home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-23-2011, 08:56 PM   #51
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerthechorister View Post
The world may have changed since the 60s and 70s but surely the simple issue here is to minimise flow restrictions on the intake side which is going to mean the 531 is better than the 530 in all situations - unless you can demonstrate that increased turbulence generally or at the edges of the stream produce an advantage.
Less resistance to flow does not equal more power, necessarily. Flow velocity typically increases as port size decreases. Greater velocity = greater cylinder filling, depending on other factors.

The benefits of the larger intake ports in the 531 head typically aren't seen with a stock intake manifold and lesser amounts of lift.

Seeing flow numbers on a chart won't tell you exactly how well directed and with what velocity the airflow will be through a port and give you the ability to determine what is better than another at x lift. Then again, in reality we aren't even just looking at how much flow will go through a head's port, if what goes through the intake manifold and/or exhaust manifold is much less. It's like if you toss on an exhaust manifold after developing/testing exhaust port flow with a 6-8"(?) straight pipe on it - if you lose flow when you put on your actual header, your header isn't right for the application and your portwork is now moot.

Eric, who has your tit in a vice? Or maybe I'm misinterpreting your many posts in this thread.

Last edited by klr142; 11-06-2019 at 02:28 PM..
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:04 AM   #52
Yea, Right
Malcontent
 
Yea, Right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Default

Well Jonathan I guess we will need your pitot tube readings overlaid to all your flow Data. How else can we continue to bench race?
Yea, Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:07 AM   #53
DNAsEqUeNcE
†John3:16
 
DNAsEqUeNcE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas
Default

lol
__________________
DNAsEqUeNcE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 11:46 AM   #54
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereophile33 View Post
I actually think a 405 can be a great head. The intake just requires some decent porting and a good cam to take advantage of it. So hold on to it for sure.

BTW Eric is your car going to be a Auto-x car or what are your plans.
J
244 will be at the autocross. Trying to get one of the B230FT's in there with LH by that time but need some dry weather. Got to get the dry so I can do the swap! If not it will be there NA, it's slow in a straight line but it's like a Miata, keep the momentum and it does great. Not a lot of cashflow that I can put in it right now, still looking at a move/business purchase/relocation/new job or whatever is the best choice.
__________________
RIP BADVLVO 3/1/1980-10/10/2015
Died at age 35

93 245 m47 300k miles, one owner, zero compression
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 11:51 AM   #55
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by klr142 View Post
Eric, who has your tit in a vice? Or maybe I'm misinterpreting your many posts in this thread.
Maybe, just maybe, I am a little tired of the resident 'know-it-all's' thinking their methods are the one and only way to do things (not Jonathan, he has provided data in the past). I have built engines since I was 13, everything from 2CV's and air-cooled VW stuff to 1100+whp street driven 4.6 Ford mod motors. Pretty sure not much has changed in the 4 years since I stopped doing that for a living.

If flowbench data was worthless then why would anyone bother? Getting flow numbers off the heads at various lift points can determine the best camshaft for a given application, the needs of the intake and exhaust to maximize the VE, and generally make for a more driveable combination.

Or we could just believe what someone says, build another mediocre redblock and deal with it.

Maybe I should just sell all my redblock **** and throw a 5.0 in it, I already have one.
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 11:54 AM   #56
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by badvlvo View Post
Maybe I should just sell all my redblock **** and throw a 5.0 in it, I already have one.
If it doesn't weigh more than a turbo'd redblock, why not?
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:25 PM   #57
fidel
knox motorsports
 
fidel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: richmond, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yea, Right View Post
Well Jonathan I guess we will need your pitot tube readings overlaid to all your flow Data. How else can we continue to bench race?
also with the flow numbers i would like to see them up to 16mm of lift if possible. from what i have seen comparing two heads with the same motor, if one head flows better to a desired lift but falls off severly after that lift it will not perform as well as the head with less overall flow that doesn't drop off after that point, when put on the dyno.

also port volumes would be helpfull in this discussion.

and are we comparing heads with the seats and port beginings in the stock location?
__________________
fidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:50 PM   #58
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by klr142 View Post
If it doesn't weigh more than a turbo'd redblock, why not?
It's an option, but would cost a bit once I spend on good heads, intake, exhaust to get the weight down.

But this is about redblocks and I have 4 right now, 2 NA and 2 turbo, so data is valuable.
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:53 PM   #59
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fidel View Post
also with the flow numbers i would like to see them up to 16mm of lift if possible.
***WARNING, THIS FLOW CHART IS BOGUS!*** Flow numbers don't make sense at low lift, as if there was a gap between the flow bench and the head. Also, my ports weren't actually opened up behind the valves for who knows WTF reason.

I wish my head flow sheet went up to 16mm...

Last edited by klr142; 02-21-2018 at 03:41 PM.. Reason: Flow chart is wrong and head work wasn't completed. 2/21/18
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:03 PM   #60
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

So from 10mm up you saw no further improvement in flow on the head alone on the intake side? Longer duration will help on that intake side to compensate for the lack of flow at higher lift by allowing more volume. And that's not even getting into the intake manifold as a restriction.

