Jim Hand is known for flowing his ported Pontiac iron heads with the intake and carb bolted on. Back in the day he shared 260 cfm flow but many didn’t realize it was a “Net” flow accounting for the intake and carb held at WOT. JD
A Ford FE, it is really important to flow through the intake manifold, it comprises half of the head port. Surprisingly a well done intake manifolds can improve the net flow. If take a Trick Flow set off heads and a Track Heat and just stick with the design and just put a little work and a great valve job, it will surprise you what the net flow comes out to. Ford did this with the FE and came up with surprisingly good results with iron heads and performance LR,MR,HR intake manifolds with flow and dyno work. The FE was kicked around by many magazines because they didn’t understand how they developed them. Many porters schooled on other engines would throw off the balance and go backwards. Getting the. manifold in the picture really helped because that is how they were developed, as an operating unit.
I’ve had mixed results removing the dividers out of the plenum. Was able to make back to back dyno tests with as close to the same environmental s as possible. Gained 20 hp on a 355c.i. with 200cc heads. Later on we tried it on a very similar engine to the first one. Only difference was 220cc heads on a 355. Was not back to back but close environmentals. Didn’t seem to help. I would have to cut the dividers back and radius the inlet to the ports.
This isnt stupid testing. After you talked about intake port alignment this is crucial. I have tried to explain to people why a tpi small block wont make more than 400hp no matter what heads are on it because the intake is the equivalent of a restrictor plate.
@@tiitsaul9036 they're actually 17 inches long my guess was way off. however a 13 inch running length intake isn't making peak torque at 5,000 rpm that would be like a 7,500 rpm engine
@@konnerkramer329 a gen 3 coyote has an intake runner almost an inch longer than a tpi intake. Its not the length. The Gt350 has the same length as a coyote intake and they make peak power over 7000 revs. Flow test a good fitting tpi intake bolted together to a head and you will find every port flows less than 200cfm. They dont flow enough to make much over 400hp no matter the engine underneath.
@@timothybayliss6680 well no shit cfm plays a part in rpm range. so does displacement... a coyote is 300 cubic inches and a tpi is 350. you have heads that flow 290cfm with an intake that flows 290cfm on a 300 cubic inch engine depending on the cam its going to want to rev higher rpm. if you really want to talk about coyotes look the f150 intake vs the boss intake. just by changing and intake you change the power band over a 1,000 rpm. both intakes flow very close to the same just had different running lenths. 2015-2018 they had the same cams. the only difference was the intakes yet one engine would rev over 7,000 rpm and still make power while the other stopped making power over 6,000 rpm. yes running length plays a part in rpm.
@@konnerkramer329 really tpi engines are 350?, There isnt any 305 tpi engines? The voodoo is 314 cubes. You are acting like there hasnt been gen1 sbc heads that flow more than 290cfm or camshafts with usable duration for as long as there has been tpi intakes filling wrecking yards. In testing of intakes by Automototune on a cams/headers gen3 coyote a ported gen3 intake made more peak power, peak torque and more power over 6700rpm compared to a CJ intake. Its not the length. A stock Gen3 coyote intake was better than a boss 302 intake EVERYWHERE and made peak power more than 400rpm later. Even the gen3 truck intake (longest runners of the test) made peak power 150rpm earlier than the CobraJet intake(shortest runners of the test). The stock truck intake makes peak power over 6400 in this test with intake runners five inches longer than a tpi intake. When is the last time you saw a tpi engine make peak power at 6400rpm? Watch any test you can find of a tpi intake on a flowbench bolted to a head and a stock production tpi intake. The intakes do not flow enough air to make more that about 400hp. They have insufficient and inconsistent taper. You can make more than 440hp with a cams/header on a l31 longblock and a RPM airgap. How many 440hp engines have you seen with stock tpi intake?
Really illustrates how much air doesn't like to turn. My guess on why it flowed worse when you had 1 hole lined up nice versus when the whole spacer was centered is that you actually had more open area overall with the spacer centered than with the one hole lined up. Just a guess.
An electrical engineer figured this out years ago. Flow works better when it swirls. His stock heads still holds nhra records today. Rip D Wink he was at engine masters challenge 2013
Awesome work and great info!! Have you done any testing or porting with Ford 4.6 2v heads? I'm about to home port stock 4.6 2v heads. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks!
What's your thoughts on the large plenum conversion from 417 motorsports that cuts the carb flange off and welds a larger elbow flange on. I was told it almost doubles the surface area opening.
You would think since this manifold was probably designed in CAD they would have taken these issues into consideration. Especially for the money the end user spends on it.
