WOULD YOU TRIM THE GASKET IN THE PHOTO BECAUSE IT OVERHANGS THE EDGE OF THE PORT? WOULD IT BE WORTH ANY POWER? I GOT UNRECOGNIZED? ON THE STREET THE OTHER DAY!
I would trim it, not because I’m OCD…. But because it’s easy to trim it and it’s right there in front of me. But you are correct… there are 3 things to consider. Cross sectional area of all 3 components.
Hi Richard, I purchased a Edelbrock TM-1 manifold in the 70s and I actually read the install instructions and they read Do not port match this manifold, Gasket match head only. The manifold was smaller than the head and they said this is to stop reversion! Basic stock 40 over 350 hp 327 balanced ported and roughed intake ports 461 😁2.02 heads exhaust ports round and polished. 12 bolt 5: 13 gears Muncie 4 spd. run low 12.50s rev to moon and a blast to drive
@@richardholdener1727 . Are you asking or do you not believe there is reversion? There's supposedly a pressure wave of energy that can pulse back at some rpm ranges and the lip of the smaller manifold suppresses some of it. I'm debating on porting the openings of my Performer RPM intake to a little smaller than the intake ports on the head. Maybe only raise the roof of the "good ports" toward the straight wall (top of intake exit would slant) and go all the way across on the "bad ports" to attempt to equalize flow/mixture. No matter what I'd probably leave the lip at the bottom. Or maybe I'll leave em alone, just bolt it on and not worry about it! Lol 🤣
Richard - I would love to see a Gen 1 chevy 383 Dart SHP block, good internals, big turbo setup pushed to its breaking point on the big bang series. I feel this is budget-minded but not junk yard for guys like me that love to tinker and make big power without going latest tech and spending big money.
Are all the big bang motor just factory bottom ends with good topends pushed to failure? I am just curious what the breaking point of a decent but not topshelf SBC would be.
Live stream ended before I could find the David Vizard reference for blocking off a SBC port to gain low RPM torque. "How to port and flow test cylinder heads" by DV pages 135-137. I fought his results very interesting.
If i had my way, I'd pin the gaskets, bolt the intake and head(s) together with the gasket installed, then have the whole rig extrude honed as one piece..
@Lee Mathis even being a strict drag race engine, I don't know that you would gain anything. I think you mentioned that you were running a 5.3, with that block, unless you're running in excess of like 45lbs of boost, cylinder bore stability should not be an issue and your money could be better spent elsewhere.
I (STILL) find it hilarious of how "PORT VELOCITY" and "PORT SIZE VS CFM" went right out the window when the LSX stuff started getting cranked out! It's like they fed us bullshit all those years until they finally made a engine worthwhile with the LSX and said screw the old school stuff. Think about it... New "LSX" ports on the avg run 235-240ish cc intake port size... And their flow CFM max is like 350-360ish..... TF CNC HEAD FLOW.. 255cc intake port, flows 363CFM @.600 12* HEAD 1.423 CFM PER CC.......VS...... AFR COMP ELIMINATOR 195CC INTAKE PORT 23* HEAD 306CFM @.600 = 1.569 CFM PER CC... Which has more cfm vs cc of size?!? WOW! But that is less (FAR LESS) as compared to say a AFR 195cc port with 306CFM... I mean it's crazy how they just killed smaller ports when the LSX stuff is the same bore size generally at 4"-4.1" in size like a traditional SBC yet they throw these big port heads acting like they are the greatest thing since sliced bread when pound for pound old school 23* designs outflow them port size vs cfm flow wise... Craziest stuff i ever seen Richard.. I know you just test and work with what MFG's make.. But you got to admit this happened and how they changed everything once the LSX stuff came out, like they did a 180 and pretended everything they said back in the day never happened.. Keep up the great work as always man! Adam
@@hillbillydeluxe08 I couldn't tell you from the dr seat but I've had to add about 20% fuel to the base tables in the ECM to bring the long term correction back to zero.
@@cromBumny supposedly there is something in the works for that. There also was one WAY back in the day. I believe it was a Brazilian touring car. They used a 4.0 short block and a gear driven, dual overhead cam, crossflow head. I've seen the video, it's wild.
If you live between 0 and 4500 rpm it probably not make a difference If you live all day long from 5000 to 10,000 many you’d be picky Spend your time and money on bushing and or ball joints for the front end Your front tires will thank you and your arms will thank you
I saw a video from Headgames last night saying that port matching reduces flow speed. Better not port match for a low end torque engine like an AMC 258?
