It all goes back to Larry's initial post in this thread where on the first page of the article he posted it stated "flow quality is as important as flow quanity".
As already stated here, that statement is not new earth shaking news.
In the 2002 issue of Circle Track magazine Jim McFarland's tech article had this heading.... "Engine Airflow: More Than Just Numbers. Airflow quality can yield cost-effective performance gains."
Jim McFarland says, I recently asked a prominent engine builder, "What's the most frequent question you get when discussing cylinder heads with a customer?" His answer? "How much air will they flow or how many cc's are the ports?" Stop right here. Note, nothing was said about port shape, surface finish, airflow quality, cross section vs. torque range, combustion chamber shape, or any other characteristic of potential impact on optimizing power. Only "how much airflow" and "how big are the ports." What's implied is that more flow must mean the better when, in fact, both expectations can be misleading, if not wrong.
( 215 cc's is not too big for an honest street application and does not automaticly mean a high rpm "race" application. Some just like to step it up a bit )
Last edited by Steve C.; 03-18-2007 at 01:58 PM.
|