I run a nitrous motor and it will be cool to see how much a 90 degree nozzle effects air flow versus an annular nozzle? Is it worth the time welding bungs into the intake to recess the annular’s or just drill and tap for a 90° nozzle? Would be interesting to know. Thanks Eric, I have learned more from your videos about porting, valves, valve angle and cylinder heads than any book could ever teach we all really appreciate your time. Eddie wheels 😬🧑🏻🦽👍.
Id like to see those dividers cut back flush to the port opening to a nice inverted taper and see how much it flows then. I think those aero foiled spacers should be flat to flat with the carb and the foil pointing down?
It looks to me the more clear path to the port.would be from the rear barrel , not the front one just over the port, the divider seems to disturb the line of sight, you should design a intake manifold, there is ppl on TH-cam who cast things, with 3D printers, it should not be difficult to get one made to pull a mold from, make a couple fixtures, to make machining easier, a mill should be all that is needed to get the basic flanges milled and such, then do your porting magic! Either make a limited run here in the USA , or maybe get a Chinese foundry to cast the ship them semi raw, having a top plate that can be flipped over to go from 4150 to dominator would be cool, probably require a spacer for the 4150 carb to actually fit properly, linkage to clear, have your name embossed over the runner, it would look awesome!
Do you by chance have flow numbers for the intake factory vs ported "without being bolted to the head"? Curious what the differences were vs the numbers that you got bolted to the head.
Seems like a ported intake gives similar gains to a flowed head, which gave me an idea. Can you compare a stock head with a ported intake against a flowed head with a stock intake?
you may want to sum all the numbers as well. "power under the curve" that will show a difference per cylinder as well, that might be a little more explicit vs. looking a the table
If you check David Vizard Performance Channel it will explain some of results you got. The flow on the unported manifold to me appears to coming from the throttle throat diagonally opposite not the closest as the corner is to tight.
If you could edit, flow all four ports on one bank atleast, then spray the intake , taking a snapshot from video, and stitch them together making an animation of the dye chem adding up in the intake, if you had time and patience, do all eight cylinders, stitch together in the firing order,. I don't know how to do it, just the idea to do it! This could tell a interesting story, if nothing else , it can be done with a film camera, and make a flip animation, showing the dye build up, then the order could be changed for firing order swaps, what, 4&7, 3&6? Last I was paying any real attention the 4&7 swap was getting popular, Id like to build a slight radical flat plane engine, about 3.50" -3.80" 3.850" crank maybe use a 400 block, possibly build a balance shaft that can be added either machine the block at the filter side of the pan rail,try squeezing it in there, modified oil pan and timing cover, and damper, to allow a chain to spin the balance shaft, or put it in the valley above the cam, like the 4.3v6 and 3.8L, machine flats on the block below the deck, to allow some bearing blocks to be wedged inat least the ends and one center, then machined the front of the block to allow a chain drive and cover, possibly a custom timing cover using a spacer and flat cover, making a cam swap easy, no need to drop the pan, possibly machine the block down, with a hole, for the shaft pass through, maybe machine flats on the oil gallery, to allow tapping for oil to the bearings, with restrictions, probably use roller bearing, may as well tap and screen drain backs , and add vent tubes also. But while machining the block, and building a balance shaft, use the bearings a V6 bal shaft uses, fitted into an alum. Plate, that is wedged into the valley, and bolted impossible. Use a brace between the Bering mounts that can be used as pushrod guide plates aswell, or to bolt guides on to, that could be useful in a high rpm engine , with relatively small pushrods with the bracing bolding into the front and rear of the block, and into the bearing retainer, made from 1" plate aluminum, with a slot through them allowing the brace to fit, and bolt in with a 6mm bolt, and a dowel, probably a . 750" x 1.250" brace, with flats machined in the block front and rear, with a 6mm cone seat bolt, to flush fit, to not stand out on the outside of the block, and use lock tight, to seal the brace to the block, and the cone and threads, so it should not leak oil, use a tiny copper line to feed the oil into the bearing blocks, that would be tapped and passages drilled to feed the oil to the bearings, use the center bearing blocks as a tee, to fees the other bearings, if someone wanted, they could use the braces to feed the oil, then only a single line from block to brace to feed oil, the top of the bearing blocks should be flush with the deck, and left in place if decked, so the head intake port area can work as a secondary means to secure the bearing blocks, depending on the weight of the balance shaft, 2bearings can be enough, using 1.5" or 1.75" or even 2" steel bar, with the ends turned down to fit the bearings, and sprocket, the counter. Weight can be turned and or machined eccentric , possibly modifying the cam sprocket, making the mounting area thinner, only .125" or less if possible, then machine a gear drive for the bal. shaft, (or sprocket and