I’m always floored that high quality content like this is FREE! Keep up the awesome work man. Have you ever worked on Ford 4.6 2V heads? I just picked up a Mustang GT and it needs some help for sure, apparently these heads aren’t great… Trick Flow offers a nice option but I’m wondering if you have worked on a set of stock heads?
Yeah they aren't great mate, we haven'tdone much with them. But thr layer versions, we did a lot especially with the 4v 4.6 and later boss engines when we developed the world's fastest Mk ll GT40. That was the Italian developed block.
😂👌 that's it. The sad part is there's so many die-hards that think flow numbers are the ultimate. In actual fact, our best performing heads have lost numbers on the bench but go faster in the real world. This is why I focus on velocity gradients. Over actual bench numbers. Inertia is what we are trying to optimise here, and velocity is a direct indication of how well our inertia mechanisms will work.
The 3rd is the most beneficial blend between our "harmonic" of induction tuning element and velocity/restriction over Distance (primary induction length), this is why almost all top race engines use this target. On the 2nd harmonic, our runner length needs to be far too long so now our drag coefficient suffers, limiting mass flow into the engine. So for example a 100mm runner has less restrictions then a 150mm runner. But we also need to balance the volume in a mechanism I call the "gulp effect". "Replacement ratio" And again we find most top primary induction lengths in motorsport are designed to be between 90-95% of the cylinder they are replacing. This also feeds into a complex secondary mechanism in the plenum. Which if the runner is too long and has too much volume, the secondary signals will be weaker. But yes our harmonic elements will have more strength, around 8% on the 2nd harmonic instead of around 5% but the restrictions will be far greater 10-15% loss due to the length of the primary induction passage. Distance over time creates restriction. Then there's some surface area factors and surface Ra factors that play a part. As far as a formula, I have my own formula that Ive designed and use with different density, temperature and speed, factors. But a general 1100fps for sound will get you close 👌 I will hopefully have our induction calculators back up in the coming months, I think I have a very basic 3rd harmonic calculator in there. They were all on my old site. We just need to get them up on the new one.
@@bainracing Looking forward to the new site. Is the restriction caused by the additional length due to the boundary layer? RE formula: makes sense, seems most out there are empirically derived (the old Chrysler one comes to mind). I have some questions on setting up valve events on VVT to work with the induction tuning but that’s a discussion for another time.
@@XX-nw1xg Yeah distance over time. total "Drag" increases with the 2nd harmonic as we need 50% more length so that's more drag. This is obviously why we use the MCSA and the taper with Average CSA to reduce total Drag even at 3rd harmonic lengths. we also see this with Ra factors improving hp by 2-3%. 100-200Ra seems to be the area of least drag. I think the Princeton university came to similar results. But the 2nd just kills HP and it clearly shows much more Thickening of the boundary condition, as we can see VE's Fall hard with RPM. This indicates a clear density shift, this is from Higher velocity, and if the CSA hasn't changed then that only leaves the boundary conditions, this is the dynamic element here.
@@bainracing thanks for the replies and great info. I have an m52tu, hoping to optimize the above (mathing it out at the moment). Been reading Blair’s 4 stroke book, time areas and whatnot. VVT is adding a lot of variation to my calculations so has been a challenge. Any recommendations?
@XX-nw1xg mate, you just have to pick your best averages off the cam timing number in the area needed. focus on peak torque to the Max power area. I like harmonic length to tip before peak RPM, so we are generally 0.100-0.200" longer. Helps the average HP numbers.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
Can’t wait to piece this monster together and see what it can do accompanied by all the other components! Great work thanks Jake 🤟🏻
You and me both!
awesome content, thanks for sharing!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I’m always floored that high quality content like this is FREE! Keep up the awesome work man. Have you ever worked on Ford 4.6 2V heads? I just picked up a Mustang GT and it needs some help for sure, apparently these heads aren’t great… Trick Flow offers a nice option but I’m wondering if you have worked on a set of stock heads?
Yeah they aren't great mate, we haven'tdone much with them. But thr layer versions, we did a lot especially with the 4v 4.6 and later boss engines when we developed the world's fastest Mk ll GT40. That was the Italian developed block.
Awesome work!
No flowbench races today? 😄
😂👌 that's it. The sad part is there's so many die-hards that think flow numbers are the ultimate. In actual fact, our best performing heads have lost numbers on the bench but go faster in the real world. This is why I focus on velocity gradients. Over actual bench numbers. Inertia is what we are trying to optimise here, and velocity is a direct indication of how well our inertia mechanisms will work.
Hey Jake, why do you target the 3rd vs 2nd harmonic. Also curious which formula you’re using to calculate intake length. Thanks
The 3rd is the most beneficial blend between our "harmonic" of induction tuning element and velocity/restriction over Distance (primary induction length), this is why almost all top race engines use this target.
On the 2nd harmonic, our runner length needs to be far too long so now our drag coefficient suffers, limiting mass flow into the engine.
So for example a 100mm runner has less restrictions then a 150mm runner.
But we also need to balance the volume in a mechanism I call the "gulp effect". "Replacement ratio"
And again we find most top primary induction lengths in motorsport are designed to be between 90-95% of the cylinder they are replacing.
This also feeds into a complex secondary mechanism in the plenum. Which if the runner is too long and has too much volume, the secondary signals will be weaker.
But yes our harmonic elements will have more strength, around 8% on the 2nd harmonic instead of around 5% but the restrictions will be far greater 10-15% loss due to the length of the primary induction passage. Distance over time creates restriction. Then there's some surface area factors and surface Ra factors that play a part.
As far as a formula, I have my own formula that Ive designed and use with different density, temperature and speed, factors. But a general 1100fps for sound will get you close 👌
I will hopefully have our induction calculators back up in the coming months, I think I have a very basic 3rd harmonic calculator in there.
They were all on my old site. We just need to get them up on the new one.
@@bainracing Looking forward to the new site. Is the restriction caused by the additional length due to the boundary layer? RE formula: makes sense, seems most out there are empirically derived (the old Chrysler one comes to mind). I have some questions on setting up valve events on VVT to work with the induction tuning but that’s a discussion for another time.
@@XX-nw1xg Yeah distance over time. total "Drag" increases with the 2nd harmonic as we need 50% more length so that's more drag. This is obviously why we use the MCSA and the taper with Average CSA to reduce total Drag even at 3rd harmonic lengths. we also see this with Ra factors improving hp by 2-3%. 100-200Ra seems to be the area of least drag. I think the Princeton university came to similar results. But the 2nd just kills HP and it clearly shows much more Thickening of the boundary condition, as we can see VE's Fall hard with RPM. This indicates a clear density shift, this is from Higher velocity, and if the CSA hasn't changed then that only leaves the boundary conditions, this is the dynamic element here.
@@bainracing thanks for the replies and great info. I have an m52tu, hoping to optimize the above (mathing it out at the moment). Been reading Blair’s 4 stroke book, time areas and whatnot. VVT is adding a lot of variation to my calculations so has been a challenge. Any recommendations?
@XX-nw1xg mate, you just have to pick your best averages off the cam timing number in the area needed. focus on peak torque to the Max power area. I like harmonic length to tip before peak RPM, so we are generally 0.100-0.200" longer. Helps the average HP numbers.