Here is a trick to try. I call it the "backyard back cut". First I put the valves in a drill press and polish them with Emory paper. Then I brush dye on them and lap them in. Then I put them back in the drill press and remove any part of the seating surface below (inside the port) the valve seat. I do this by spinning them in the drill press and using a die grinder to remove the metal. If you are worried about not being steady with the die grinder you can hold it with the shaft resting on the valve stem facing the direction that pulls the bit toward the valve. It is hard to explain but I think you will figure it out. Basically you are just looking to remove the ditch cut on the back of the intake valve and open the flow curtain a bit around the back of the exhaust valve. The angle isn't critical as any work in this area improves flow.
No way like my grandpa’s 1985 Daytona turbo 2.2? If so he got a chip which would allow a 6500 rpm vs 5500 stock… not rev but the end of the boost as I recall before the wig opened at least some and then on his gauge boost went up from 7psi to 12psi and it started to just chirp 2nd as he shifted easy due to the cables. I guess he was in his 60s and I was 11 and allowed to idle it into the garage and it was my first experience with a manual. He had 65 GTO with 421 376 tripower M22 and others well the 23 T-bucket with Ohio George built 283/301 12:1 I forget the cam and no rise 2-4 with AFB. I rode in that a lot. Once at the track low 9s mid 130s and weighed 1500ish w/o driver. Such a cool guy. He was an engineer and built the bucket from the rails up. Man I wish I had a vid… solid cam and I’ll keep one thing for me in case I ever do it it will be like that was but LS which it doesn’t need. Just finding powerpack heads and a few 283 that can take the overbore to get to 301… some flaws in casting will leak coolant.. he went through 2 blocks built until the third was gtg. That car did things like raise the tires about a half foot shifting at 8k around 80 and every time he stayed in it for about 1.5 sec I’d call it we were at 120 and if he stayed in it for a couple more 140. I watched gauges a lot as a kid. As a younger child like 3 or 4 I’d fall asleep on an easy ride.
My example is an 04 Aveo head on my car. The bowls were terrible from the factory. I used the minimal material removal down just past the valve guide area. It made more power with the same gas mileage.
@@richardholdener1727 No didn't have the correct bore for the flowbench and is was just my work car. Bought it with the timing belt broke. All new valves and guides. Piston Rings where are surprisingly stuck also.
It is indeed, but a very bad place to put it. Not a big deal in the NA cars, but holy crap does it cut through the head like a torch right there when someone is careless with octane and ambient temps.
I wonder if that casting pad causes every non intercooled bathtub car to torch the head gasket between 2 and 3 when people run 87 octane during the hot summer. I have had entirely too many friends do that. Most to the point that a chunk gets melted out of the head surface between the chambers.
I know with my own 2.2 turbo 1 engine, #3 cylinder pings worst of the others because the knock sensor can't hear it as well as the others. I've put a hole in 2 #3 pistons before switching to turbo 2 pistons, rods etc.. keep in mind that it's in a 85 GLH turbo with DC top mount intercooler, and matching DC hi-perf computer
Don't forget, if you are using the stock exhaust manifold, the turbine housing is directly under the #3 intake runner, and im sure it super heats that cyl, the log intake manifold is also known to cause uneven airflow distribution
He's heat soaking his charge air cooler over the hot turbo and exhaust manifold. Most of us agree that the DC over the top unit was a bad design. I think it looks cool as hell when you have the hood open, but form over function is blowing up engines here.
Dang IDK why you are putting so much work into a platform with the wrong rod ratio and wrong cam!!! Jokes aside I loved the video. See you at the lecture later!
Something doesn't make sense with the flow being so different between the 2 heads. 20cfm is a BIG difference and there's not that much change between the 2. I've personally messed with both of these heads and backyard ported them (no bench). You don't gain a massive amount of power just by plopping a G-head on and making sure the tune is good. It just doesn't happen, so that's what screams to me there's some sort of error here.
A fellow turbo Mopar person that has done his own testing verified to me that he has also observed this discrepancy between the 2 heads. I think maybe context is missing from this test in that the areas under the curve for the stock cam profiles of these heads isn't really represented in this video, so it's not a good way to compare them versus what people have experienced over the years because not many folks actually ran anything other than stock cams (because there was the false belief that bigger cams weren't worth it as a round about way of saying it).