chain,) machine the block above the timing cover, then make a plate to make it flush with the timing cover, either brase or epoxy it in, with a bolt or two, then a spacer, the thickness of the timing cover, with the lip to fit in the oil pan to make the seal, then a o-ring cord seal groove in both sides of the spacer, with a load of .250" cone seat Allen bolts to fit a timing cover 3/16" -1/4" plate possibly weld in a thicker piece of aluminum to be machined to hold the front seal, wit the added area on top below the intake, possibly making a trapezoid shape, angle in from the water pump, then up to the intake base, an be flat across, I think it would look the part! Not really stand out, maybe the flat timing cover would be thick enough us use dowel pins along with the cone seat bolts, it should align properly each time reinstalled, probably add two dowl pins in the top about the water pump area! It should seal well using o-rings and o-ring cord, with the spacer being thick as possible and still clear the damper, placing the seal at the proper location, maybe machine it from a .500" plate alum. Weld the seal area thicker if required, then machine the thickness down and drill the bolt holes with the added 9-12 not all going into the block, 2-3 in the bottom at the oil pan, 7-9 above the water pump, if it were to go back to a cross plane crank, the cam swap, remove the bal. Shaft, plug the oil output, in the block, remove the bearing if needed, bit not required, leave the braces to keep the seal of the block, a new timing set, the only thing would be the new timing cover that stays with the block now,, the bearing blocks and braces may very slightly brace the block, basically a groove with an aluminum plate wedged in it, use epoxy to prevent movement, then braces bolted in on each end of the block, with similar grooves, using lock tight to glue/ seal them in, then as for a intake, I think I'd bet a fairly large single plane, and basically cut the top off it, and make a new one from wood, only to plenum area, make the wood fit the intake, then make it larger flaring out about 2" in all directions, possibly make a top bolt on to allow different carb options after the wood is shaped and fitted, smoothed, and sealed then cast it from aluminum welding it on the intake runners, possibly welding the runners thicker, near the new plenum, and weld the plenum thicker to match, smooth and shape it to look normal, the the runners have room to fit the new plenum better, allowing a dominator if it's wanted, with a custom top plate, what I'm thinking is a plate similar to the dominator plate, using a pair a 500 Holley 2bbls, mounted back to back, , being a flat plane crank, the top plate would have a divider plate hanging from it, filling nearly the whole plenum, being the engine is 2x 4 cylinder engines sharing a intake and crank, after the welding and grinding I'd glass bead the exterior hard to get a uniform look, maybe go to something a bit more harsh, wire brush, sand paper roll, then glass beads, then do some flow testing, to see how the divided plenum flows, maybe drill a couple 1" -1.5" holes in the divider, it can change the power curve, removing dips at certain RPM, or cause them, throughout the rev range, a Dyno test would be required to see exactly what it needs, maybe stat with none, add one small hole, see what it does, then another, if it's good,. Make them large if that's no good, replace the divider, a flat plane crank 4.155 bore, 3.5" stroke , (maybe upwards of 3.850") running 12:1 , 2.125"-1.55" about 50-54cc heads 250runners, roughly. 600" lift , 250° @ .050" all rough specs, with a 500 Holley per bank, 1:1 linkage, annular boosters, being a street engine maybe put a tiny heating coil in the intake floor, to heat a roughly 1.5" area to about 200° when cold to evaporate the fuel when cold, just a coil of wire like a old cook stove burner, hanging from a plate under the carb, pulling about 10amps, making about 120-140 watt heater, it can help re vaporize fuel when in normal use, wit it about .100" off the floor, crazy idea, but diesel engines use thing like this, as long as it's keep below the fuels flash point,. Just hot enough to boil any fuel that gets on it, and be small enough to not heat the air excessively! Could be the next thing for street engines since chokes!
Could it be possible to try cutting the devider flange flush with the carb opening and sharpening the edge? There's also still a bit of extra material at the "short side" on that particular runner.
You almost took the words outta my mouth. I also would like to see the runner dividers cut back to the opening. Get them right out of the way. Yes the total runner length would likely be too short. But the gain in dry and wet airflow and fuel cloud quality would very likely make more average power anyways? I would not sharpen the remaining cut back divider walls but radius them all kinda like they are now. The problem with this is. Regardless of the flow bench results. All these ideas can only shpw gain or loss on a engine dyno. The flow bench on its own won't prove out what way makes more power. Anyhow. To Eric. Great video. Super interesting as usual.👍
@@mohanperformance.enginerd.1308 blunt edge creates turbulence, where sharp egde keeps the flow laminar on wider area, that's my reasoning for the sharp divider. Sharp dividers have been proven working on 4-valve heads, although the difference being simultaenous flow on both sides of the divider. There could be a medium, perhaps? Sharp point but radius sides? This would give the runner a "velocystack" effect with minimal turbulence from the edge.