@@rockroll9513 thank you very very much. Yeah I figured.. If it was motorcycle or the small and big block stuff I'd be all set. I've never done any LS stuff but I know the cast iron is stronger but I just wasn't sure if an aluminum block would handle being boosted and making 1500 horse
@@richardholdener1727 I know and you have actually seen me use your mismatch picture to show guys that even with that mismatch you can still go mid 11s with a peanut port 454 and a rectangle intake! Many guys told me it won’t even run never mind run good! 😀
I have a 12 3.7 mustang Manley rods and pistons ect. I port matched/ gasket matched on my fresh rebuild. I was dealing with plastic intake / stainless steel headers I spent about 4-6 hours total. I had to modify header gasket as it was to small. Fix runners in plastic intake. Before my rebuild my best dyno was 309whp@ 7100. After with gasket matching/port matching I hit 314whp @7200. Im sure most of you Muscle cars guys laughing at a v6. My point is im one of the guys who could never leave gasket alone i would have to fix it.
@@richardholdener1727 hey Richard love your knowledge ! It’s just frustrating when I’m working on my Chevelle a commercial comes on it seems like every 5 minutes or so and I have to cancel it so often ! Anyway I don’t sit around while listening and I imagine a lot of other of your viewers don’t either but it’s not stopping me from continuing to watch your channel dude ! Love your stuff keep doing it ! 👌😎🇺🇸
![[UNCUT] ที่นี่ที่แรก ปู - หาญส์ พูดถึงมหากาพย์หนี้สิ้น I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 10 ก.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KDNA9DZ0p4U/mqdefault.jpg)
Trim...you can't gain 100hp in one place but like this, you can gain 1hp in a hundred places. Definately trim!
I would trim it, not because I’m OCD…. But because it’s easy to trim it and it’s right there in front of me. But you are correct… there are 3 things to consider. Cross sectional area of all 3 components.
Hi Richard, I purchased a Edelbrock TM-1 manifold in the 70s and I actually read the install instructions and they read Do not port match this manifold, Gasket match head only. The manifold was smaller than the head and they said this is to stop reversion! Basic stock 40 over 350 hp 327 balanced ported and roughed intake ports 461 😁2.02 heads exhaust ports round and polished. 12 bolt 5: 13 gears Muncie 4 spd. run low 12.50s rev to moon and a blast to drive
stop reversion?
@@richardholdener1727 . Are you asking or do you not believe there is reversion? There's supposedly a pressure wave of energy that can pulse back at some rpm ranges and the lip of the smaller manifold suppresses some of it. I'm debating on porting the openings of my Performer RPM intake to a little smaller than the intake ports on the head. Maybe only raise the roof of the "good ports" toward the straight wall (top of intake exit would slant) and go all the way across on the "bad ports" to attempt to equalize flow/mixture. No matter what I'd probably leave the lip at the bottom. Or maybe I'll leave em alone, just bolt it on and not worry about it! Lol 🤣
Richard - I would love to see a Gen 1 chevy 383 Dart SHP block, good internals, big turbo setup pushed to its breaking point on the big bang series. I feel this is budget-minded but not junk yard for guys like me that love to tinker and make big power without going latest tech and spending big money.
a built 383 is not Big Bang-that is a dedicated turbo build-why would you want to break that?
Are all the big bang motor just factory bottom ends with good topends pushed to failure? I am just curious what the breaking point of a decent but not topshelf SBC would be.
Live stream ended before I could find the David Vizard reference for blocking off a SBC port to gain low RPM torque. "How to port and flow test cylinder heads" by DV pages 135-137. I fought his results very interesting.
If i had my way, I'd pin the gaskets, bolt the intake and head(s) together with the gasket installed, then have the whole rig extrude honed as one piece..
I drill and pin my intakes to the heads and mark the intake gaskets L&R and stamp the heads L&R to make sure they assemble correctly.
Right at beginning of the video is always the best part :)
the live feeds all have the same format-topic discussion followed by q&a
@Lee Mathis even being a strict drag race engine, I don't know that you would gain anything. I think you mentioned that you were running a 5.3, with that block, unless you're running in excess of like 45lbs of boost, cylinder bore stability should not be an issue and your money could be better spent elsewhere.
