results showed a difference in
fuel consumption and if the EGT's were up when tested that would mean a more complete burn...

I have modified over 100 sets of heads like this, I have seen improvements, both increase in power and
reduction in fuel consumption at the race track and on the street. I don't have dyno or EGT results. I have
never tried this with alky but would expect positive results because of the large amount of liquid introduced.

John,
Sorry for the thread hijack, I find it interesting that my burn patterns are better that almost everything I'm seeing.

[ProPower engines]

...When you cut the ditch in the head did you have any back to back results that showed increased HP
The burn patteren is almost perfect and wanted to know how or if the results showed a difference in
fuel consumption and if the EGT's were up when tested that would mean a more complete burn...

I have modified over 100 sets of heads like this, I have seen improvements, both increase in power and
reduction in fuel consumption at the race track and on the street. I don't have dyno or EGT results. I have
never tried this with alky but would expect positive results because of the large amount of liquid introduced.


Sorry for the thread hijack

Did you play with different depths The pic looks like about .100 deep. Is that close or is it deeper.

[Tony Mamo @ AFR]

Tony, I have never slammed your products. What I said about the curly cue wing in this thread was not aimed at you personally, as you are not the originator of it. Someone else a long time ago, don't know who, came up with it. It is an approximately 15 year old trick, that many of us have abandoned, that you decided to re-label as new technology and adapt to the AFR line. Good for you, but I wouldn't exactly call it thinking outside of the box.

As it stands, the wet flow on a 23 degree is so good it is well nigh impossible to screw it up completely, so you're in good shape.

Greg,

I never claimed to be the "originator", although I'm not sure I have ever seen one applied to a 23' head previously, nor do I care. Truth be told the new LS7 head is what sparked my interest to further investigate this design cue as its timing fell in line with some of the 23' Eliminator re-design I was working with at the time. Initial attempts of implementing it were discouraging btw, but coupled with some other ideas I had it started to show me some promise....BUT....to get back on track, the short story is there is alot more to this head design (and the success of its execution) than a wing in the intake bowl.

And for the record, my late night semi-rant (previous post) was not directed solely at you.

What I find disappointing in general is the sense of alot of "nit picking" of a very capable product and while there are so many good things to say about it, I see very little of that from some of the people in this industry who would be more apt to truly appreciate its accomplishments (for an out of the box mass produced CNC piece thats very affordable all things considered).

Over the years I have seen countless things that I personally don't agree with or subscribe to (concerning manifold and head design) but I keep to myself and focus on doing the best I can to improve and perfect our product, not take little jabs about what I don't like or don't agree with concerning someone else's work.

Anyway....I've said my peace and I will let this thread continue. There is alot of interesting ideas and thoughts being shared here. I need to get back to building an engine I'm pretty excited about anyway thats going to feature another upcoming AFR new product.

-Tony

[automotive breath]

Did you play with different depths The pic looks like about .100 deep. Is that close or is it deeper.

These grooves were cut ~0.080" deep and then contoured deeper into the chamber scoop area. I have never tried deeper.

[maxracesoftware]

This shows you +20 cfm gains on a FlowBench
but no real HP on the Dyno or DragStrip

[Cylinder Head Works Inc.]

Gentlemen, If i could have you all over for a BBQ and Tequila I would This is great!!! later I've got some pics to share but its Sunday afternoon temp is +5 c T-shirt weather and I promised to take the pedal bike out of storage for my little girl.

Later, John

[GregGood]

What I find disappointing in general is the sense of a lot of "nit picking" of a very capable product and while there are so many good things to say about it, I see very little of that from some of the people in this industry who would be more apt to truly appreciate its accomplishments (for an out of the box mass produced CNC piece thats very affordable all things considered).

Over the years I have seen countless things that I personally don't agree with or subscribe to (concerning manifold and head design) but I keep to myself and focus on doing the best I can to improve and perfect our product, not take little jabs about what I don't like or don't agree with concerning someone else's work.

-Tony

I have not seen a *lot of nitpicking* on this particular head. Only on one item, the wing.

Also, you have been very vocal in the past about others claims. You have as much as called me a liar before about a certain set of ETP heads that run well. No biggie to me, I took it.

We can handle this two ways. We can all steer clear of your *ads* that get posted on here, such as would happen on LS1Tech, or we can continue to use this site as a non-commercial place to hang out and chew the fat. There are many of us here that have been around longer than you and have had our hands in a lot of projects. Do you want us to NOT share our experiences because it disagrees with your current ad campaign? Fine, petition to Don and he can decide. I'll abide with whatever he says. If this is to be an LS1Tech type site, I am gone.

[user-9274568]

I first seen that wing in around 1987 in a Dart/Buick from Nickens. All of their heads used some sort of wing back then, even the splayed valve. I will admit when they came out of the Buicks, it seemed to hurt ET. But again, that head was a turd along with the chamber. So basically it was a crutch.