@@oikkuoek well, I agree on a 4 valve. A sharp divider is likely best. As you mention the air on both sides of a 4 valve runner is directed toward the valve area. However, on a two valve engine. In a plenume. The air is not traveling toward the valve but more often in a violent chaotic hurricane. Some air as it swaps or washes around from one runner opening to another. Is dragged sidways across the sharpend divider. This almost always "IMO" creates turbulence right at the runner opening which you can imagine is a disaster. So If I understand you correctly. Then I would disagree. Radiused divider entries will almost always work best. This is a long ongoing debate. My cards are on a radius divider entry.
@@mohanperformance.enginerd.1308 You do have a point there. But I still have one but. When all the cylinders share the fuel delivery, and these deviders are casted to prevent the robbery from the cylinder next door, more runner lenght - more torque =more fuel mix ready behind the valve when it opens, a sharp devider would aim the upstream flow towards the carb, and less robbing the nearest cylinder, that is already suffering from the shorter runner, where blunt runner allows the robbery and decreases the cross section of the runner opening. On shared plenum, the optimal situation is laminar flow from the runner opening to the valve, and full turbulance at the shared section, to keep the air/fuel mixture even and flowing, to prevent condensing droplets forming.
@@oikkuoek your thinking is good. But in real life it does not work out. From my experiance in a plenume designed intake. Sharp edges rip the air to shreds and efectively close down the opening CSA they make less power every time. I have many hours testing in this area my self and so I can only tell you my results. But sharp edges are a deal killer! In a 4 valve. I also sharpen them like a knife. That is a application where it is benificial. But a v8 4 bbl intake with sharp edges will never work. Your right about what you are saying in regard to intake opening placement runner length and so on. But that is significantly overuled when the edges are sharp. Big no no IMO. A 4 bbl intake. At best, is a series of comprimises anyways.
To me I don’t like the flanges in my manifold all 4 of those I would cut back so the air and fuel don’t have to fight there way around them so it will give them more of a straight run like my SB 454 Motown snd my 496 BB but mine are street cars
@@WeingartnerRacing I guess I meant to say that I've seen people fsay they flow the head at 280 on a bench let's say and the manifold by itself they want it to flow over 300 by itself so the total flow doesn't drop to far below what the head flows itself when combined Does this sound correct?
Does forced induction throw all these numbers out the window? Or is it basically good flow flows even better with charge psi? ... Awesome work and great content. !
with forced induction you need good flow or you are compressing the charge in the manifold and runners which is generating heat for no benefit possibly causing early detonation
With the port going into reversion after .800 lift and the CFM gains above .700 lift not substantial enough to justify the energy required to run a stiff spring up there any higher, would this head/intake example suit a camshaft with lift somewhere in the .670-.690 range max ? ...or am I missing something ? Why do you refer to the peak AFTER the port reversion ?
He tests up to an inch because it can indicate stability. If you go up from .7 to .8 lift and flow goes down it tells you that something is going on in the port and is useful data even if youre only running a .680 lift cam.
Jim Hand is known for flowing his ported Pontiac iron heads with the intake and carb bolted on. Back in the day he shared 260 cfm flow but many didn’t realize it was a “Net” flow accounting for the intake and carb held at WOT. JD
I've always wanted to see testing done with the intake on for some real world testing, thanks!
A Ford FE, it is really important to flow through the intake manifold, it comprises half of the head port. Surprisingly a well done intake manifolds can improve the net flow. If take a Trick Flow set off heads and a Track Heat and just stick with the design and just put a little work and a great valve job, it will surprise you what the net flow comes out to. Ford did this with the FE and came up with surprisingly good results with iron heads and performance LR,MR,HR intake manifolds with flow and dyno work. The FE was kicked around by many magazines because they didn’t understand how they developed them. Many porters schooled on other engines would throw off the balance and go backwards. Getting the. manifold in the picture really helped because that is how they were developed, as an operating unit.
I’ve had mixed results removing the dividers out of the plenum.
Was able to make back to back dyno tests with as close to the same environmental s as possible.
Gained 20 hp on a 355c.i. with 200cc heads.
Later on we tried it on a very similar engine to the first one. Only difference was 220cc heads on a 355.
Was not back to back but close environmentals.
