Artie's Sportsman II 383 project

[Paul Wright]

Ok, here's a new head porting project thread to follow.

Artie (aka AGPD45) is a Steve's Nova Site member and a mechanical engineering student in Rolla, Mo.
He has a 383 in a 1st gen Camaro he recently acquired. It runs "ok" but he knows it could be better so he want's to make some improvements. We are going to try for over 500 hp with a hydraulic roller cam and these heads. He has a Scat cast crank and I beam rods with TRW forged pistons. His current cam is a Comp XE284H. He doesn't have any 1/4 mile times for a baseline.
After some discussion and negotiations I agreed to help him out. He sent me the heads to assess. The heads show it was running very rich with a thick layer of carbon in the ports and on the valves.
Here's Pix of one of the heads after a night in the parts washer:

[Paul Wright]

On disassembly, I discovered the keepers had hammered the groove edge into a burr. If you look at the picture you might be able to see the edge is mushroomed, if that's the word.
I had to file the burr off every valve to get the valves down the guides without tearing up the guides. This is a potential problem that could lead to dropping valves. I'll have to investigate why this happened.

[Paul Wright]

Here's the port template used for Kev's ported S/R head. His heads flowed 247 cfm when finished, I think. Notice the Sportmans move the pushrod pinch and the port roof is taller.
I'm going to do a baseline on the flow bench and then get to work making chips. We'll see what we get when I'm done.

[agpd45]

On disassembly, I discovered the keepers had hammered the groove edge into a burr. If you look at the picture you might be able to see the edge is mushroomed, if that's the word.
I had to file the burr off every valve to get the valves down the guides without tearing up the guides. This is a potential problem that could lead to dropping valves. I'll have to investigate why this happened.

Does that mean that the keepers weren't installed properly? And also, could this have affected the previous performance of the motor?

[John65ss]

I had to file the burr off every valve to get the valves down the guides without tearing up the guides. This is a potential problem that could lead to dropping valves. I'll have to investigate why this happened.

Paul: What causes this to happen? I have a set of L98 heads (used) with LT4 hot cam springs / retainers, and I had the same problem. Seems like the keeper corners created raised edges on the valve stem. Stems will not come out of the guide until the edges are filed down.

[Ron Slabaugh]

Does that mean that the keepers weren't installed properly? And also, could this have affected the previous performance of the motor?

Assuming none of the parts were mismatched, I'd guess valve float could cause the damage to the valves. How many miles were on the motor? How high would you rev it?

That guide boss in the intake ports is huge. It will be enlightening to see how much flow is improved by reshaping it.

[Paul Wright]

Today, I hauled the pass side head to Kinetics Racing engines and did the baseline testing. Even though I cleaned it, it still stinks like shellac. I had to put it in the bed of the truck it was so bad. Must have been running stale gas or something.

I don't have a definitive answer on the keeper groove damage yet but I will check it out further. One speculation is the XE "Extreme" cams are harder on the valvetrain due to quicker opening and closure rates. The intake valves are steel and the exhaust are stainless. The keepers and retainers are black oxide steel. I'm thinking the retainer and keepers just don't fit the generic valves very well, but I don't have a final judgement yet.

Anyway, here's some pixs of testing. Graphs of data in next post.

[Paul Wright]

Here's the Intake Graph with the Stock S/R (similar flow as a "camel hump") for reference. One thing I noticed was the kink at .525" lift. If you only took data at .100" increments as magazines often do, this anomaly would not show up. The other surprise is Kev's ported S/R's flow better (247 cfm) than these stock Sportsmans (236 cfm).
That won't be the case when I get done with these. I know they won't be as good as Dave's AFR's but there will be an marked improvement.

[Paul Wright]

Here's the exhaust graph.

[novaboy009]

Whoot whoot, my S/R's are pretty good! If I could just find a forged 406 rotating assembly and a roller cam we'd really be in business.

Kev

I think finding a forged 406 rotating assembly is not the problem. It's paying for it. Besides your just spinning the tires now. More power won't help with that. Just work on your chassis, traction and reducing weight and you'll be in the 12's. Whatever you do, don't hurt those heads! ~Paul W.

[Ron Slabaugh]

A young guy on the Chevelle site put this combo together in 2004.

"Brian’s Stroker "Street" Small Block

350 +.040" 4 bolt block 3.75” Stroke crank= 385ci
-SRP Forged Pistons #138094 with Plasma Moly file fit rings
-9.8:1 CR
-350 block .004" deck
-Clevite 77 bearings
-Fel-Pro Gaskets
-Eagle Cask Crank 3.75" Stroke External balance
-Crower Sportsman 6” cap screw Rods ARP main studs
-Milodon louvered Windage tray
-GM Stock oil pan and pickup
-Melling Standard oil pump
-Cloyes true Roller timing set
-World Products Sportsman II 200cc intake port heads 72cc combustion chambers fitted with Race Flo 2.02/1.60 back-cut valves bowl blend
-Performer RPM intake manifold
-Holley 750 with Proform Main Body
73 front jets, with a 5.5" powervalve.
83 rear jets, no rear powervalve.
-4 hole spacer 1/2” tall
-Holley carb Heat Shield
-Crower Cams #00321 (Ground on a 108LSA) Solid Flat tappet 242/248 Dur .050” .482/.504" valve lift Crane double Valve Springs #99893-16
-Rocker Arms- Crower Stainless Steel 1.5
-Comp One Piece .080” wall 5/16” Pushrods
-MSD Ready-to-run Pro Billet Blaster II chrome coil
-Headers- 1-5/8” primary 3” collector, 33” average primary tube length
Merge style collector
-3” head pipe/H style crossover Dynomax Oval UltraFlo mufflers, 3” dumps.
-Carter 172gph mechanical pump plumbed to 3/8" fuel line.
-Mobil 1 5W-30 oil, Ford F-type transmission fluid Coastal 75w-90 Gear oil
-Autolite AR-13 spark plugs
-TH-350 by STR, ATI 10” Treemaster Converter, 4.10 gears Cheetah shifter
-Summit Steel OEM style damper
-Koni Street Adjustable front shocks set full soft
-Moog 6314 springs
16.44” …………………….free height
.601”………………………..wire dia.
289 lbs/in………………..rate
1744………………………..total load"

First serious run netted a 11.60 ET with a 1.61 60ft in a 3260lb 67’ Camaro"

At the end of the 2006 season and with lots of suspension tuning and a Pro Systems Carb, he ran 11.15 @ 117 mph with this combo.

[Paul Wright]

Here's all the stock iron head intake flow data I have so far. These are actual tested numbers not magazine or vendor numbers.
The Vortec does best out of all of them at lifts under .460" which coincidently is the max lift on stock Vortec's.
Notice the 182's do much better at mid lift than the S/R's. Kev procured his S/R's from Ebay and they may have been factory rejects being resold (Bill Mitchell sells the rejects). I don't know that for a fact but the casting was real rough. Much rougher than ones I've bought direct. Certainly the flow is less than they advertise.

Next up is to make some measurements and then start grinding. Stay tuned!

[Marv D]

Paul, I beat a set of stainless 2.08 valves up in a set of AFR 210 that looked very similar. Because that motor was never reved very high, I couldn't believe it was valve float. My machinist tore the heads apart and concluded it was valve bounce after looking at the seats and valve faces. I would guess it's still something associated with too light of a spring for the ramp and valve weight. In my case, the springs were pretty soft on the seat pressure. But because we had decent open pressure for a hydraulic cam, I thought everything was well. Just something to consider in your investigation.

[Tom Griffin]

I can see this thread is destined for the "best of tech" section. Paul thanks for your time and documentation on this project.

By the way... that sure does look like my HP calculator in one of those pics;)

Tg

(This is my second one. The first one got stolen by a meth head who didn't know how to work it and threw it away but sold my laptop for a whopping $20. They don't make the HP48 anymore and the Ebay prices are climbing. That meth head could have gotten $200 for the calculator! ~ Paul W.)

[novaboy009]

I think finding a forged 406 rotating assembly is not the problem. It's paying for it. Besides your just spinning the tires now. More power won't help with that. Just work on your chassis, traction and reducing weight and you'll be in the 12's. Whatever you do, don't hurt those heads! ~Paul W.

I've got aluminum body mounts, SSM lift bars and hopefully some DR's coming. I'm thinking fiberglass bumpers are next b/c there's a ton of weight in the 4th gen's bumpers.

Kev

[DriveWFO]

I've got aluminum body mounts, SSM lift bars and hopefully some DR's coming. I'm thinking fiberglass bumpers are next b/c there's a ton of weight in the 4th gen's bumpers.

Kev

Keep most of the rear bumper weight. I think the benefit of having the weight there behind the rear tires will out-weigh the ET gains from the weight reduction. You need to get that front end "loose". Trick springs and drag shocks should be on order!

This is just my $.02!

[agpd45]

Wow, this thread is really turning out well... i'm pumped already to see some results... In the mean time, learning a little about head tuning is well worth the wait. Thanks for all the insight, Paul.

Artie

[Paul Wright]

We've got to get you ready for the PRP showdown. Now that DriveWFO isn't going to have the Badass AFR's he's going to be toast!

[novaboy009]

I bet those Canfields will do just fine;) I'm gonna still need a bigger hammer and better chassis to run with Dave and Tom this year.

Kev

[John65ss]

Please keep us posted on the valve lock issue. I've never seen anyone give a definitive answer on why this sometimes happens.

[DriveWFO]

We've got to get you ready for the PRP showdown. Now that DriveWFO isn't going to have the Badass AFR's he's going to be toast!

HA! I've been on the phone alot. Even thought about going to an 18* CFE, but talk about needing some $$$ :eek: But they make HUGE power!

These Canfields are a nice piece and should run pretty close to the AFRs. John Fenton made sure I didn't get hung up on just the flow numbers. We talked (or should I say I listened!) about port cross-section and it's effect on the runner, air speed, etc. I definitely walked away from that conversation with a better understanding of the "total" head package. These heads are all one-off heads, built to order. He uses quality components such as Ferrea valves.