Wasn't it discussed at some point that the late turbo motors(Non log) use a piston dish that is larger in volume, so when you do the G-plop compression is significantly reduced leading to a cancellation of the power developed from the increased flow? Not to mention cam profile as you've stated, as well as calibration. Don't forget how much Stu likes to stress that the TII system is exactly that. A complete system. Every part is specifically made to work with every other part. If he isn't considered a better expert than any of us, I guess he should have stayed at GM in 1982. None of us would be here talking about this if he hadn't fought the safety lawyers and the accountants every step of the way. :P His own car and a few others that he built were beating early iterations of Super 60 cars in the mid to late 80s. I always wished that they had set a higher production horsepower goal originally and maybe we could have eventually seen front mount charge air coolers packaged from the factory.
SO THE FLOW NUMBERS DON'T MAKE SENSE COMPARED TO INFO WHERE YOU HAVE NO FLOW NUMBERS TO COMPARE? I DOUBLE CHECKED THEM-THEY ARE RIGHT-AND THE G HEAD HAD BETTER FLOW ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE LIFT RANGE
Could you provide some comments around top end power for this turbo application when comparing injected alcohol as main fuel vs the comport controlled gasoline power ? Application would be in an off road application thank you
Here is a trick to try. I call it the "backyard back cut". First I put the valves in a drill press and polish them with Emory paper. Then I brush dye on them and lap them in. Then I put them back in the drill press and remove any part of the seating surface below (inside the port) the valve seat. I do this by spinning them in the drill press and using a die grinder to remove the metal. If you are worried about not being steady with the die grinder you can hold it with the shaft resting on the valve stem facing the direction that pulls the bit toward the valve. It is hard to explain but I think you will figure it out. Basically you are just looking to remove the ditch cut on the back of the intake valve and open the flow curtain a bit around the back of the exhaust valve. The angle isn't critical as any work in this area improves flow.
This the kind of stuff we want to see!😁
No way like my grandpa’s 1985 Daytona turbo 2.2? If so he got a chip which would allow a 6500 rpm vs 5500 stock… not rev but the end of the boost as I recall before the wig opened at least some and then on his gauge boost went up from 7psi to 12psi and it started to just chirp 2nd as he shifted easy due to the cables. I guess he was in his 60s and I was 11 and allowed to idle it into the garage and it was my first experience with a manual. He had 65 GTO with 421 376 tripower M22 and others well the 23 T-bucket with Ohio George built 283/301 12:1 I forget the cam and no rise 2-4 with AFB. I rode in that a lot. Once at the track low 9s mid 130s and weighed 1500ish w/o driver. Such a cool guy. He was an engineer and built the bucket from the rails up. Man I wish I had a vid… solid cam and I’ll keep one thing for me in case I ever do it it will be like that was but LS which it doesn’t need. Just finding powerpack heads and a few 283 that can take the overbore to get to 301… some flaws in casting will leak coolant.. he went through 2 blocks built until the third was gtg. That car did things like raise the tires about a half foot shifting at 8k around 80 and every time he stayed in it for about 1.5 sec I’d call it we were at 120 and if he stayed in it for a couple more 140. I watched gauges a lot as a kid. As a younger child like 3 or 4 I’d fall asleep on an easy ride.
I love this ch. his heart is in it and he is doing in the way I love. One change as manageably as possible. More power to you bro!
Had no idea, I remember growing up those cars n engine's were one's with the fans wired straight to key from dealer ship LOL
old school, new school, high tech, without air flow nothing makes real power.
My example is an 04 Aveo head on my car. The bowls were terrible from the factory. I used the minimal material removal down just past the valve guide area. It made more power with the same gas mileage.
MEASURED?
@@richardholdener1727 No didn't have the correct bore for the flowbench and is was just my work car. Bought it with the timing belt broke. All new valves and guides. Piston Rings where are surprisingly stuck also.
Ive been told the notch in one chamber is a machining index location.
It is indeed, but a very bad place to put it. Not a big deal in the NA cars, but holy crap does it cut through the head like a torch right there when someone is careless with octane and ambient temps.
dammit what did i miss
This segment brought to you by Denso "Plug in Power"
I liked the early flow of the conversation. It was all G! 🥝✔️
og
@@richardholdener1727 😁👍
I could be wrong, but Rods should come out the side somewhere between 420-500hp
I wonder if that casting pad causes every non intercooled bathtub car to torch the head gasket between 2 and 3 when people run 87 octane during the hot summer. I have had entirely too many friends do that. Most to the point that a chunk gets melted out of the head surface between the chambers.