Didn’t seem to help.
I would have to cut the dividers back and radius the inlet to the ports.
I remember when Weiand Team G intakes were the shizznit for SBC,
Always very informative
This isnt stupid testing. After you talked about intake port alignment this is crucial. I have tried to explain to people why a tpi small block wont make more than 400hp no matter what heads are on it because the intake is the equivalent of a restrictor plate.
also because the intake runners are like 13 inches long and have a power band of like idle to 4,000 rpm
@@tiitsaul9036 they're actually 17 inches long my guess was way off. however a 13 inch running length intake isn't making peak torque at 5,000 rpm that would be like a 7,500 rpm engine
@@konnerkramer329 a gen 3 coyote has an intake runner almost an inch longer than a tpi intake. Its not the length. The Gt350 has the same length as a coyote intake and they make peak power over 7000 revs.
Flow test a good fitting tpi intake bolted together to a head and you will find every port flows less than 200cfm. They dont flow enough to make much over 400hp no matter the engine underneath.
@@timothybayliss6680 well no shit cfm plays a part in rpm range. so does displacement... a coyote is 300 cubic inches and a tpi is 350. you have heads that flow 290cfm with an intake that flows 290cfm on a 300 cubic inch engine depending on the cam its going to want to rev higher rpm. if you really want to talk about coyotes look the f150 intake vs the boss intake. just by changing and intake you change the power band over a 1,000 rpm. both intakes flow very close to the same just had different running lenths. 2015-2018 they had the same cams. the only difference was the intakes yet one engine would rev over 7,000 rpm and still make power while the other stopped making power over 6,000 rpm. yes running length plays a part in rpm.
@@konnerkramer329 really tpi engines are 350?, There isnt any 305 tpi engines? The voodoo is 314 cubes. You are acting like there hasnt been gen1 sbc heads that flow more than 290cfm or camshafts with usable duration for as long as there has been tpi intakes filling wrecking yards. In testing of intakes by Automototune on a cams/headers gen3 coyote a ported gen3 intake made more peak power, peak torque and more power over 6700rpm compared to a CJ intake. Its not the length. A stock Gen3 coyote intake was better than a boss 302 intake EVERYWHERE and made peak power more than 400rpm later. Even the gen3 truck intake (longest runners of the test) made peak power 150rpm earlier than the CobraJet intake(shortest runners of the test). The stock truck intake makes peak power over 6400 in this test with intake runners five inches longer than a tpi intake. When is the last time you saw a tpi engine make peak power at 6400rpm? Watch any test you can find of a tpi intake on a flowbench bolted to a head and a stock production tpi intake. The intakes do not flow enough air to make more that about 400hp. They have insufficient and inconsistent taper. You can make more than 440hp with a cams/header on a l31 longblock and a RPM airgap. How many 440hp engines have you seen with stock tpi intake?
Really illustrates how much air doesn't like to turn. My guess on why it flowed worse when you had 1 hole lined up nice versus when the whole spacer was centered is that you actually had more open area overall with the spacer centered than with the one hole lined up. Just a guess.
An electrical engineer figured this out years ago. Flow works better when it swirls. His stock heads still holds nhra records today. Rip D Wink he was at engine masters challenge 2013
Awesome work and great info!! Have you done any testing or porting with Ford 4.6 2v heads? I'm about to home port stock 4.6 2v heads. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks!
What's your thoughts on the large plenum conversion from 417 motorsports that cuts the carb flange off and welds a larger elbow flange on. I was told it almost doubles the surface area opening.
It's about time someone did this! Always wondered now i know! 👍?what would happen if you drilled a hole in intake devider? Just a hole?
port blending is a good hp booster
Awesome video keep up the good work 👏 🙌 👍 👌
You would think since this manifold was probably designed in CAD they would have taken these issues into consideration. Especially for the money the end user spends on it.
Designing in CAD is like writing in Microsoft Word. It doesn't make it better. It just documents your work.
I run a nitrous motor and it will be cool to see how much a 90 degree nozzle effects air flow versus an annular nozzle? Is it worth the time welding bungs into the intake to recess the annular’s or just drill and tap for a 90° nozzle? Would be interesting to know. Thanks Eric, I have learned more from your videos about porting, valves, valve angle and cylinder heads than any book could ever teach we all really appreciate your time. Eddie wheels 😬🧑🏻🦽👍.
Id like to see those dividers cut back flush to the port opening to a nice inverted taper and see how much it flows then. I think those aero foiled spacers should be flat to flat with the carb and the foil pointing down?