[Paul Wright]

HA! I've been on the phone alot. Even thought about going to an 18* CFE, but talk about needing some $$$ :eek: But they make HUGE power!

These Canfields are a nice piece and should run pretty close to the AFRs. John Fenton made sure I didn't get hung up on just the flow numbers. We talked (or should I say I listened!) about port cross-section and it's effect on the runner, air speed, etc. I definitely walked away from that conversation with a better understanding of the "total" head package. These heads are all one-off heads, built to order. He uses quality components such as Ferrea valves.

I'm just messin' wit ya! :D
I agree with the statements about paying attention to cross section, velocity and flow quality not just CFM. I've been preaching that for years but most people just give me a blank look and say they want their amps to go to eleven.

I'm thinking about using small stem 2.08" valves on these. I'd have to reguide but that would give me an opportunity to get rid of the big guide boss. The seats would have to be recut but then I can put the super secret squirrel grind to it. Lot's to think about. As you know it's only a matter of time and money!

[Paul Wright]

Please keep us posted on the valve lock issue. I've never seen anyone give a definitive answer on why this sometimes happens.

I'm looking into it. I've talked to several peers about it and I get varying theories.
It may be a combination of factors that hammer the groove like that. I'd like to know if there's a connection between using the high intensity XE cams in combination with cheaper (low quality) valves, locks and retainers. The XE cams do slam the valves open and closed harder. The Voodoo cams which compete with the XE's advertise slower closing rates to reduce stress. However, I've used roller cams that popped the valves harder and not had the problem but then again I only use quality components with a roller.
I think the metallurgy of the valve in combination with poor fitting locks and retainers is the most likely culprit. Stay tuned on this side bar.

[stock z/28]

Hi,

Im not trying to interfere, but on the valve locks there are a few issues as I see it.

Stamped keepers are sometimes not real "square" and dont actually fit the valve and/or retainer as well.

Sprig oscillations that causes the retainer to kind of "dance" around the stem, causing the load to be much higher in a narrow spot.

I guess valve float, but I have taken a lot of heads apart that had weak springs with little wear.

I would say the vast majority of the race style heads that I dissasemble I have to file the edge. Its very not too.

In the pic it looked like that valve may have been toast?

There is a lot of different designs on keeper-valve-retainer fit.

Thanks

Jeff

[Paul Wright]

Jeff, The retainer and locks are poor fitting for sure. The stem shows signs of fretting, if that's the word. There's shiny marks indicating movement. The groove shows tool marks and the upper edge isn't square. It's almost like the cutter was worn.
The intake has the following markings laser etched on the stem:
8650
SPR
1756

Maybe you or someone else knows who makes this valve? Speed-Pro? It's not stainless.

[stock z/28]

Hello,

Paul, on a quick guess I would say Speed Pro 1756--- Speed Pro is acually Sealed Power--and Sealed Power is actually Federal Mongrel (or something like that) maybe Mogul, but I always like Mongrel better.


Jeff

[Nova Bob]

Paul,I know if you take a look (if you already have)in how to build a chevy small block on a budget.it shows you just cutting down the int.and exh.guide boss,es will gain considerable cfm.Bob

[Pro-touring72]

On the vavle lock mushrooming.
In my twisted Wedge TFS heads on my 355 I had the samething. They had TFS SS valves with the TFS locks and retainers. With what was sold to me as LT1 springs.(Kmotion brand) Cam was a lunati Bracket Master 224* 460 lift always shifted under 6000.

In my installed Height thread I noticed something about the Comp super locks. they fit loose in the bottom of the retainer and rock.

Just a thought about what I found. Maybe the retainer rocking with the spring pushing on it pounded the retainer groove.
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/333/valverockte3.png

[Paul Wright]

Great drawing! That's almost exactly what it looks like (from the witness marks) it's doing. I was trying to figure out how to take a close up photo without cutting the retainer in half.
I'm not sure yet if one, the other or both are the culprit. Are both yours made by Comp or just the locks?
In any event I don't think we are going to reuse the locks or the retainers.
The valves should be replaced also since the grooves are damaged enough that I wouldn't take the chance trying to reuse them.
I'll be in the shop today with the heater on full. (It's cold) Hopefully I'll have some "in progress" porting pictures by tomorrow and then the next round of flow testing next week.

[Rogers Performan]

If you have pounding in the the lock groove it is one of the signs of valve float. Scuffing on the side of the valve from locks shiny out side of locks and also a star pattern on the tip of the valve is all signs of valve train problems.

[Pro-touring72]

They fit the same in both the VTO (Forged American part) and Comps retainers.

[Paul Wright]

Ok, back to the porting tutorial.
For the first round I decided to test bowl mods first. No port matching, no opening the pushrod pinch area, no seat rework,No guide rework. Just the bowl and a little unshrouding of the chamber. These mods usually get the best results but most amatuers do the port match because it's easy. As I showed with Kev's heads the port match is the last thing to do, not the first.

The area under the seat was opened to the rule of thumb ~ .85 x valve OD. In this case .85 * 2.02 = 1.717". I use a template made from an old valve. I turn the OD to the prescribed dimension and make some at various increments smaller so I can sneak up on the dimension.
Remember you can always grind it bigger but you can't grind it smaller!

This is the Intake graph. Notice the kink has been straightened and the upper lift flow has improved from 235.9 @.500" lift to 250 CFM @ .550" lift. That can support up to 514 hp. Even though that was the HP target, I'm not done yet.

[Paul Wright]

Here's the exhaust. This one has the Mod 1 changes plus the guide blended.
Big 21 cfm peak flow improvement but notice the kink between .250 and .350". There was turbulence indicated by the manometer bouncing. If you ported in your garage and didn't test it on the flow bench you wouldn't know if you had trouble! Magazines NEVER report anomalies like this. Porting without a flow bench is like timing without a timing light.
Peak exhaust flow was 181.09 CFM @ 28" but more work is needed on these to improve flow quality. It should flow smooth and steady at all lifts. Stay tuned.

[shawn]

Hi,
If you don't already have some, get a couple of inside calipers. You can buy them here from Enco-

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INPDFF?PMPAGE=294&PARTPG=INLMK3&PMITEM=240-0381

They are cheap and a great way (if you document sizes) to quickly check and keep track of your dimensions as you go. I have a bunch of them. When i'm doing push rod area, I'll keep one as a go-no-go for that, as an example.

I would shy away from putting a 2.08 valve in there. A 2.055 is 51% of a 4.030 bore and going any larger than that you start to crowd the bore. Those heads don't have a 60/40 shift. If you had a larger bore, you could get away with it, but without a TON of work, you won't be able to take advantage of the larger valve. Then you start running into a port that is much to large for the intended application. Good luck.
shawn

[agpd45]

what are the price differences in going with the better valves, guides etc. so i can have some comparisons... i know the options are endless but some ballpark to compare bang for buck

[Paul Wright]

Well, that's precisely going to be the issue. I've been testing on the flow bench for the last two days and clearly the valve size is a limiting factor with the Sportsmans. I can't get much past 252 cfm. Once the pushrod pinch area is bigger than the valve opening, the valve becomes the choke point.

As Shawn points out going to 2.08" might not be feasible due to the relatively small 4.030" bore. Going to 2.055" would help. Using small stems and replacing the guides helps. We might get 265 CFM or maybe only 257 cfm.
I talked to several fellow head specialists and looked at potential mods others are doing. Some are using very involved machine work to make the most of rules that require iron heads. They admit that the rules were supposed to contain costs but instead it escalates the cost as people try to get and edge.

The problem is when you add it up you'll come to the realization that you can just buy $2,000 aluminum heads with all the tricks and better flow 280-300 cfm.

You still have to budget for the roller cam, lifters, springs, pushrods, 7/16" studs and new roller rockers.

Say you tell me: "damn the topedo's, full speed ahead".
The other consideration is how much horsepower can your cast crank handle?
It's not wise to sink a lot of moola into a 550hp 7,000 rpm combination with a cast crank I don't care who makes it. It may last for awhile but it won't last as long as a more durable bottom end. 500 hp plus is pushing your luck.

So now it's where to put the budget where it makes sense.
I've been doing some calculations and I think you should go with a solid roller instead of a hydraulic roller. The lifters are cheaper and the grinds are a better suited match for the CR and head flow. I think we can come up with a solid 500 hp and 500 lbs/ft of torque and keep the rpm under 6,200 rpm.
You'll be able to drive the car on the street and it will move when you shove the pedal down.
gotta go. more later tonight.

[agpd45]

Options.... options... and more options... i got from what i read i just have more questions now... Is changing out my crankshaft out of the question? i plan on taking the motor to a very experienced engine builder that is going to install the cam, heads, etc... and i may be able to squeeze more money into the budget.... But i guess at that turn point we might as well ask how well the block will hold up and so on and so forth... One of the reasons I wanted the most potential out of these heads is so i could reuse them if possible on a nice 406 buildup... Who knows what direction this project will head in, but i love options, .02, and input as much as possible>>>>>>>>>>:confused:

[Paul Wright]

If you change the crank you might as well get lighter pistons, then it might make more sense just to buy a rotating assembly ala DriveWFO. If you are going eventually do a 406 then all you need is the block at that point.
You can wind up going around in circles upgrading until you don't have anything left from the original engine!

I know it's going to be some tough choices, but my advice is to make a plan and stick to it. In my opinion, building a 500/500 383 out of what you got is a decent plan with the least amount of changes.
We can use the cam to limit peak power rpm and put the emphasis on torque where you can use it. A bigger cam would just make more power at a higher rpm (less reliable) and kill torque below 4,000.
A 550hp @ 7,000 rpm & 450 lb/ft @t 5000 rpm engine might be better for bragging rights but the other one would be more usable on the street. Spend the money on making the total package reliable and fun to drive.
If I knew you were looking for a turn-key engine I would have just driven down and picked up the rest of it!