Now who has data on a 531 stock and a modified 531 so we can compare?

16mm lift on that head would be a waste on the intake for sure, probably the exhaust too unless the bench ran out of air at 202.57.
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:11 PM   #61
Captain Bondo
Exklusiv Zubehör Klub
 
Captain Bondo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Default

I don't think anyone meant to say port flow numbers are worthless. My intent at least was to point out that they represent a single variable in the system and need to be considered in context.

Peak power and peak torque are typically each made within a reasonably narrow band of port velocities. Especially since we are dealing with a "wet" port...

You can't just say "oh add duration to compensate for a lack of high lift flow", etc. It's myopic.
__________________


-Kenny
(I crushed a 240 with some stuff done to it. Honest.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
Turbobricks isn't a car forum any more. Its a forum for lame kids.
Captain Bondo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:21 PM   #62
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

The exhaust is still flowing more at 14mm of lift, but yeah, who knows WTF is going on with the intake side on my head. You bet I was curious when I got that print-out.

EDIT: It's a bogus head job and bogus flow chart.

Last edited by klr142; 02-21-2018 at 03:42 PM..
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:37 PM   #63
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bondo View Post
I don't think anyone meant to say port flow numbers are worthless. My intent at least was to point out that they represent a single variable in the system and need to be considered in context.

Peak power and peak torque are typically each made within a reasonably narrow band of port velocities. Especially since we are dealing with a "wet" port...

You can't just say "oh add duration to compensate for a lack of high lift flow", etc. It's myopic.
While they represent only one aspect of the head they are one of the most valuable figures available when selecting camshafts, intakes and exhausts.

I personally DGAS about peak HP, it's about the curve. Dyno queen peak HP numbers don't mean jack **** unless it can be used properly.

As for the duration comment, well when you have the head installed on the car and it's not getting further porting or bigger valves, then what do you do? Keep in mind that his car is NA so you can't just force more air in the engine. More duration can increase the fill, allowing higher volume into the chamber, increasing HP. While my cam experience specifically to Volvo engines is limited I have much experience on domestic V-8 engines, having selected several custom cam grinds for various engines I have built. It works the same, you might just have to trust me on that one.

Your intent and the way you come off in this thread may be entirely different, you came off like a dick. I don't really think you are like that, or at least I would hope not, but you have to keep in mind that there are many others on this forum with the skills to understand this data and what to do with it. When you add in the OP's statements with zero supporting data it's just an opinion. No facts = opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by klr142 View Post
The exhaust is still flowing more at 14mm of lift, but yeah, who knows WTF is going on with the intake side on my head. You bet I was curious when I got that print-out.
Yep, the exhaust side looks great, but in my experience the real problem on our heads is the intake. Maybe there's an error on the sheet or the bench took a nap, it's way better than stock but totally flat well below the cut off where it has been stated the 531 would be superior.
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:46 PM   #64
fidel
knox motorsports
 
fidel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: richmond, VA
Default

stock 531 head , intake to a little over 15mm and exhaust to a little under 13mm


ported 531 from erland cox's website
http://translate.google.com/translat...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8

i have some more flow numbers i need to scan and graph.
fidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 01:55 PM   #65
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by badvlvo View Post
you came off like a dick.

Just so you know, you sound like one in almost all of your posts as well and are the main(only?) person who is calling people names repeatedly throughout the forum without knowing who they are... Kenny isn't too much of a dick in real life, at least not from the short time I've been with him. The real thing is, who wouldn't come off as a dick in this forum, there's too much bull**** to not slap people around some.

When you add in the OP's statements with zero supporting data it's just an opinion. No facts = opinion.

Jonathan is and always was intending to post facts. He had a good thought to start a GOOD thread(which is not seen on this site anymore, because too many asshats will post up and f**k with things and just piss everyone off) and get the juices flowing. It doesn't matter. If you're patient, s**t will come to you. Shut up and wait if you're so concerned about the flow numbers, we don't need to hear you filling up the internet with saying the same thing over and over.

Yep, the exhaust side looks great, but in my experience the real problem on our heads is the intake. Maybe there's an error on the sheet or the bench took a nap, it's way better than stock but totally flat well below the cut off where it has been stated the 531 would be superior.
Flat is better than falling off, but what is there to believe when the last two numbers are the exact same...? That being said, the head is not the restriction on my car. I think the car would perform almost the same, if not better in some aspects, with a standard head and mild port/valve job.
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:06 PM   #66
Yea, Right
Malcontent
 
Yea, Right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Default

This is a comparison chart showing my old Sten Parner head (RIP), my current Erland Cox/Pacman head, an early RSI stage 2 head (not sure what changes have been made since) and a stock 530 head. All of these were flowed on the same bench...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Picture 13.jpg (178.7 KB, 283 views)
Yea, Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:09 PM   #67
Yea, Right
Malcontent
 
Yea, Right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Default

These are flow numbers from my current race head. The first flow chart was done by Erland Cox, the second by Larry Widmer at Endyne - same exact head, no changes made between the two different flow charts.

So, with differences between flow benches, how can flow numbers even be discussed as a comparison on a forum?