It looks to me the more clear path to the port.would be from the rear barrel , not the front one just over the port, the divider seems to disturb the line of sight, you should design a intake manifold, there is ppl on TH-cam who cast things, with 3D printers, it should not be difficult to get one made to pull a mold from, make a couple fixtures, to make machining easier, a mill should be all that is needed to get the basic flanges milled and such, then do your porting magic! Either make a limited run here in the USA , or maybe get a Chinese foundry to cast the ship them semi raw, having a top plate that can be flipped over to go from 4150 to dominator would be cool, probably require a spacer for the 4150 carb to actually fit properly, linkage to clear, have your name embossed over the runner, it would look awesome!
Is it worth while to port the intake to the heads on a SC setup?
Anyone ever tried some kind of turning vane setup like used in ductwork?
What would happen if you also extend the dogbone in to the other ports?
Do you by chance have flow numbers for the intake factory vs ported "without being bolted to the head"? Curious what the differences were vs the numbers that you got bolted to the head.
Seems like a ported intake gives similar gains to a flowed head, which gave me an idea. Can you compare a stock head with a ported intake against a flowed head with a stock intake?
you may want to sum all the numbers as well. "power under the curve" that will show a difference per cylinder as well, that might be a little more explicit vs. looking a the table
Very easy to see ! If you know what you are looking for
Great info as always
that aint stupid,smokey yunick said the engine should be flow test intake to header flange piston in the hole to,and you should have all the valves in
If you check David Vizard Performance Channel it will explain some of results you got. The flow on the unported manifold to me appears to coming from the throttle throat diagonally opposite not the closest as the corner is to tight.
im sure he talks to vizard on speed talk forum probably lol these guys are all on there
Would working a sniper Jr be worth it.
If you could edit, flow all four ports on one bank atleast, then spray the intake , taking a snapshot from video, and stitch them together making an animation of the dye chem adding up in the intake, if you had time and patience, do all eight cylinders, stitch together in the firing order,. I don't know how to do it, just the idea to do it! This could tell a interesting story, if nothing else , it can be done with a film camera, and make a flip animation, showing the dye build up, then the order could be changed for firing order swaps, what, 4&7, 3&6? Last I was paying any real attention the 4&7 swap was getting popular,
Id like to build a slight radical flat plane engine, about 3.50" -3.80" 3.850" crank maybe use a 400 block, possibly build a balance shaft that can be added either machine the block at the filter side of the pan rail,try squeezing it in there, modified oil pan and timing cover, and damper, to allow a chain to spin the balance shaft, or put it in the valley above the cam, like the 4.3v6 and 3.8L, machine flats on the block below the deck, to allow some bearing blocks to be wedged inat least the ends and one center, then machined the front of the block to allow a chain drive and cover, possibly a custom timing cover using a spacer and flat cover, making a cam swap easy, no need to drop the pan, possibly machine the block down, with a hole, for the shaft pass through, maybe machine flats on the oil gallery, to allow tapping for oil to the bearings, with restrictions, probably use roller bearing, may as well tap and screen drain backs , and add vent tubes also. But while machining the block, and building a balance shaft, use the bearings a V6 bal shaft uses, fitted into an alum. Plate, that is wedged into the valley, and bolted impossible. Use a brace between the Bering mounts that can be used as pushrod guide plates aswell, or to bolt guides on to, that could be useful in a high rpm engine , with relatively small pushrods with the bracing bolding into the front and rear of the block, and into the bearing retainer, made from 1" plate aluminum, with a slot through them allowing the brace to fit, and bolt in with a 6mm bolt, and a dowel, probably a . 750" x 1.250" brace, with flats machined in the block front and rear, with a 6mm cone seat bolt, to flush fit, to not stand out on the outside of the block, and use lock tight, to seal the brace to the block, and the cone and threads, so it should not leak oil, use a tiny copper line to feed the oil into the bearing blocks, that would be tapped and passages drilled to feed the oil to the bearings, use the center bearing blocks as a tee, to fees the other bearings, if someone wanted, they could use the braces to feed the oil, then only a single line from block to brace to feed oil, the top of the bearing blocks should be flush with the deck, and left in place if decked, so the head intake port area can work as a secondary means to secure the bearing blocks, depending on the weight of the balance shaft, 2bearings can be enough, using 1.5" or 1.75" or even 2" steel bar, with the ends turned down to fit the bearings, and sprocket, the counter. Weight can be turned and or machined eccentric , possibly modifying the cam sprocket, making the mounting area thinner, only