[Paul Wright]

Ok, here's more graphs from the last 4 days of porting and 2 days of testing.
This is the exhaust. I originally put all the data on but it got too crowded and confusing so I'm only showing the baseline, a middle and the last one.

Mod #2 is an example how making partial changes doesn't yield a smooth curve. It may flow more at peak but at midlift it got turbulent. It took two more changes and trips back to the flow bench got the air flowing smoothly. Area under the curve and smooth flow is more important than peak flow. The valve spends very little time at max lift. Think about it.

[DriveWFO]

That's why I decided to go ahead and get a good rotating assembly. It's providing me a great basis for future builds (such as what I'm doing now). Don't forget that torque plays a BIG part in how fast you get down the track. My 383 with unported 170cc Vortecs put me in the 11.50s with a 3400# race weight. 60ft times averaged 1.55. Gobs of torque from that setup.

[Paul Wright]

Ok, here's the latest Intake curve and stock baselines of three iron heads.
The WP S/R 2.02; the Vortec 062; and the Sportsman II.

As "bolt on" heads go, the Vortec is the clear winner for lifts under .470"
The Sportsman beats the S/R out of the box and is as good as but much cheaper than porting a set of S/R's or Camel humps.
Porting gains are ultimately limited by the 2.02" valve size so at some point the aftermarket aluminum heads are more financially sensible despite the cost.
Modifying parts to the next level is often more expensive than just buying the next level.

Superflow has the following examples in their book using a z/28 302 and flow at 25":
Stock 2.02 head 190 CFM (201@28") 413 HP
Normal ported 2.02 head 226 CFM (239@28") 492 HP
Best Ported 2.02 head 253 CFM (267@28") 550 HP

They also have the following formula:
HP = 0.27 * (corrected test flow CFM) * (25/ Test pressure inches)^0.5

So with the standard 28" current best of 252.54 CFM corrected we get:
519.5 Hp potential
With your heavy TRW pistons and a cast crank, I think 500 hp and 6,200 rpm are prudent limits. This was the same situation as the Durango Deuce engine which had heads similar to these. Even though it could rev much higher and make more power, with a cast crank, it wasn't prudent. Rev limit was set to 6,200. The engine survived hell and back though! With a 4 barrel and a different cam it pushed the power to 460 I think, but remember that's with only 331 cubes. Eventually the cast crank did fail.
You got a rev limiter, I hope?

[stock z/28]

Hi Paul



You know this thread kinda reminds me of "claimer" thread a while back. :)


On a serious note I would always rather have a solid cam in a performance engine, For tuning ability among other things.

Just my opinion, but that head with a 2.05 is almost perfect for a 355 in all but a very high rpm application, and even then you end up with a very small power curve. If its a street/strip that's a very good head.

I agree that a cast crank is a "probable weak link".


Good Luck Paul

Jeff

[agpd45]

Do you guys think it's a good idea at this level to fill my block with a block hardener (hardblock) up to the freeze plugs?

[David_D.]

I don't think there is a need to fill the block. I wouldn't do it!

[shaggy]

What kind of flow can be gained from a 5 angle valve job? I know someone who said they got a few cfm from just the valve job.

[DriveWFO]

What kind of flow can be gained from a 5 angle valve job? I know someone who said they got a few cfm from just the valve job.

A good 3 angle with flow better than a mediocre 5 angle. Paul, thoughts?

[patman]

OK, so I *do* have the block and crank to support that range on my build, I have the Dart Pro 1 heads, which flow fairly well, and I have pretty much convinced myself that a solid roller is the way to go.


So now it's where to put the budget where it makes sense.
I've been doing some calculations and I think you should go with a solid roller instead of a hydraulic roller. The lifters are cheaper and the grinds are a better suited match for the CR and head flow. I think we can come up with a solid 500 hp and 500 lbs/ft of torque and keep the rpm under 6,200 rpm.
You'll be able to drive the car on the street and it will move when you shove the pedal down.
gotta go. more later tonight.

So what kind of cam specs are we talking about here? That sounds precisely where I want to be.

[Paul Wright]

A good 3 angle with flow better than a mediocre 5 angle. Paul, thoughts?
People always ask me "what's best", but in truth the best one is the one that works best for that particular head combination. It's sort of like asking fisherman "what fishing lure is best?". Super Secret Valve grinds are as common as can't miss fishing lures. In fact there are virtually unlimited cutter combinations for the Serdi seat machine. They can custom make any seat profile you want. If you talk to ten head porters you'll probably get ten opinions. One thing they'll all agree on is the valve seat interface is definitely an area that can make a difference in flow.

Some of the things I tried were different brands of valves and different back cut angles. I was surprised by some tests that looked like they'd work, but only made the flow worse. You can gain peak lift flow at the expense of low lift flow or gain low lift but lose peak lift or you can screw it up everywhere. It's real tedious to test seats scientifically. Machining a head over and over isn't a reliable way. Probably the best way is with a flow box with removable seats. That way you can swap valves and seats quickly so it's consistant.

Here's just one test sequence I ran that tested a particular angle combo on the exhaust.
If you just consider peak flow then test A is better. However, B flows much better at low to mid lift. Keep in mind that exiting exhaust pressure is highest when the valve is just lifting off the seat. Pressure is lower at peak lift and the valve spends little time at max lift so big gains at lower lifts are more beneficial than small losses at peak lift values.... (unless, of course, you are just into bragging).

[Paul Wright]

Even the Valve itself is an integral part of the flow system. Here's a comparison between two intake valves. Same grind, same stem and a same outside diameter. The difference is in the back off the valve. One has flatter backside and one has a more tapered transition to the stem. If you guessed the flatter valve flowed worse...
Surprise! you are wrong.

That was one of the first things I learned when I worked in the head department of my past employer. They gave me a valve to clay up until I thought it was aerodynamically improved. I was confident that my swoopy looking valve would flow a tornado's worth of air. It blew my mind that it flowed much worse. It was like I fell down the rabbit hole and everything I thought I knew was wrong. It really opened my mind and that's why they did it.

You got to park "common sense" and your perceptions at the door when working with airflow.
Make all the theories you want but back it up with data. Trust the data not your assumptions.
That's why porting without any way to measure actual airflow improvements is more likely get bad results than good.

[Carl 66]

Hey Paul,


What kind of CFM are stock vortecs able to flow? How close are the "stock" sportsmans to the vortecs?

Carl

[Paul Wright]

Hey Paul,


What kind of CFM are stock vortecs able to flow? How close are the "stock" sportsmans to the vortecs?

Carl

I think I have the graphic answer to that question on Page 3, post #41
If you just want to know the peak numbers then you haven't been paying attention.

[Carl 66]

Paul,

I was looking for a graph that you have supplied for that shows the flow curve. That smooth curve is very impressive for factory production castings. I didn't mean to have you repeat yourself I just missed that post.

Thank you as always,

Carl

[Paul Wright]

With all the discussion on the importance of the valve grind and the shape of the valve we come to the next step in the process. We need to decide on the valve length so we can order valves. Part of the decision hangs on the spring installed height. Which, in turn hangs on the lift of the cam so we have to start putting stakes in the ground, so to speak, to define the size and shape of the valvetrain envelope. If you don't plan it out now, you can discover geometry problems when you go to assemble the engine later.... Stay tuned.

[bowtie0069]

One has flatter backside and one has a more tapered transition to the stem. If you guessed the flatter valve flowed worse...

Paul,
When Tony Mamo did my heads he found 12 cfm (240-252) on the exhaust by going to a tulip shape valve. I know that doesn't always work, but he felt it was worth the expense of me having to buy a new set of valves.

[Paul Wright]

That's on the exhaust side. Remember, the air flows in the opposite direction. This also brings up another difference. Exhaust gas is very hot, under pressure and acts differently than the cooler, wetter intake flow which is driven by low pressure in the cylinder. What works on a Chevy might not work on a Ford head.
The main point is not to assume something works. You have to test it.

Added:
We could use 12 CFM. What exhaust valve did he use? Ferrea?

[DriveWFO]

That's on the exhaust side. Remember, the air flows in the opposite direction. This also brings up another difference. Exhaust gas is very hot, under pressure and acts differently than the cooler, wetter intake flow which is driven by low pressure in the cylinder. What works on a Chevy might not work on a Ford head.
The main point is not to assume something works. You have to test it.

Are you testing different reversion levels too?

[shawn]

Hi,
on that exhaust port if you have access to a serdi, use a Newen 5119 cutter. It's 30/45/10mm radius with .059 on the top and seat cut. Go back with a 90* cutter and set the throat at 89%. You should be able to get .200 or so of cut with the 90. Just blend that into the 10mm radius to make it look nice, but don't increase the size. Use a semi tulip Ferrea 20* back angle valve. A 6000 series valve part is F6202. It should be a good enough valve for what your looking to do. Slightly blend the chamber into the top cut on the exhaust. Try not to make the approach into the top cut any "flatter" if at all possible. If you narrow the guide boss a bunch and get the short turn correct, you should have a decent port that will go around 210cfm without to much effort. The short turn is the key on those to getting the port to be smooth. The abrupt edge on the exit will give you fits sometimes, too, so try flowing it with a pipe in place.
A tulip style valve will almost always make those style exhaust ports flow better. They will also increase reverse flow. In a lower rpm style engine they will make them a little more "perky" and throttle responsive. In our high rpm stuff, even though they show better on the bench, it kills high rpm power. That's why you won't see them in an engine like that. I could go on and on about my thoughts on exhaust ports, but it would probably bore most of you.
Hope this helps.
shawn

[Paul Wright]

I don't find it boring at all. Good tips. Thanks Shawn!
While we're at it, what's a good seat profile grind and valve type on the intake side if we go to a 2.055" valve?