I first seen a wing in a 23º SBC in about 1989. Seem to recall they were Chapman heads. Bud Harper was a big wing guy, Chapman related.

And Tony, although you may not agree with everything, that's your choice. However with marketing such as yours, proclaiming the "The Most Powerful Standard Racing Head Available",, "The Baddest 23°Standard Port Head",, and "The Nastiest 23°Standard Port Head", your going to catch the shyt. Just a reminder some of us can disprove those claims and just because it's printed doesn't mean it fact.

My opinion because I have one and it's OK to express it!

End of story.

[blaktopr]

I feel the effects of a wing can vary depending on who shaped it. Plus add to that the rest of the port, the chamber shape, and the rest of the intake tract including how well the carb/FI is tuned. There are too many variables with the hands that are in the port alone to give a difinitive answer of if it works and how well.

With something like the PS truck heads, the port shape is very good alone. Adding something like that would play havoc with the bowl area.

I am wondering how the vane may also effect the speeds over the SSR. Instead of them equal, the speeds now even faster on the common wall. This may draw some pressure to that area.

So where can the CFM come from?
-Ability to pull some air to the faster vane area from the chamber side of the port when testing at 28"?
-More air exiting at a point closer to the chamber toward the bore side helping pressure recovery measured at 28"?
-Help hold the air onto the SSR when going through the convergence lift?
-When adding those points up, the common wall and bottom half of port working across the short side, and the long side and chamber wall of the port working off the back side.
-If there is any rotation made in the bowl, can that rotation help or hurt depending on the rest of the port.

When it kills power, I think it is because energy lost with any chaos that the vane produces when it is in an allready well designed port. I wonder about inersia and pulse waves.

I have a way to see behind the valve in mind. Looks like I will be doing some more testing to see how right or wrong I am.

[blaktopr]

I been thinking if when using alky. Say a vortex with gas amounts is small and out of the way from the plug. Adding the amounts found with alky can increase the size of the liquid vortex becomming too close to the plug. And/or the change in airspeeds from such a saturated port may "move" the vortex slightly to a spot less desireable.

Another way to look at it is a possible pooling or vortex at the high pressure side of a vane, leaving a little in the port.

In the first pics, a stream travels from the long side to the short side following the top cut of the seat. Speeds are higher there than the long side exit. Depending on what the patterns look like at other lifts, there can be more liquid trapped at the area by the short turn seat.

Just some speculation. I have not wet tested a vaned port with different chambers.
For anyone who wants to see some different vortexes in an early head here are some links to vids. These are early Pontiac castings from the pics I posted earlier. 187cc, 2.05 valve, 75,60,50,40 seat (I know), chamber matched best as possible to top cut, flow sheet in garage but pretty fat curve peaking at 285CFM at .550 and then stayed flat upward, The vids were taken using a mild Victor manifold that pulled numbers down 5-10CFM. The amount of liquid was about 4.75GPH injected as a mist at the runner entrance of the manifold. This pulled the CFM down another 10 at 28".
Maximize the window, it helps to see.

.300 lift
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMZ8mvTHTDI

.400 lift. Also, try to notice which way the drops are traveling on the face of the intake valve.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0XrQzlM5TQ

.550 lift. Now look at the drops on the intake valve.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2TGGn5XNVs

Those drops will tell you where the area of lowest pressure is.

[GregGood]

Did you notice how the port went into swirl mode when the port velocity rose going to .550" lift" ?

[blaktopr]

Did you notice how the port went into swirl mode when the port velocity rose going to .550" lift" ?

Begins around the convergence point and approaching .22 to .25 LD on these. MMMMMMMmmmm.

Also, take note watching the .300 vid. 3/4 of the way through, there was a quick separation when I fooled with the liquid. Look at the area around the bottom of the exhaust valve and listen. Makes you think when you see something happen away from the intake port. Gotta love this stuff.

[eric's 327]

I'm certainly not an expert on this subject. But if you are going to wet flow a head wouldn't the test be a more accurate representation with a liquid that has a molecular structure and specific gravity similar to gas? Then how would you calibrate the mixture so the water didn't act as an overly rich mixture of gas would? I suppose the problem would be finding something with similar evaporative properties that is non-flammable, but a water/dye mixture is not even close to the behavior of gasoline. At least it doesn't seem like it would be, especially considering how gas and alcohol behave differently even though they are more similar to each other than they are to water. Injecting water/dye may provide a good idea of the direction and pattern of air flow, however.

While I was looking at the pictures and videos I was just wondering if gas would form similar droplets in a running engine. That's what got me thinking about this. There is no doubt that gas does fall out of suspension and fuel wash does occur, but does it occur at the same flow and velocities of a wet flow test? Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought fuel separation occurred in dead areas and at low velocities. I can see the stagnation between reversion and positive flow around overlap would be a likely place for fuel separation. Burn patterns reveal the evidence of fuel separation but can they tell you when it occurred? I'm going to stop right here and go to bed - before I think of more questions to ask.

Eric