.125" or less if possible, then machine a gear drive for the bal. shaft, (or sprocket and chain,) machine the block above the timing cover, then make a plate to make it flush with the timing cover, either brase or epoxy it in, with a bolt or two, then a spacer, the thickness of the timing cover, with the lip to fit in the oil pan to make the seal, then a o-ring cord seal groove in both sides of the spacer, with a load of .250" cone seat Allen bolts to fit a timing cover 3/16" -1/4" plate possibly weld in a thicker piece of aluminum to be machined to hold the front seal, wit the added area on top below the intake, possibly making a trapezoid shape, angle in from the water pump, then up to the intake base, an be flat across, I think it would look the part! Not really stand out, maybe the flat timing cover would be thick enough us use dowel pins along with the cone seat bolts, it should align properly each time reinstalled, probably add two dowl pins in the top about the water pump area! It should seal well using o-rings and o-ring cord, with the spacer being thick as possible and still clear the damper, placing the seal at the proper location, maybe machine it from a .500" plate alum. Weld the seal area thicker if required, then machine the thickness down and drill the bolt holes with the added 9-12 not all going into the block, 2-3 in the bottom at the oil pan, 7-9 above the water pump, if it were to go back to a cross plane crank, the cam swap, remove the bal. Shaft, plug the oil output, in the block, remove the bearing if needed, bit not required, leave the braces to keep the seal of the block, a new timing set, the only thing would be the new timing cover that stays with the block now,, the bearing blocks and braces may very slightly brace the block, basically a groove with an aluminum plate wedged in it, use epoxy to prevent movement, then braces bolted in on each end of the block, with similar grooves, using lock tight to glue/ seal them in, then as for a intake, I think I'd bet a fairly large single plane, and basically cut the top off it, and make a new one from wood, only to plenum area, make the wood fit the intake, then make it larger flaring out about 2" in all directions, possibly make a top bolt on to allow different carb options after the wood is shaped and fitted, smoothed, and sealed then cast it from aluminum welding it on the intake runners, possibly welding the runners thicker, near the new plenum, and weld the plenum thicker to match, smooth and shape it to look normal, the the runners have room to fit the new plenum better, allowing a dominator if it's wanted, with a custom top plate, what I'm thinking is a plate similar to the dominator plate, using a pair a 500 Holley 2bbls, mounted back to back, , being a flat plane crank, the top plate would have a divider plate hanging from it, filling nearly the whole plenum, being the engine is 2x 4 cylinder engines sharing a intake and crank, after the welding and grinding I'd glass bead the exterior hard to get a uniform look, maybe go to something a bit more harsh, wire brush, sand paper roll, then glass beads, then do some flow testing, to see how the divided plenum flows, maybe drill a couple 1" -1.5" holes in the divider, it can change the power curve, removing dips at certain RPM, or cause them, throughout the rev range, a Dyno test would be required to see exactly what it needs, maybe stat with none, add one small hole, see what it does, then another, if it's good,. Make them large if that's no good, replace the divider, a flat plane crank 4.155 bore, 3.5" stroke , (maybe upwards of 3.850") running 12:1 , 2.125"-1.55" about 50-54cc heads 250runners, roughly. 600" lift , 250° @ .050" all rough specs, with a 500 Holley per bank, 1:1 linkage, annular boosters, being a street engine maybe put a tiny heating coil in the intake floor, to heat a roughly 1.5" area to about 200° when cold to evaporate the fuel when cold, just a coil of wire like a old cook stove burner, hanging from a plate under the carb, pulling about 10amps, making about 120-140 watt heater, it can help re vaporize fuel when in normal use, wit it about
.100" off the floor, crazy idea, but diesel engines use thing like this, as long as it's keep below the fuels flash point,. Just hot enough to boil any fuel that gets on it, and be small enough to not heat the air excessively! Could be the next thing for street engines since chokes!
Could it be possible to try cutting the devider flange flush with the carb opening and sharpening the edge? There's also still a bit of extra material at the "short side" on that particular runner.
You almost took the words outta my mouth. I also would like to see the runner dividers cut back to the opening. Get them right out of the way. Yes the total runner length would likely be too short. But the gain in dry and wet airflow and fuel cloud quality would very likely make more average power anyways? I would not sharpen the remaining cut back divider walls but radius them all kinda like they are now. The problem with this is. Regardless of the flow bench results. All these ideas can only shpw gain or loss on a engine dyno. The flow bench on its own won't prove out what way makes more power.
Anyhow. To Eric. Great video. Super interesting as usual.👍
@@mohanperformance.enginerd.1308 blunt edge creates turbulence, where sharp egde keeps the flow laminar on wider area, that's my reasoning for the sharp divider. Sharp dividers have been proven working on 4-valve heads, although the difference being simultaenous flow on both sides of the divider. There could be a medium, perhaps? Sharp point but radius sides? This would give the runner a "velocystack" effect with minimal turbulence from the edge.
