| Slant Six Forum https://www.slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure https://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=66370 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Jase [ Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
Quote: When setting the specifications for all of the components going into an engine build, I cannot say that any one item is more important than any other, as they all need to work together. However I do believe that the camshaft specifications has more impact on the ‘personality’ of the final motor than any other single item.
If the goal of your build is low RPM torque, the right cam is what is going to make that happen. You want a small cam, around 200 degrees of duration or smaller, medium lift. With an upper RPM cap of 4500 rpm, I would stay with stock sized valves, do some minor bowl clean up and invest in a good multi angle valve job. To maximize performance you need to maximize compression and the ignition curve. For the compression: get knowledgeable on Static and Dynamic compression. For the ignition curve: a heavy vehicle usually won’t take a lot of initial timing, but with the right springs you will be able to bring the mechanical advance in as the vehicle starts rolling. Remember, you are working with a small displacement engine and a large vehicle, be prepared to be underwhelmed. In summary, it is understandable that you want to maximize low end torque, a good flowing cylinder head can help, but it is not at the top of the short list of things that make low rpm torque, which are: 1) large displacement, which you do not have 2) camshaft profile-one with an early closing intake valve to build dynamic compression 3) compression, static and dynamic 4) ignition advance, mainly when the mechanical advance comes in and how it ramps. Good Info and very good points..... Yet I would like to characterize my desire as creating a torque band that last's longer than the stock slant. Not so much looking for more low end torque. The stock slant produces a torque peak at 1400-1600 RPM according to uncle Dan here: https://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=61743 I am interested in having that "peak" arrive in the 2700-3500 RPM ranges and less interested in a peak number than a long curving arc that carries. Hopeful that more compression will help everywhere, and a better flowing head will do the same. With the truck in first gear, High range, at 3000 RPM I am flying along at 8 MPH... Second gear hits 1200 RPM at 6MPH and 3000RPM gives me a 16 MPH road speed... Third gear shows 1500 at 15MPH and 3000 gives me an even 30 MPH. The third to forth step is large, and that is where I am wanting more RPM-ability If I spin the engine to 3600 in 3rd, I get 36MPH, upshifting then, I am at 2000 RPM in 4th. Generally speaking I don't need more torque, but more the same about of torque in a wider RPM range. IF I need low range, all of the road speeds get cut in half, for the same RPM. |
|
| Author: | GregCon [ Tue Dec 21, 2021 4:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
That sawn-in-half head is an interesting picture. The two, or three, things that jump out at me: 1) The walls are thinner than I'd expect. That's because they are running water jackets between them. 2) The water jackets see a lot of exhaust heat....on a V8 such as a 440 or 426Hemi, the port is not running alongside nearly that much of a water jacket. 3) Both intake and exhaust ports are loooong. Not the best for performance, and it makes it all the more difficult to do port work. Therein lies visual evidence of why a cross flow head offers benefits...not just in manifolding but in port length and layout. |
|
| Author: | DadTruck [ Tue Dec 21, 2021 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
I am interested in having that "peak" arrive in the 2700-3500 RPM ranges Then forget the info that I gave you. The folks that you want to talk to include Lou, you may want to consider a turbo engine, or if staying NA, Rick Covalt, Slantzilla, or Greg O would be good resources, as you are looking for good engine power in about the same RPM that they launch from the start line when drag racing. |
|
| Author: | volaredon [ Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
the guy who posted that video is a regular on FABO. |
|
| Author: | DusterIdiot [ Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | D |
D |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Thu Dec 23, 2021 9:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
DI has plenty of things I like there. Good idea on cam and headwork. If you really want low-mid torque increase and you only drive 1000 mi/yr, I would build for 93 octane fuel. It really is hardly any more cost compared to all your other costs ($30-70/yr extra, even if your MPG is horrible). Then you can run 9.0-9.5:1 static comp with that cam, and just that compression bump (from the stock 7.5 or 8:1) will give you a lot more torque across the whole band. Lou |
|
| Author: | icepaddles [ Sun Dec 29, 2024 12:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opinions-thoughts about this guy's cylinder porting procedure |
I’m thinking about trying to port a head and manifold for getting improvements on equaling out reversion between cylinders. It seems if you bowl ported then lowered the roof in nos. 1 @ 6 to slightly decrease the runner volume, left the 2 & 5 volume stock and increased the 3 & 4 volume the velocity might equalize the reversion a bit. I bought a Rochester (1979 Pontiac) Dualjet 210 and the throttle bores are 1” wider apart than the 1.78 ish” normal spacing, the plan is mount that sideways and outboard on an Offenhauser 4 bbl manifold, i think you can see the reversion idea stacking up if understand flow qualities and reversion science. The Offy has a great plenum design which connects the end cylinders a bit so each runner is somewhat more equal. Has anyone tried this as compared to and all out porting scheme? |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC-07:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|