I'M GOING TO SMOOTH IT-EVEN ON THE STOCK MOTORS
Any news from Vizard on his?
Thinking the same thing.
I can't wait for the l67 heads to get back to you
I know with my own 2.2 turbo 1 engine, #3 cylinder pings worst of the others because the knock sensor can't hear it as well as the others. I've put a hole in 2 #3 pistons before switching to turbo 2 pistons, rods etc.. keep in mind that it's in a 85 GLH turbo with DC top mount intercooler, and matching DC hi-perf computer
Don't forget, if you are using the stock exhaust manifold, the turbine housing is directly under the #3 intake runner, and im sure it super heats that cyl, the log intake manifold is also known to cause uneven airflow distribution
Research the Turbo Dodge # 4 cooling system mod that eliminates the hot spot.
He's heat soaking his charge air cooler over the hot turbo and exhaust manifold. Most of us agree that the DC over the top unit was a bad design. I think it looks cool as hell when you have the hood open, but form over function is blowing up engines here.
YEP-TOP MOUNTS ARE SILLY
Flowbench/dyno test idea: Toyota 2AR-FE head, 2AR-FXE hybrid using Frankenstein Motorworks mod using two intake cams.
The G head usually needs more timing in my experience
BIGGER CHAMBER VOLUME
Dang IDK why you are putting so much work into a platform with the wrong rod ratio and wrong cam!!!
Jokes aside I loved the video. See you at the lecture later!
I've got a 2.2 swirl head on the bench, just waiting to hear what mods it needs.
How about the chevy 2.2 ?
Something doesn't make sense with the flow being so different between the 2 heads. 20cfm is a BIG difference and there's not that much change between the 2. I've personally messed with both of these heads and backyard ported them (no bench). You don't gain a massive amount of power just by plopping a G-head on and making sure the tune is good. It just doesn't happen, so that's what screams to me there's some sort of error here.
A fellow turbo Mopar person that has done his own testing verified to me that he has also observed this discrepancy between the 2 heads. I think maybe context is missing from this test in that the areas under the curve for the stock cam profiles of these heads isn't really represented in this video, so it's not a good way to compare them versus what people have experienced over the years because not many folks actually ran anything other than stock cams (because there was the false belief that bigger cams weren't worth it as a round about way of saying it).
Wasn't it discussed at some point that the late turbo motors(Non log) use a piston dish that is larger in volume, so when you do the G-plop compression is significantly reduced leading to a cancellation of the power developed from the increased flow? Not to mention cam profile as you've stated, as well as calibration. Don't forget how much Stu likes to stress that the TII system is exactly that. A complete system. Every part is specifically made to work with every other part. If he isn't considered a better expert than any of us, I guess he should have stayed at GM in 1982. None of us would be here talking about this if he hadn't fought the safety lawyers and the accountants every step of the way. :P His own car and a few others that he built were beating early iterations of Super 60 cars in the mid to late 80s. I always wished that they had set a higher production horsepower goal originally and maybe we could have eventually seen front mount charge air coolers packaged from the factory.
Glad to see test, my Math teacher had A Fast 2.2 !
SO THE FLOW NUMBERS DON'T MAKE SENSE COMPARED TO INFO WHERE YOU HAVE NO FLOW NUMBERS TO COMPARE? I DOUBLE CHECKED THEM-THEY ARE RIGHT-AND THE G HEAD HAD BETTER FLOW ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE LIFT RANGE
I think he meant the power outputs don't make sense, not the flow numbers.
I have Intel that David Visard had a 2.2 head of yours. I'm betting the head David worked on is a whole lot better.
BETTER THAN STOCK?
where is the Vizard head...he said he sent it weeks ago!!
HE SAID THAT TO WHO?
Yes...the roller cam is the safer bet! So where did u get this sick 2.2?
AND A 2.5
Great post..what was the bore diameter used for the testing...
3.58
@@richardholdener1727 thanks
Who has the best flowing cyl head? Honda K?
Just get a BIGGER turbo!!!
Could you provide some comments around top end power for this turbo application when comparing injected alcohol as main fuel vs the comport controlled gasoline power ? Application would be in an off road application thank you
comport controlled?