[Bluesman]

What a great thread! This has to be a stickey with all this good information. You do raise another interesting question, tho. If the stock vortecs are about "flowed out" at about 0.450, what benefit if any is there to the Scoggin Dickey mods that get them up to 0.525 lift? ...or am I reading your graphs totally wrong (the most likely explanation!:D )

Dave

[DriveWFO]

What a great thread! This has to be a stickey with all this good information. You do raise another interesting question, tho. If the stock vortecs are about "flowed out" at about 0.450, what benefit if any is there to the Scoggin Dickey mods that get them up to 0.525 lift? ...or am I reading your graphs totally wrong (the most likely explanation!:D )

Dave

Going a little beyond that point will let the valve operate in it's "max flow" range twice (once while opening, again while closing). Here's a graph comparing my 062 Vortec castings, stock VS. my competition valve job. This is with the stock 1.94/1.50 valves. Aftermarket valves would more than likely yield even better results.

[shawn]

The intake cut will be a little more dependent on how the bowl,short turn and chamber end up shaped. Another good cut on the exhaust would be a Newen 078. It's on a "b" body and makes for a little less work on the chamber side. You just have to watch the edge of the chamber so that you don't break the cutter off when your plunging it in. Sometimes those chambers are cheated over a bit and interfear with the cutter itself.
Back to the intake side, you'll probably end up with something like a Newen 069. It's 35/45/60/75 with a small radius at the edge of the top cut. On this also, you would just want to blend the "lip" of that radius, not making the chamber any "flatter" than the 35* top cut. The bottom 75* cut is .337, so it should get some of that extra metal out of there for you. On a street/strip type deal I usually put the intake bowl area around 89% or there about. A little smaller wouldn't hurt, but anything larger is going to make it a little lazy for a street driven deal. It seems to be a decent blend of response and power. If you have a test valve to spare and experiment with, try a 35* back cut first and work your way down. You'll probably find that 32* or so with that valve job will give you a decent blend.
When you get the valve job done, bowl sized,and some of that guide out of there your going to see it really start to have good gains up to about .500 lift or so, then go flat. Your short turn velocities will be so high that it can't make the turn anymore, so you'll need to start working that area. You may also see the same thing when you start testing valve backcut's.
I did a set of sb chev heads recently that had a HUGE change because of a back cut. I put a 32* cut on it and at .450 lift we were up about 25 cfm and at .500 it went so turbulent the manometer was jumping around about 2". I took that valve out and stuck the other one back in and it was fine to .600 lift. After reworking the short turn, I ended up gaining 30+ cfm @.550 over the non-backcut valve. Just that one simple back cut, if it wasn't flow tested, probably would have cost us upwards of 30hp, maybe more. Now that I think about it, it was an engine similar to yours. A 383 with a hyd. roller cam.
shawn

[Carl 66]

WFO,

If I might ask, what did it cost to get the vortecs to flow like that? And what was involved?


Thanks,
Carl

P.S. I wish I could afford Canfields!!!!!!!!!

[Paul Wright]

Ok, I got off the phone with Artie and we have a decision on the valves. He's going to order the Ferrera 6000 series valves (Exh # 6202;Int # 6208) from Flatlander Racing and have them shipped to me. As soon as I get them, I'll test the valves and seat angles to see if there are any flow improvements. We decided not to go with small stem LS1 valves due to having to change guides and decided not to go with 2.055" intakes because of potential valve relief issues with the TRW pistons.

[DriveWFO]

WFO,

If I might ask, what did it cost to get the vortecs to flow like that? And what was involved?


Thanks,
Carl

P.S. I wish I could afford Canfields!!!!!!!!!

I think it was around $350 for bench testing and the valve job.

[agpd45]

Valves are ordered from flatlander, only 15 bucks each... significantly cheaper than what we originally thought. also they had really good customer service, and told me a little tech info. Hopefully they make a diff. on the bench........

[agpd45]

I talked to Flatlander today to ask if they recommend specific valves guides and locks.... The guy told me for my application and goals, he "strongly" recommends titanium so they will hold up.... He said they're about 300+ a set.. Any ideas if this is necessary... I wanna do the project right once instead of a headache later, so is this the safe side, or overdoing it. Once again, the valves are Ferrea F6202, F6208, and all the important info should be in this thread. Thanks guys,
Artie

[Paul Wright]

I agree that we need to ditch the heavy steel retainers.
We can get Titanium retainers from Competition Products for less than $300.
I'll give you a part number once I determine the spring, but I'm still waiting on the dyno sim(s) from Mike Goble.

[bowtie0069]

...."Titanium retainers from Competition Products for less than $300"


Chet Herbert(or Doug) have titanium retainers real cheap--the machine work isn't the prettiest, but they do the job and save a lot of money.

[patman]

Retainers like these?

http://www.competitionproducts.com/prodinfo.asp?number=3650

At $75, it sounds too good to be true. What about locks? After the pictures of the beat up valve stems at beginning of this thread, this seems like something that needs to be done right...

[novaboy009]

$75 does sound too cheap for that. I'd run 'em in my junk, but I'd get the real deal if this thing doesn't have a super tight budget.

Kev

[Pro-touring72]

Hey Paul I went today to pick up my heads from the shop. I asked him about the mushroomed valve grooves. He showed me some racing valves from some Briggs&straton and some 1/4 midget stuff that look the same including some Small chevy valves with this same problem.
He claims that his small race engine cams launch the lifter off the lobe for more lift and alot of cams do this now adays.He also said on the small stuff they have been doing this for many years to get by some rules. He mentioned Lift rule cams/ Launcher cams and a compcams line of cams that does this.

[DriveWFO]

Hey Paul I went today to pick up my heads from the shop. I asked him about the mushroomed valve grooves. He showed me some racing valves from some Briggs&straton and some 1/4 midget stuff that look the same including some Small chevy valves with this same problem.
He claims that his small race engine cams launch the lifter off the lobe for more lift and alot of cams do this now adays.He also said on the small stuff they have been doing this for many years to get by some rules. He mentioned Lift rule cams/ Launcher cams and a compcams line of cams that does this.

Yes, it's called lofting.

[66IISS]

would this "lofting" be done with a very aggressive ramp rate and an spring that's too light?

[Tom Griffin]

$75 does sound too cheap for that

The key word in their add is "imported".

Tg

[Paul Wright]

The key word in their add is "imported".

Tg

They are made in Israel. They also have made in USA retainers.

[Pro-touring72]

So Are the Israeli Retainers worth it? I know alot of tooling Ive used is made in Israel and it is top notch.

[Paul Wright]

I've never used them, so I can't say plus it's not my position to endorse any product or vendor. I'm just pointing out the term "imported" doesn't ascertain any lack of quality or country of origin.
Swiss watches are imported and they aren't junk or cheap.

[big dog ss]

"Titanium retainers " im by no means an expert but isnt that over kill? i mean getting 500hp from a 383 isnt that difficult just look at ryans dyno combo page. feel free to point out the error in my thinking..:) :beer:

[Tom Griffin]

Good point on the word imported.... it seems like anymore when I see the word "imported" for aftermarket parts I think china.
Tg

[Paul Wright]

"Titanium retainers " im by no means an expert but isnt that over kill? i mean getting 500hp from a 383 isnt that difficult just look at ryans dyno combo page. feel free to point out the error in my thinking..:) :beer:


This isn't about making HP. It's about building a reliable engine.
There was evidence of valve float and groove damage with the current heavy steel retainer and XE hydraulic flat tappet cam. I expect to extend the valve float rpm by 2-300 rpm with the lighter retainer for a better margin of safety. The titanium retainers will also help reduce the valvetrain loads expected with the higher intensity solid roller cam and springs.

A good comp steel retainer is about $60 a set. $10 more we can get the Israeli titanium or for $40 more we can get Manley Titanium retainers.
It's money well spent and a good complement to the quality Ferrea valves.

Say, isn't a Doberman a little more aggressive breed than is necessary? Couldn't you make do with an angry poodle?

[big dog ss]

angry poodle??LOL nope they have to much attitude for me. never had a doberman, the pic is a rottweiler..:D scratch him behind the ears he will give you a big kiss!:cool:

[patman]

Paul - where are you sourcing the Manley titanium retainers for that price?

Thanks-
Pat

[agpd45]

Hey Paul can you drop me a line and let me know if the valves came in.... They could not give me a tracking number, so just let me know what's goin on. Thanks man...
Artie

[Paul Wright]

Oh, sorry. The valves arrived promptly, but I was ice racing up north this weekend.
http://www.coochtek.com/mira/albums/Linda07/adq.sized.jpg
The 25 year old heater in the garage crapped out again so I'm on hold until the new heater arrives this week. I'm very curious to see if there's a big improvement in flow.

[agpd45]

any news on the heater/ valves?

[Paul Wright]

Heater arrived and valves are here. I'll post when I get time. I have a Statistics exam tomorrow.

[novaboy009]

Stats? You goin' back for some edumacation Paul?

Kev (Almost fully edumacated hisself;))

[ERV JR]

Hey Paul Do You Know What Kind Of Ti Retainers That Afr Uses, I Asked When I Called And They Only Would Say "trust Me They Are Good You Wont Have Any Problems". I Checked About 2 Mo Ago And It Was A 109 Dollar Upgrade Then When I Callled To See If I Could Order The Heads They Said The Price Went On Titainum Recently So The Upgrade Fee Is 211 Bucks, I Want To See If I Can Find Some For Cheaper And Maybe Just Order The Heads With The Nex Tek Spring Up Grade And I Would The Install The Retainers And Set Installed Height.

Sorry, I don't know what retainers they use. They may get them from various suppliers. ~Paul W.

[Paul Wright]

Stats? You goin' back for some edumacation Paul?

Kev (Almost fully edumacated hisself;))

Yep, the Detroit auto biz is circling the drain so I decided I need to learn something different. I applied and amazingly got accepted to Lawrence Tech so I signed up take some classes. They say you're never too old to learn. We'll find out. One thing is for sure there are quite a few hotties on campus. There's one who sits next to me in Stats that is very distracting.