@@oikkuoek well,
I agree on a 4 valve. A sharp divider is likely best. As you mention the air on both sides of a 4 valve runner is directed toward the valve area. However, on a two valve engine. In a plenume. The air is not traveling toward the valve but more often in a violent chaotic hurricane. Some air as it swaps or washes around from one runner opening to another. Is dragged sidways across the sharpend divider. This almost always "IMO" creates turbulence right at the runner opening which you can imagine is a disaster. So If I understand you correctly. Then I would disagree. Radiused divider entries will almost always work best. This is a long ongoing debate. My cards are on a radius divider entry.
@@mohanperformance.enginerd.1308 You do have a point there. But I still have one but. When all the cylinders share the fuel delivery, and these deviders are casted to prevent the robbery from the cylinder next door, more runner lenght - more torque =more fuel mix ready behind the valve when it opens, a sharp devider would aim the upstream flow towards the carb, and less robbing the nearest cylinder, that is already suffering from the shorter runner, where blunt runner allows the robbery and decreases the cross section of the runner opening. On shared plenum, the optimal situation is laminar flow from the runner opening to the valve, and full turbulance at the shared section, to keep the air/fuel mixture even and flowing, to prevent condensing droplets forming.
@@oikkuoek your thinking is good. But in real life it does not work out. From my experiance in a plenume designed intake. Sharp edges rip the air to shreds and efectively close down the opening CSA they make less power every time. I have many hours testing in this area my self and so I can only tell you my results. But sharp edges are a deal killer! In a 4 valve. I also sharpen them like a knife. That is a application where it is benificial. But a v8 4 bbl intake with sharp edges will never work. Your right about what you are saying in regard to intake opening placement runner length and so on. But that is significantly overuled when the edges are sharp. Big no no IMO.
A 4 bbl intake. At best, is a series of comprimises anyways.
Those 99 cent store Flashlights 🔦 gotta Go!!!!😁🤣
I hope.
Eric your test springs are from WHO need to get a set thanks jb.
What retainer are you useing too?
I was going to ask if you have done this with a carb....
To me I don’t like the flanges in my manifold all 4 of those I would cut back so the air and fuel don’t have to fight there way around them so it will give them more of a straight run like my SB 454 Motown snd my 496 BB but mine are street cars
I have a version 1 Holley dominator carb for sale....it's listing number says it's a 750 cfm version....interested?
Did you block off the other runners oun the same bank?
The head stand does that.
Its probably not centered because the middle runners are shorter
So i read on speed talk that people like to have the manifold flow 15% or more than the heads flow? that sound right?
It’s not going to flow more than the heads attached to the head.
@@WeingartnerRacing I guess I meant to say that I've seen people fsay they flow the head at 280 on a bench let's say and the manifold by itself they want it to flow over 300 by itself so the total flow doesn't drop to far below what the head flows itself when combined
Does this sound correct?
What did the intake flow factory vs ported?
It’s at the end of the video.
I meant what did the intake itself flow factory vs ported "not attached" to the head? Just wanted to compare vs bolted to the head?
Doesn't 5 get robbed by 7 on a std firing order or 2 rob 4 on a 4-7 swap?
👍😎🇺🇸😁
Does forced induction throw all these numbers out the window? Or is it basically good flow flows even better with charge psi? ... Awesome work and great content. !
with forced induction you need good flow or you are compressing the charge in the manifold and runners which is generating heat for no benefit possibly causing early detonation
Just get a sheet metal dual carb intake.
It’s not elderbrock it’s ediblecock.
cut the runners out of a manifold lets see what happens
With the port going into reversion after .800 lift and the CFM gains above .700 lift not substantial enough to justify the energy required to run a stiff spring up there any higher, would this head/intake example suit a camshaft with lift somewhere in the .670-.690 range max ? ...or am I missing something ? Why do you refer to the peak AFTER the port reversion ?
He tests up to an inch because it can indicate stability. If you go up from .7 to .8 lift and flow goes down it tells you that something is going on in the port and is useful data even if youre only running a .680 lift cam.
18👍's up thanks for sharing
Why do people say eldebrock (2:53)? It's edelbrock.
find a new hobby
Why do you care
@@gullreefclub why do you care if I care🤣. I kinda wonder if people say it that way because its easier and they don't even realize they are doing it.
@@andy347495 why do people have boston accents and say lobsta?
EDELBROCK NOT ELDABROCK
Ok