Furthermore EVERY engine package responds differently to flow at various valve openings and valve sizes, and velocities and on and on and on. These are the tools we use to maker our best guess how an engine package will perform in real life. Then you go back and start all over because the result is not what you expected/wanted. It's all fine to discuss "theory" but if anyone tells me that they think they can look at flow data and make solid conclusions I say yeah, right.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg flow data cox pacman head.jpg (88.7 KB, 281 views)
File Type: jpg spm flow data.jpg (106.5 KB, 279 views)

Last edited by Yea, Right; 03-24-2011 at 02:23 PM.. Reason: clarification
Yea, Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:10 PM   #68
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Not saying Kenny IS a dick, just that he comes off as one in this thread. Yes, we are inhabited by quite a few who know nothing but preach as if they know it all, but when someone requests information that would validate the OP's claim then why argue? I have legitimate questions on this subject as I don't want to be continually building heads or swapping cams to get what I want out of my engine.

I know that Jonathan has intended to post real data, that's what I am looking for, not someone going off on tangents that are out of the realm of a reasonable engine build.

When someone asks for information that is common in the world of engine building and the response is something between you don't need that and you don't know what to do with that it is just reinforcing why so many people have not built Volvos. Posting the data would allow others to select the correct components for their needs the first time rather than constantly changing components.

It would also sell RSI's heads and cams..........

As for patience, I can wait for the information, but there's no reason for anyone to come at me as if I don't know what I am doing.
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:17 PM   #69
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Understood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badvlvo View Post
there's no reason for anyone to come at me as if I don't know what I am doing.
Don't take it personally, some of it may be directed at you but some of it may be directed at the general public who aren't smart enough to fully understand(none of us truly are, but you know what I mean) what is being discussed. Remember, we have to try and keep it at least somewhat PG for the less educated to help understand.

I really need to be doing other stuff, but I'll get back to your PM in a bit. Thanks for sending it.
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:24 PM   #70
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by klr142 View Post
Understood. Don't take it personally, some of it may be directed at you but some of it may be directed at the general public who aren't smart enough to fully understand(none of us truly are, but you know what I mean) what is being discussed. Remember, we have to try and keep it at least somewhat PG for the less educated to help understand.

I really need to be doing other stuff, but I'll get back to your PM in a bit. Thanks for sending it.
I know what you are getting at and don't take it personally. I'm just frustrated with the resistance to sharing information on here. Yes, some will interpret it wrong, I have in the past as have all of us at some point, but it's for the greater good of the community. When the posts are directed at my posts then I do take it as directed towards me.

I disagree in keeping it PG, we need to have all the information possible, then those who know how to use it can help others by teaching them or guiding them to the right choices. While too much information is just as bad as too little, I don't see the reason to not share what we have here.

Do OTHER stuff? Yeah, I'm about 50% done with an instructional I am writing right now, just come back to TB to clear the head and wait for approval of revisions.



Have you kicked Pat in the shin for me yet? Where has he been?
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:35 PM   #71
klr142
Turbo, what?
 
klr142's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by badvlvo View Post
I disagree in keeping it PG, we need to have all the information possible, then those who know how to use it can help others by teaching them or guiding them to the right choices. While too much information is just as bad as too little, I don't see the reason to not share what we have here.
[...]
Have you kicked Pat in the shin for me yet? Where has he been?
That's what I meant, not that we have to keep all info PG, just add more info in as needed and make sure everyone knows that not everything said is always a straightforward fact with nothing else being important or necessary to know/discuss.

Haven't kicked him yet, he was already down. Actually, I've only seen him once for a couple seconds since I've been back...
klr142 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:37 PM   #72
Yea, Right
Malcontent
 
Yea, Right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Default

Just for grins, this is the cam data for the ENEM C2 I am currently using.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Enem C2 cam spec 2.jpg (186.1 KB, 280 views)
Yea, Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 02:47 PM   #73
badvlvo
Bad for Babies
 
badvlvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Default

Good info, thanks.
Posted via Mobile Device
badvlvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 05:38 PM   #74
fidel
knox motorsports
 
fidel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: richmond, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yea, Right View Post
Just for grins, this is the cam data for the ENEM C2 I am currently using.
here is a graph of your cam, yours is the one that is labeled old
fidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 05:46 PM   #75
orie
Doctor Who
 
orie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Folsom, CA
Default

I'm here to learn, always have been. It can be hard sorting fact from theory though. Often theorys get presented as fact. That's true almost universally I think. Most people in performance have useful information to contribute, but the one thing lacking is factual data. There's often no before/after results for many of our mods, just hearsay. So, I lump all the information I can get together and make a go at it based on that. This time around, it means i'm trying a mildly ported/matched 531, RSI stage 1 cam and a stock b230ft. Maybe the 531 is overkill, maybe it isn't. I'll let my MPG and overall street performance dictate if i'm happy with the 531 or not.

Keep crankin the info guys, I find it fascinating.
__________________


Hefty, rear-wheel-drive, and comfortable, the 700- and 900-series wagons were essentially an evolution of the 265 philosophy. Fun, boxy, fast, boxy, and fun. More right angles than a box full of right angles.

BrickSpeed forums!
orie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.