[novaboy009]

Yah, better watch out or you'll end up with an extra girlfriend or two!

Kev (Oh sure, I'll help you study darling;))

[DriveWFO]

One thing is for sure there are quite a few hotties on campus. There's one who sits next to me in Stats that is very distracting.



Hey honey, what do ya think of my crankshaft?



Hmmm....how did the snout get so rusty?



Oh, that's just from handling it too much. My timing chain is a little loose.


(laughing at my own posts :D)

Hey, I'm laughing too! ~Paul W.

[stock z/28]

Hi guys,


Its great you are taking classes Paul, I hope you are enjoying it. It does seem about all aspects of the automotive business are gloomy.


I was kind curious, are they (the manufactures) recommending titanium retainers for push rod style street engines now?

It seemed to me they favored a quality steel alloy retainer for most high mileage circle track and street engines. Times change though and I don't ever seem to be current.

Good luck with the Hotties, and don't forget protection and/or some heart stimulant.

Jeff

[Paul Wright]

If there's one place where titanium is most cost effective, it's the valve train.
Reducing the mass of the valve and retainer is very beneficial. With lighter components you need less spring. Coupled with a stiffer pushrod, some people have found they don't need as much cam duration. Heavy valves, heavy springs causes the pushrod to flex like a pole vaulters pole. This delays valve opening which effectively reduces valve duration.

You'll find titanium on the Z06 Corvette and Acura NSX so even the OEM's are getting into the act.
Apparently, the price has fallen for titanium (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_48/b3810116.htm) so it's going to be more common in the future.

[69NovaSS]

P.S. I wish I could afford Canfields!!!!!!!!!


Buy yourself a set of the Jegs Brand ally heads...they are made by Canfields;)

[stock z/28]

Hi Paul,

Don't get me wrong Paul, I use a lot of Titanium retainers and valves. I agree that they are good investment in a high RPM race type application.

What I was basically refering to was the durability of the commonly available and moderate priced "race" type retainers that are generally offered.

I guess in my eyes its a cost vs durability vs real world power advantage.
If the durability is there, would use them as well at the price. Most of the valve train manufacturers I deal with have shy-ed away from recommending them (basic titanium) for seasonal circle track and/or true street applications.


I have been a little scared to use any on a real street application, it will be interesting to see how it works out. They have certainly came down in price.

With out a doubt the high end valve train parts are very trick, excellent quality, but the price is generally very prohibitive for a street application.

On a side note, I have a lot more faith in GMs quality control than I do most aftermarket suppliers. I dont really think they want to eat an Z06 engine under warranty because of a dropped valve. My opinion on the warranty supplied by most aftermarket performance parts suppliers is next to "0".


Good Luck Guys

Jeff

[ERV JR]

Were Can You Find The Maneley Retainers For Around 100 Bucks ?

[agpd45]

Hey Paul, just curious, did you ever get those number from Mike???

[Paul Wright]

Hey Paul, just curious, did you ever get those number from Mike???

No. Not sure why.

[novaboy009]

How'd the test go Paul? Any luck with the hot girl;)

Kev

[Paul Wright]

How'd the test go Paul? Any luck with the hot girl;)

Kev

Funny you should ask! I got to class early and I was sitting on a bench outside waiting for the current class to leave. She shows up and sits down next to me and starts chatting up a storm. Not only is she hot but she's smart. She has a degree in Physics and is going for a degree in BioChemical Engineering. She breezes through the test (60 questions) and leaves. I get done in an hour and she's still outside talking to a girlfriend. We talk some more and I go home.
I don't keep many secrets from my wife so I tell her about "statshottie". She says "If she's that smart, maybe you should ask her to be your study partner"!

Ok, this has got to be some kind of candid camera setup.

[novaboy009]

I get done in an hour and she's still outside talking to her girlfriend.

Oh boy, this just keeps getting better!!!!

Kev:eek: :D

[Paul Wright]

Ok, the heater's finally up and running so I got back to work on the heads. I'm pretty happy with the port and seat configuration as it is right now (noon 3/2). "quit while you're ahead" as they say. I think I've got it as far as it's going to go without some serious remachining and I don't want to risk breaking through.

I've talked to numerous head specialists and even took a look at some other Sportsman head projects and there is definitely more that can be done but the amount of work and expense isn't justified for street car that doesn't have to follow a rule book. One set I looked at had $3,000 worth of mods on top of the work that had already been done. Probably $5,000 into the heads total. It was for a Vintage class race car with rules that require iron heads. It's ironic that often the "iron head" rule is to keep costs down. Racers are always looking for an edge so it only escalated the cost. You can buy alloy heads that flow the same or more for about 2 grand, so it's cheaper to trade up than fix up.

Anyway, I can't get flow bench time until Monday or Tuesday, so I'm going to continue to duplicate the master port to the other ports this weekend. I have a test plan to check the stock Ferrera Valves against the Manley's and then the valve seat and back cut angles. I hope to get final testing all wrapped up in one day before I wear out my welcome at Kinetics.

Next steps will be installed heights, springs, retainers, 7/16" rocker studs, rocker type and ratio and start honing in on cam specs.

While 600+Hp from a 383 is great for bragging rights, the main thing everyone should remember is it's not prudent to make more power than the bottom end can handle. Cast cranks have limits and they need to be respected if you want the engine to last.

[1bossnova]

Paul do you flow test your exh. with a test pipe? I was reading you flow numbers on the posts and they seam very low for a 1.60 valve? I just finshed a set of sportman II with a 1.60 valve and the the exh flows 205 @ .500 and 232 @ .700 with a test pipe

regards,
Bryce

[Tom Griffin]

Paul....
You keep getting side tracked with getting us head info... can we stay on subject with the campus stories:D They sure do bring back good memories from the late 60's early 70's
Tg

[Paul Wright]

Paul do you flow test your exh. with a test pipe? I was reading you flow numbers on the posts and they seam very low for a 1.60 valve? I just finshed a set of sportman II with a 1.60 valve and the the exh flows 205 @ .500 and 232 @ .700 with a test pipe

regards,
Bryce


Yes, if you look in the pictures there is a pipe on the exhaust and a flow inlet on the intake.
My numbers are "corrected" numbers and while they may not be as impressive as some published numbers, I know they are accurate. If you got 232 CFM @ 28" out of a Sportsman exhaust port I'd like to know how you did it.

One thing I noticed about testing the exhaust side is when the flow gets high the potential for leaks goes up dramatically. Just putting your hand over the exhaust you can feel an incredible rush of air. During the initial tests, I frequently run my hands around the fixture feeling for leaks and if any appear I stop the testing and fix them.

There are many reasons for good results but often people are so happy about the results they don't question if it's legitimate. Sportsman rocker studs holes go into the Intake port. It would be real easy to forget to seal those. I don't know how many times I've been ecstatic about how the flow testing is going only to realize I left the spark plug out.

Even if the testing was done properly you still can get variations.
No two heads will ever flow the same and even Superflow says that flow benches aren't directly comparable. Many older benches develop leaks or are out of calibration. I personally checked this bench with the calibration orifice after I cleaned and refilled the manometer with the correct fluid (the old fluid was dried out and crusty). Even the guys who own the bench didn't know the fluid in the incline manometer has a precise specific gravity. The fluid is super expensive $60 an oz but it's necessary to match the factory calibration. Some people balk at the price and substitute other liquids not knowing it can screw up the results.

Even though nobody races flow benches and dyno's, people still love to brag about flow and HP numbers. I call it the "my amp goes to 11" syndrome.


I'm a skeptic by nature so when I get better than expected results I may run the tests two or three times to see if they correlate. Bottom line: I rather be right than impressively wrong.

Paul....
You keep getting side tracked with getting us head info... can we stay on subject with the campus stories:D They sure do bring back good memories from the late 60's early 70's
Tg

Oh, I got some great stories from the last time I was in college in the 70's!

[shawn]

These photo's (albeit poor)should give you an idea of what your exhaust port should/could look like-

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2031899330062727338oeGXur

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2982369630062727338VnBUvi

this one you can kind of see the corner radius-

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2637307540062727338BESeQa

These were taken more for reference, not publication, so they aren't pretty. It should give you the idea, though.
Don't let people get you caught up in exhaust flow numbers. Keep working on smooth transitions and stable air flow and you'll be much,much further ahead. If you really want a big number, just keep making it larger, and watch your torque fall. I have a few things that I pay attention to when doing exhaust ports. First and foremost is port stability. It absolutly has to be stable at all valve lifts. On a street/strip deal I like to see about 300fps exit velocity or a little higher and the port sized about 102-104% of the valve area at the exit. When i reach those things I'm done. I don't touch it after that. Again, don't get caught up in the numbers game. It'll just lead you astray.
shawn

[agpd45]

Hey I'm in college too, and yes the stories are great... especially when St. Patty's Day is coming up here in Rolla (the only fun thing all year besides studying our .............. off)...

[1bossnova]

Yes, if you look in the pictures there is a pipe on the exhaust and a flow inlet on the intake.
My numbers are "corrected" numbers and while they may not be as impressive as some published numbers, I know they are accurate. If you got 232 CFM @ 28" out of a Sportsman exhaust port I'd like to know how you did it.


Paul I assure you the numbers are real.

My flow bench is a superflow 600 with a flowcom and performance trends software. It was just calibrated to make sure every thing is up to par.

Yes I do believe there are some variations when it comes to flow benches. But I have test mine against some in the local area and they are with in 2-3%

The neat thing about the performance tends software is that you are able to test with a .000 lift point to check for leakage and you can adjust your flowcom accordingly. Its very help full when is comes to forgetting the spark plug.

I will have the flow sheets up loaded to my web site soon! but there are some other numbers there right now. “I’m new to the web world and learning slowly”

But in most cases on any stock small block heads with a 1.60 exh valve you should see flow numbers in the 230cfm @.700 range with the short turn done right.