I (STILL) find it hilarious of how "PORT VELOCITY" and "PORT SIZE VS CFM" went right out the window when the LSX stuff started getting cranked out!
It's like they fed us bullshit all those years until they finally made a engine worthwhile with the LSX and said screw the old school stuff.
Think about it...
New "LSX" ports on the avg run 235-240ish cc intake port size... And their flow CFM max is like 350-360ish..... TF CNC HEAD FLOW.. 255cc intake port, flows 363CFM @.600 12* HEAD 1.423 CFM PER CC.......VS...... AFR COMP ELIMINATOR 195CC INTAKE PORT 23* HEAD 306CFM @.600 = 1.569 CFM PER CC... Which has more cfm vs cc of size?!? WOW!
But that is less (FAR LESS) as compared to say a AFR 195cc port with 306CFM... I mean it's crazy how they just killed smaller ports when the LSX stuff is the same bore size generally at 4"-4.1" in size like a traditional SBC yet they throw these big port heads acting like they are the greatest thing since sliced bread when pound for pound old school 23* designs outflow them port size vs cfm flow wise...
Craziest stuff i ever seen Richard.. I know you just test and work with what MFG's make.. But you got to admit this happened and how they changed everything once the LSX stuff came out, like they did a 180 and pretended everything they said back in the day never happened..
Keep up the great work as always man!
Adam
I used the gasket as a template on my Jeep 4.0. Ported the intake, head, and exhaust to match the gasket.
Overall did you experience any difference?
@@hillbillydeluxe08 I couldn't tell you from the dr seat but I've had to add about 20% fuel to the base tables in the ECM to bring the long term correction back to zero.
An aside: I wish someone had made a cross flow jeep 4.0 head
@@cromBumny supposedly there is something in the works for that. There also was one WAY back in the day. I believe it was a Brazilian touring car. They used a 4.0 short block and a gear driven, dual overhead cam, crossflow head. I've seen the video, it's wild.
@@cromBumny th-cam.com/video/RUW65S0JZtw/w-d-xo.html
If you live between 0 and 4500 rpm it probably not make a difference
If you live all day long from 5000 to 10,000 many you’d be picky
Spend your time and money on bushing and or ball joints for the front end
Your front tires will thank you and your arms will thank you
i did the scribed intake to head port match lol. Didnt dowel it, just punched two locating marks
I saw a video from Headgames last night saying that port matching reduces flow speed. Better not port match for a low end torque engine like an AMC 258?
I would only trim if on the roof of port
Question is. If you were building an LS motor and were shooting for 1200 plus hp
Would you use an iron or aluminum block. And why please.
Iron. Stronger. Unless it's an LSx block.
@@rockroll9513 thank you very very much. Yeah I figured..
If it was motorcycle or the small and big block stuff I'd be all set.
I've never done any LS stuff but I know the cast iron is stronger but I just wasn't sure if an aluminum block would handle being boosted and making 1500 horse
either iron or the l33/lc9 alum 5.3l
How about my rectangular port intake on a peanut port head! On my 454 that throws the whole theory out the window!
we have done that
@@richardholdener1727 I know and you have actually seen me use your mismatch picture to show guys that even with that mismatch you can still go mid 11s with a peanut port 454 and a rectangle intake! Many guys told me it won’t even run never mind run good! 😀
I have a 12 3.7 mustang Manley rods and pistons ect. I port matched/ gasket matched on my fresh rebuild. I was dealing with plastic intake / stainless steel headers I spent about 4-6 hours total. I had to modify header gasket as it was to small. Fix runners in plastic intake. Before my rebuild my best dyno was 309whp@ 7100. After with gasket matching/port matching I hit 314whp @7200. Im sure most of you Muscle cars guys laughing at a v6. My point is im one of the guys who could never leave gasket alone i would have to fix it.
Send it back to autozone 🤣... I want my money back it doesn't fit
Race engine yes street car no
I’d get a new gasket
You absolutely should have stopped and talked to those guys. Would have made their week.
You have more commercials than content ! 💩
So I have 1 full hour of commercials? maybe a touch of an exaggeration
@@richardholdener1727 hey Richard love your knowledge ! It’s just frustrating when I’m working on my Chevelle a commercial comes on it seems like every 5 minutes or so and I have to cancel it so often ! Anyway I don’t sit around while listening and I imagine a lot of other of your viewers don’t either but it’s not stopping me from continuing to watch your channel dude ! Love your stuff keep doing it ! 👌😎🇺🇸