I just finished a set of 441 heads with a 1.50 exh valve and they flowed 209cfm @ .700

The main key to making the exh flow is a full radius valve job and a correctly worked short turn. I also use a 30 degree back cut valve with a radius top


FYI The sportsman II intakes flowed 252 cfm @ .500 and 269 @ .700 port matched to a felpro 1205 gasket

I will have pix for you soon

Regards,
Bryce

[Paul Wright]

I'd like to see the pix. Here's what we have at this stage. I made seat revisions and I brought various valves including the new Ferrea's. The new valves didn't get us 13 cfm. In fact the gains were only marginal over Manleys that have been 2 angle back cut. I spent the day testing many combinations and the changes are so subtle there wasn't much point in graphing all the iterations. These two graphs compare the 'out of the box' baseline and the latest stage of modifications.
Stage 4 Intake: 257 CFM @ 28" (.700" lift)
Stage 5 Exhaust: 182.67 CFM @ 28" (.700" lift)

Note: Stock the intake flow was good enough for a 485HP engine; modified it's now good for 530HP. A gain of 45 hp. (100% VE; this calculation doesn't consider inertial supercharging effect or engine displacement)

[agpd45]

Looks like everything is startin to come around :)

[agpd45]

Hey Paul is it ready for me to purchase any parts yet ??.... retainers, springs etc etc..... if so can you toss me some p#'s

[Paul Wright]

I'm still waiting on Mike to give me the first set of EA data so we can figure out the cam specs. I'm guessing at this point I need to get my own program since I don't think they are coming. The flow numbers are evolving anyway. Just came in after about 4 hours of reworking the guide bosses and chamber polishing.

I've got another round of flow testing scheduled tomorrow. I think I found a few more cfm. I should probably quit testing after that and "get-r-done". We have one anyonomous board member that may help out on some parts so I'll let you know. I noticed Isky has an "Internet only" sale on roller lifters this month.

[mikemen12]

Are you planning to post some before and after pictures of your work?
I get bored easily just looking at graphs and text (Just like Playboy)!! I like to see pictures too!! lol

[agpd45]

Ahhh.. I'm not gonna lie, most of my imput comes from impatience.... even tho i know the longer i wait the better, it's just killin me..... keep up the good work... you know paul, those who do good things, it does really come back to them :)

[Paul Wright]

Here's the update on Friday's testing (without a graph)

Intake 262 CFM @ .700" (+5 CFM; avg gain 2.75 CFM all lifts)
Exhaust 183 CFM @ .700" (+6 CFM; avg gain 3.5 CFM all lifts)

While there is much more that can be done, (2.05 valves, remove the guide boss, etc), I think that's as far as I'm going to go.

I'm currently working on duplicating everything from the master ports to the other 14 ports. I'll post pictures when I get a chance.
There isn't much to see since the camera can't focus on the subtle changes that yield 1-5 cfm per change, but it all adds up.

From the standard Superflow airflow/HP estimating calculations, I've improved the heads by 50 hp.

added:
Here's the head on the porting bench. It's dirty noisy work.

[novaboy009]

Hum.... my S/R's don't flow that much worse than the Sportsmen's. The 240-245ish we got out of a stock port are pretty impressive.

Kev

[Carl 66]

Hey Artie,

When you get your heads back from Paul give me a call. I'll get your heads and the shortblock over to Greg's.


Carl

[agpd45]

That would be awesome... I will be home from the 23-30 for spring break.... I'm keeping my fingers crossed...

[agpd45]

Not to make things more difficult but... lets say hypothetically if I were to buy a complete 383 shortblock... ( maybe GM block) but w/ all the goods, forged crank, h beam rods, forged lightweight pistons, so on and so forth.... what would be a good price and a good place to look. I'm in St. Louis, MO, and I'm not trying to be a pain, it's just not out of the question to do so... So for a nice solid shortblock, what would i be looking at or does anyone know a good place to look... (or does anyone have one :) ) to sell

[Paul Wright]

You have to decide what you want to do and stick to a plan. If you want a good engine that's only a matter of time and money. If you are just impatient then all I have to say is the old axiom: "haste makes waste".

The good news is I think I've decided on a cam, (at least based on the current engine configuration).

XR274R Solid Roller 12-770-8
Great for Power Touring, easy on parts, Very reliable power, rough idle, 2500 rpm stall required.
2200-6200 rpm power band (That's streetable!)
I 236/E 242 @ .050"
I.564"/E.570" with 1.5 ratio
110 LSA
106 ICL

Plugging in the new flow numbers in Comp's predictor it says 553HP @ 6000 rpm 559 lb/ft @ 4500 rpm*
With your 4.10 gears the thing should pin you back in the seat pretty good.
Here's what Comp recommends:
Springs 977-16 1.460" 155lb @ 1.850"; 420 @1.250"; CB 1.195";rate: 441lbs/in
Cup seat #4704
Lifters #818-16
Ti retainer #730
Locks #611-16

We have a board member sending a set of 731-16 Ti retainers for 1.550 springs.
I'll look for a spring that matches the 977 specs and fits these retainers.
I'd try to find the most reliable lifter you can get. You can buy cheaper roller lifters but they aren't all the same.

Pushrods will be determined after mocking up the heads and lifters. If you want to get those Scorpion rockers like DriveWFO got for his 383 then that's ok. Be sure to go with 7/16" studs and 1.5 ratio.

* Interestingly enough with a hydraulic flat tappet XE274H and unported heads:
460Hp @ 5,500 rpm

[patman]

XR274R Solid Roller 12-770-8
Great for Power Touring, easy on parts, Very reliable power, rough idle, 2500 rpm stall required.

I was going back and forth between the 770 and the 771 (XR280) cam... I ended up going for the 771 because I figured the large(ish) displacement of the 406 would do better with the larger cam. The simulations showed not much difference at low/mid RPM, but a definitely higher peak at 5500-ish, so I went for it. As it happens that was on the Gilbert Chevrolet parts blowout list...and it arrived Friday. Still one left I think...

[Paul Wright]

Well, he has a smaller 383 and it has a cast crank.
If he goes with a new short block then it would make more sense. Maybe a trick 396 small block with a 4.155" bore aftermarket block? :rolleyes:

[DriveWFO]

His cam has similar duration numbers to the hydraulic flat-tappet cam I ran last season (236/246 @ .050"), though mine was ground on a 108 LSA, 104 ICL. He's gonna need a lot more converter than 2500, unless this is just a driver?

[69NovaSS]

His cam has similar duration numbers to the hydraulic flat-tappet cam I ran last season (236/246 @ .050"), though mine was ground on a 108 LSA, 104 ICL. He's gonna need a lot more converter than 2500, unless this is just a driver?

ya I would think he would too;)

[69NovaSS]

Well, he has a 383 and it has a cast crank.
If he goes with a new short block then it would make more sense. Maybe a trick 396 small block with a 4.155" bore aftermarket block? :rolleyes:

oh ya that would be cool....:) :cool:

[Paul Wright]

His cam has similar duration numbers to the hydraulic flat-tappet cam I ran last season (236/246 @ .050"), though mine was ground on a 108 LSA, 104 ICL. He's gonna need a lot more converter than 2500, unless this is just a driver?

It's not a flat tappet. It's a roller. Even though the .050" duration is the same, it's apples and oranges on the seat to seat duration. Comp says power band starts at 2,200 so they spec a 2500 rpm stall.

[69NovaSS]

It's not a flat tappet. It's a roller. Apples and oranges. Comp says 2500.

well thats cool....so with rollers you can have more duration but use less stall then you would with a flat tappet?

[DriveWFO]

it's apples and oranges on the seat to seat duration.

It ain't gonna run good with apples and oranges in there.

[Paul Wright]

well thats cool....so with rollers you can have more duration but use less stall then you would with a flat tappet?

No, with rollers you can get more area under the curve with less seat to seat duration. If you put a flat tappet lifter in a roller lobe it would destroy itself rather quickly. A flat tappet profile has longer ramps out of necessity which adds to the seat to seat timing which hurts street manners. A hydraulic profile would require a higher stall speed because with longer ramps, it's less efficient.
A roller with similar .050" numbers has less seat to seat duration. That's a good thing.

[agpd45]

It' got a 3600 Redneck stall in the TH350 as of now.....

Would the XR280R make more power from 2500rpm on through the power band, or would it make more unusable power...

I do have the 3600 stall and 4.10's in the back

[DriveWFO]

It' got a 3600 Redneck stall in the TH350 as of now.....

You'll get around 3600 stall with X horsepower. How much HP did they rate the 3600?

[agpd45]

Good point, I forgot about that...
Well I had redneck build it and they built it based on my old specs, which was the same shortbuild with a different cams and the stock heads.... does that stall the car up or down?

[DriveWFO]

Good point, I forgot about that...
Well I had redneck build it and they built it based on my old specs, which was the same shortbuild with a different cams and the stock heads.... does that stall the car up or down?

If you are going to make more power (nobody upgrades their motor to make less!), then your converter is going to stall higher. How higher is the question. What's the horsepower delta between the old and new combo?

[69NovaSS]

No, with rollers you can get more area under the curve with less seat to seat duration. If you put a flat tappet lifter in a roller lobe it would destroy itself rather quickly. A flat tappet profile has longer ramps out of necessity which adds to the seat to seat timing which hurts street manners. A hydraulic profile would require a higher stall speed because with longer ramps, it's less efficient.
A roller with similar .050" numbers has less seat to seat duration. That's a good thing.


well i understand the whole area under the curve thing but the duration numbers you mentioned if it where for a flat tappet cam would normally require more stall then you said Comp recommends. How can a roller with the same duration as a flat tappet get by with a converter with less stall then the flat tappet would require for optimum performance??:confused:

[DriveWFO]

well i understand the whole area under the curve thing but the duration numbers you mentioned if it where for a flat tappet cam would normally require more stall then you said Comp recommends. How can a roller with the same duration as a flat tappet get by with a converter with less stall then the flat tappet would require for optimum performance??:confused:

Since the roller design lets you run steeper ramp up/down rates, you can hold the valve open longer & sooner.

[69NovaSS]

Since the roller design lets you run steeper ramp up/down rates, you can hold the valve open longer & sooner.

yes I know that...that's the whole area under the curve thingy...I'm not talking about that...reread my post...I'm wondering why a roller cam with 240 degrees of duration needs a converter with less stall then an flat tappet cam with the same 240 degrees of duration would require for optimum performance...:confused:

Sheeez:rolleyes: ....talk about pulling teeth....lol:p :D

[DriveWFO]

yes I know that...that's the whole area under the curve thingy...I'm not talking about that...reread my post...I'm wondering why a roller cam with 240 degrees of duration needs a converter with less stall then an flat tappet cam with the same 240 degrees of duration would require for optimum performance...:confused:

Sheeez:rolleyes: ....talk about pulling teeth....lol:p :D

It's because the roller cam is on a treadmill traveling at 2*X / Y3

[69NovaSS]

It's because the roller cam is on a treadmill traveling at 2*X / Y3

Ahhhhh..ok that makes sense now...those darn treadmills always seem to gum up the works ;) :D

[Paul Wright]

yes I know that...that's the whole area under the curve thingy...I'm not talking about that...reread my post...I'm wondering why a roller cam with 240 degrees of duration needs a converter with less stall then an flat tappet cam with the same 240 degrees of duration would require for optimum performance...:confused:

Sheeez:rolleyes: ....talk about pulling teeth....lol:p :D

Because the duration between when the valves are closed tight and the .050 point is different for rollers and hydraulics. The low rpm performance variations aren't the same for durations at .050 if the seat to seat durations are different. Remember that when the valve is open the cylinder, is no longer sealing pressure. Torque is directly proportional to VE (cylinder filling).
Long seat to seat timing kills low rpm VE and therefore low rpm torque. That's why you need a higher stall speed convertor to keep the engine in the power band.
You can get the same effective duration (@.050") with less torque loss using a roller and therefore less stall speed is required.

[69NovaSS]

Because the duration between when the valves are closed tight and the .050 point is different.

OK...because of the difference between the advertised durations between the roller vs the flat tappet is what causes the difference in converter requirement's?

that makes sense...thanks Paul

[Paul Wright]

No, the stall requirements are dictated by the power band. Those .050" duration "rules of thumb" you see in catalogs are for rookie estimates with typical flat tappet cams. Change your CR, your cubes or even the engine bore/stroke (305 vs 302) vehicle weight, gearing, etc. can alter the stall speed requirements.

Anybody who assumes that a roller and a flat tappet with similar .050" durations is essentially the same doesn't understand why rollers have so much power potential. They aren't simply the same cam and a lifter with a wheel.
the DD cam "only" had 228 degrees of duration at .050" but the fat lobes tell the tale:
http://www.stevesnovasite.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=7495&stc=1&d=1156303245
To get the same amount of area (which = airflow) with a flat tappet you'd need more seat to seat duration.
Here's a lumpy idle flat tappet cam lobe with with similar duration. Not the same is it?
The engine needs air not numbers to make power. If you can make the same power with less duration you are going to be more efficient. A modern Z06 makes 505 horsepower and still have impeccable manners because it can inhale prodigious amounts of air with less duration than a 60's era Corvette.

[novacane]

hi guys whats with all the techno stuff are you a engineer or a engine builder just asking?

[Paul Wright]

hi guys whats with all the techno stuff are you a engineer or a engine builder just asking?

I'm layed off and apparently too old to get a new job. 6 posts....you must be new here.

[novacane]

yes i'm the new guy sorry about no job.

[David_D.]

hi guys whats with all the techno stuff are you a engineer or a engine builder just asking?

Paul is a little of both! :)

[novaboy009]

Paul is a steve's nova site personal engine builder. Just give him a call and he'll build you a "$500" engine that will run low 13's with traction problems:D :D :D

Kev

[novacane]

i'm sure paul is very good. but i have been building engines for 18yrs.

[novaboy009]

Paul might be able to teach you a little regardless of if you're an 18 year old kid with no knowledge or a professional engine builder. Do you build as a career or a hobby?

Kev

[novacane]

i have my own shop with dyno.do r&d for one of the big three.i never said i couldn't learn somthing.

[novaboy009]

That's pretty sweet. Chrysler, Ford or GM? You guys feeling the squeeze of the domestic auto industry too?

Kev

[David_D.]

The great thing about this site is we have a lot of very knowledgable car enthusiasts, engine builders, engineers, head specialists, etc. They are all very eager to impart some of their knowledge and experiences without getting into pissing matches lol. :)

[stock z/28]

Hello,

Yea it always seems like a lot of good and interesting discussions here, I really enjoy it.


Jeff

[novacane]

i wouldn't get in pissing match with anyone. but if someone is asking a question and getting the wrong answer then i geuss i will for the better of the sport.but i have been reading some b/s and think thats wrong.i don't mean this post but others.

[Paul Wright]

i wouldn't get in pissing match with anyone. but if someone is asking a question and getting the wrong answer then i geuss i will for the better of the sport.but i have been reading some b/s and think thats wrong.i don't mean this post but others.

I sent you a welcoming PM. (My inbox fills up fast, so a reply might get bounced). We have an open forum that depends on peer review to keep the info valid. Anyone can post and sometimes internet gossip and wives tales creep in. The experts will chime in and correct anyone who's wrong. Sometimes even the experts disagree so in that's case it's up to the readers to decide when it's "debatable". I'm guessing you found this site because you heard it had good info? That's often what attracts new members and why the site has been growing. We try to minimize the "grumpy I know more than all of you" attitudes. I find the discussions interesting and educational. I think you will, too. The main thing is to differentiate facts (with data to support) and opinions or theories.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion here. You can add your opinion as long as the tone is kept civil. As moderator I have to maintain the peace, so don't take it personal if I or any other moderator has to step in.

[novacane]

got pm paul. i speak with many yrs of engine building and dyno operator.just trying to give expert info from yrs of work.i'm not your back yard engine builder. i have got thousand of hrs on dynos to no what works and what don't.i think we all can learn from each other.

[Paul Wright]

Ok, looking forward to your feedback on the BS you've found. Now let's give this thread back to Artie's project.

[novacane]

have you thougth about angle milling 2-3 deg.i have picked up 10 cfm on the intake side of my old sportman 2.

[Paul Wright]

Yes, I know all about that. It's not a simple mod. For those that don't know, angle milling towards the exhaust side rolls the head which effectively reduces the valve inclination angle and tilts the port upwards. Then we have to correct the intake/exhaust faces and the head bolt registers and it's a real pain to get it right. There's also moving the guides, installing bigger valves, using small stem valves. I talked about all that previously in the thread.
Kinetics just did a pair of Sportsmans that got 295 CFM but these are now $4,000 heads. It would be cheaper and easier to just buy better heads.
The project isn't a contest to set a record. Artie's a college student that want's the best bang for his money.

[DriveWFO]

Artie's a college student that want's the best bang for his money.

So was Kevin :beat: :D








(hiding from Paul now!)

[Paul Wright]

Yeah, this is starting to be Dejavu all over again! Just one time I want to do a "cost is no object" project.

[novaboy009]

Dave's got a pretty big house.... how about a second mortgage on that sucker, and let's build us a REAL motor:D

Kev

[DriveWFO]

Dave's got a pretty big house.... how about a second mortgage on that sucker, and let's build us a REAL motor:D

Kev

How do you think I've been building this new motor :eek: I'm still waiting for my money tree to start blooming again :rolleyes:

[patman]

You were speaking of rocker arms a page or two back...

Dave went with the Summit house brand aluminum rockers for $199 which he discovered were made by Scorpion. Another option is Scorpion branded rockers from Flatlander for $207/$209.

Flatlander also has the comp 977 springs for $119/set, which is a shade cheaper than I could find them anywhere else.

(I'm just pouting on the front porch waitin' on the UPS guy...got my package from Gilbert (cam, retainers), still looking for ones from Flatlander, Summit, and Jegs. I saved money on the parts...but payed some of it back in 4 shipping charges.)

And I am playing with EA 3.5 Pro (10 day eval), which is much more detailed than the EA 3.0 and DD2000 I was using. Looks like I shoulda gone with the XR274 (as Paul mentioned for Artie) instead of the XR280, EA3.5 is showing more low end torque differences than the older software.

[agpd45]

While it's on my mind, will my current mechanical fuel pump handle the power upgrade?? its a holley but probably close to stock i'm guessing idk....

[agpd45]

..? ........

[novaboy009]

How fast is this bad boy gonna go? I know quite a few people with your basic mechanical holley/eddy pump and a regulator running pretty quick. Fuel systems are kind of strange though, what works for some people isn't enough for others.

Kev

[Paul Wright]

It's going to go as fast as his money! In spite of my wise money saving advice in a phone call just today, I see he's looking for a "600 hp" crankshaft.
I figure it will run 12's because it can't hook up 500 hp let alone 600. Sound familiar? Maybe we need 700. Nope still doesn't hook up. How about 800? Nope. Still smoking the tires. :rolleyes: I'm getting whiplash from the changes in project direction. 500 hp will be plenty (ever drive a new Viper or Z06 Corvette? It will make you crap your pants), especially if you have to ask "how much" everything costs. If you have a fat 600HP wallet, just let me know and I'll tell you what to buy.
My wife's already pissed at me for getting involved with "another one".

[DriveWFO]

It's going to go as fast as his money!

Ain't that the truth!!!

[novaboy009]

Give 'em some power, he'll figure out how to hook it up down the road.

Kev (Just got some Drag Radials, lets see how the BLS goes!)

[agpd45]

I didn't look for a 600 hp crankshaft to make 600 hp on the motor, my point was one of the things i've noticed is that if you build overly strong, things tend to break less, so if i make 500 hp and i have a component that will handle 600hp, than it is less likely to break than if i am right at the borderline of breaking... making it's not logical but it sounded good at the time... and also, i'm not meaning to be "another" hassle... just trying to do what everyone of you try to do---- go fast and have fun :)

[novaboy009]

Don't worry, agpd, Paul and the others will torment you for being poor for a couple months, but you'll end up with a kick a** engine in the end. I'm tickled pink with mine!

Kev

[Carl 66]

Anything new to report?

Carl

[Paul Wright]

I need the retainers, springs etc. to set up the heads. There's been some discussion on getting the whole cam kit but that doesn't come with the Ti retainers so then he'll have extra parts so I'm not sure how much it actually saves. We have valvetrain geometry issues with the longer stem Ferrera valves, so pushrod length is an issue. Those get ordered after it mock up.
I might be appointed the engine builder but the project direction hasn't been firmed up. Artie is deciding how much and for what to spend on the short block expenses.

Building a 383 with 600hp durability makes sense if you can afford it. Basically in that scenario it's build one similar to DriveWFO's 383. I estimated he should have a $7,000 budget for that level. It might be cheaper or it might be more. I'm too busy to do window shopping for best deals.

My view is to refresh the existing shortblock and keep the power to around 500. That should be the best bang for the buck. Once you start replacing major components like crankshafts and pistons, you might as well get the whole rotating assembly. I haven't seen the engine so it's hard to estimate "what it needs". The bore could be fine or it could be too loose. You don't want to order parts without a complete assesment of critical measurements.

[DriveWFO]

If I make 515hp or better, I will consider this build a success. Keep in mind that I gapped my rings for mild nitrous use.

[agpd45]

I'm ready to order all of the parts... I sent you an email Paul agreeing that just making sure the shortblock is ok is the best way to go... 500 hp will be plenty and a world of a difference. Did you mention something earlier about somebody on the board having Tit. Retainers for sale or something? Let me know and if not i'll order the whole list of parts and have them shipped to your door. Thanks

[patman]

Did you mention something earlier about somebody on the board having Tit. Retainers for sale or something?

I'd be interested in that source too...as long as we're talking about titanium retainers and not a bra...

:D :D

[Paul Wright]

1.450" Tit. retainers aren't in the Victoria Secret catalog unless that's just a pastie.
I haven't heard from the board member. I think they may be the wrong size anyway. I'll go over the valvetrain shopping list and you get the parts werever you can get the best price. I want to make sure we don't have the seat cup problem, or the valve lock problem that Patman had.
You probably shouldn't order anything for the shortblock until the annointed engine builder takes a looky loo at it.

[agpd45]

Sounds good, let me know i got the plastic ready....

[patman]

Here's a possible source for retainers...

http://jarvisperformance.myriadfx.com/parts.html

Says "reconditioned Del West titanium spring retainers" he asks $60/set for them. I emailed and apparently he takes used retainers and machines them down to your specs.

Also here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120096716710

[agpd45]

wow, those retainers would save me over 250 bones, but the question is, are they reliable, since they're reconditioned? If yes, then it's a great idea but i ask this question b/c the reason we are switching to tit.(anium-perv ;) ) retainers is to have insurance, not take more risks. If they are a good decision by quality also, I'll jump on them.... Let me know some input guys... Thanks,
Artie

[Paul Wright]

One of the board members is FedEx'ng some Ti (chemical symbol for Titanium) he had extra.
I think he want's to remain anynomous but it's another example of NPHNP.
We'll see if these will work, but your link gave me an idea.

As far as the reworked ones in your link, I really don't know if they are good or not. It has merit's but also concerns. These may be Nascar cast offs that get sold off. Nascar teams cycle parts out after so many miles. Could be good, could be bad.

Manley makes no name Ti retainers for other people that goes for less. I'll have to research those part numbers and get back to you.
What I'm little concerned about is mixing and matching parts. Like Patman has found out some times you wind up ordering several parts to get the right fit.
If you are in a hurry then get the complete matched kit and the Ti retainers. It will cost more but it will be faster. If cost is a concern then you'll have to be patient. Haste makes waste.

[agpd45]

I guess what I'll do is go ahead and order these parts :
Comp Springs #977-16
Comp SuperLocks #613-16
Comp spring seat #7404-16
My reasoning is that these are for sure parts I'll need (correct me if i'm mistaken) so then we can "match" them to the Ti Retainers the member is offering (thanks very much) and if they work, then good... If not I'll have to buck up which will be ok too.. I can only ask for so much.
This sound like a plan? I'll have them drop shipped to your house Paul.

[Paul Wright]

Sounds like a plan. That way I can get the installed height done. I'm pretty sure the seats are the right number. These are the ones called out in the catalog but be aware that sometimes hot rod parts don't fit particular apps. We'll see when I test fit them.

[patman]

Comp spring seat #7404-16

Have Paul measure up your spring seats first...OD of the machined area and OD of the guide. Even though 7404 are the ones recommended for those springs, they didn't fit the machined spring seat area on my heads. Ended up with 4771-16 instead.

[agpd45]

Thanks for the heads up Patman... I will be ordering the k kit after some more time at the drawing board so hopefully we'll have those measurements by then... I have a week off of school (woo hoo) and hopefully will get a lot accomlished w/ parts, pictures, etc.

[Paul Wright]

The Sportsman heads have big cast guide bosses and a stepped spring seat. On the Durango Deuce Sportsmans I had to machine the seat OD in the lathe to get the fit right. Engine building isn't just bolting together parts.

If you order the off the shelf K kit that precludes getting a custom ground cam, ya know. No sense in ordering the cam until the engine is mocked up and CR is measured, unless you just want to wing it. As I mentioned in the Email, there may be V2P clearance issues with the generic four eyebrow valve pockets in the TRW pistons and roller cam lift.

[Paul Wright]

The 10 degree Titanium retainers arrived today from our anynomous benefactor in a fine gesture of NPHNP. These fit 1.500" springs perfectly and could fit 1.480" #977 springs with a little trim on the lathe. It's late, I'll post a picture tomorrow.

We have many discisions to make now. If we go with 1.6 rockers on the intake side will they clear the 1.500" springs and retainers? 7/16" studs require rockers with 7/16" fulcrum pivots. Will the guide plates fit? What's the pushrod length going to be? Do we go with an off the shelf roller or go custom to wring a little more power out?

Based on pictures sent, the bores are suspect and need careful measurement to determine viability. There was excessive carbon build up which may have come from excessive fuel in the cylinders. This can wash the oil off the bores and cause wear. Honing for new rings only makes them bigger. Not honing can impede ring seating. The piston to bore clearance may be loose enough to require honing to next over size which means getting .040" pistons, which means rebalancing. Lot's of pending decisions depending on what we find on inspection and measurement.

It's never easy.

[agpd45]

One of the main reasons the project keeps changing directions is because like any other car project, you run into many unexpected (but you know they're coming) problems. Examples:
1. TRW 4 valve relief pistons cause clearance issues with roller cam.
2. Cast steel crank becomes weak link in setup and may cause problems down the line.
3. carbon buildup worries Paul that there may be underlying problems such as bad rings etc. etc....
4. ti retainers may need to be machined to fit with the 977-16 springs that will be used.

My point is this: If I end up having to switch out pistons, that causes more machine work (to bore it 0.040 over) and so on. If I'm that far, I may as well go ahead and put in a forged crank and h beam rods. The list goes on. I found a shortblock Nye's Automotive is selling for $2300. If a rotating assembly will cause me more than 1500, than with the machine work and so on I'm right there, not to mention labor which Paul said would be about a grand. This is what makes the decisions so hard, not that I'm just indecisive. I know this is long and it seems like I'm rambling, but these are some big decisions that will take the project one way or another, and may end up costing me thousands down the line. What does everyone else think???

Sorry for going on and on....

Artie

[DriveWFO]

What does everyone else think???

Sorry for going on and on....

Artie

IMO, if you aren't gonna build it yourself, I'd just get shortblock and be done with it.

[Carl 66]

Ditto !!!!!!!!

[David_D.]

IMO, if you aren't gonna build it yourself, I'd just get shortblock and be done with it.

I somewhat agree. This is hard, because Paul is not an engine builder by trade. (that's not exactly true but I get your point~ Paul W)
He's offering a unique service which takes his time, etc. He gets stuck in the middle of it because he is doing the work, and frustrated when the project takes changes and unexpected turns. The difference is, he's not getting paid as an engine builder. (Actually, Artie asked if I would consider building the engine and I offered to build the engine for flat fee if he buys the parts ~ Paul W). To them, it doesn't matter what the customer wants to do cause they are getting paid for the service. (It does if they quoted a fixed price! ~Paul W.)

That being said, I would either build it myself (and I will go back to building my own engines in the future), or buy a short block.

However, since you are already in the middle of a project with Paul, I would get his recommendations. From the sounds of it, most of the work Paul has done is in the heads. I wouldn't think a new shortblock would affect Paul that much and may be less work if it comes assembled. If you want to just go a different direction completely, compensate Paul for his time, maybe offer your heads as part of the deal and journey out on your own.

Just my .02

[FunkyNova66]

I'm Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol and am very happy with the results:D

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/FunkyuNova66/Gifs/1-644-65674-l-fSutC5osHJeFvLKuA9JFa.gif

[higleyml]

I know this is long and it seems like I'm rambling, but these are some big decisions that will take the project one way or another, and may end up costing me thousands down the line. What does everyone else think???

Well since you are asking the "some big decisions" part should have been done well in advance to the 1 Feb start date of this project. Now two months later Paul is neck deep and trying to please you and stay under budget. I'm thinking you have put him in a very uncomfortable position and still have no idea what you are doing with this build. JMO

[agpd45]

It is funny how all of you are so easy to make me look like a bad guy for causing Paul whiplash in this project where I've taken so many turns. It's annoying because you just don't understand.. I started this project with one goal- to get my heads ported and put in a bigger camshaft and be done. That's why I payed