[mike leech]

Originally Posted by dci

To get this subject back on track. I think we should break the four cycles down into their own categories. Intake, Compression, Ignition(combustion), Exhaust. All four of these events have a bearing on Torque / Horsepower out put. How do all the different events effect each other if at all? How can we make each of them better? How can one help the other? Can a normally aspirated engine consume more more air than it's actual cubic inch? These are just a few questions we need to ponder.

Let's start with the induction cycle. Ask questions even if you think they stupid. In my opinion there are no stupid questions. Some of us may be at different knowledge and skill levels than others and that's okay. My objective is to educate everyone and someone out of left field may have an idea that no one else has thought of yet. Our brains are amazing computers and if challenged will find a solution. Some times it just takes a different perspective.

Good post Don. Its always a challenge to find a way to fill the cylinder better. Unfortunately the truth is the guys who are finding ways to do it really dont want to share either due to hard fought lessons and info or ridicule from self professed genius know it alls that have only read a website or copied what they think someone else did. Then claim its just physics as if fact and never learn a damn thing.

Its sad but the public gets drug into beleiving the crap as if fact and waste money. A fella can make a lot more power than they think with good parts and a good plan.

For instance hows a small 400 cfm head make 1175 hp at 8500 rpm on a 564? Everybody thinks they know yet there's almost no one doing it.

[JSPONT]

Mike is right on with the nobody shares there hard work. I just got schooled by a local guy to me who has a wet flow bench. He asked me not to share his secretes. There were so many things that I did not realize mattered, and some that I thought were so important that were not. I was shocked that even valves matter a bunch even ones that are the same size.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Good post Don. Its always a challenge to find a way to fill the cylinder better. Unfortunately the truth is the guys who are finding ways to do it really dont want to share either due to hard fought lessons and info or ridicule from self professed genius know it alls that have only read a website or copied what they think someone else did. Then claim its just physics as if fact and never learn a damn thing.

Its sad but the public gets drug into beleiving the crap as if fact and waste money. A fella can make a lot more power than they think with good parts and a good plan.

For instance hows a small 400 cfm head make 1175 hp at 8500 rpm on a 564? Everybody thinks they know yet there's almost no one doing it.

Mike,
Everything has to follow the laws of physics. What happens is sometimes people try to use the wrong laws.

While I do look at the 400 cfm a little funny. The word small is what really gets my attention. Care to share the MCSA.

Stan

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Everything has to follow the laws of physics. What happens is sometimes people try to use the wrong laws.

While I do look at the 400 cfm a little funny. The word small is what really gets my attention. Care to share the MCSA.

Stan

Stan you guys simply cannot just claim physics to back up your claims. It's not physics when there's no proof that it works. Or that it won't work. Hypothesis at best. You guys claimed over and over again coatings make more power and it's just physics. Bull crap. That's what you guys claim every time you can't prove what you think. No offense to you Stan.

And yes I will share the minimal cross-sectional area. Let me figure what it is currently

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Stan you guys simply cannot just claim physics to back up your claims. It's not physics when there's no proof that it works. Or that it won't work. Hypothesis at best. You guys claimed over and over again coatings make more power and it's just physics. Bull crap. That's what you guys claim every time you can't prove what you think. No offense to you Stan.

And yes I will share the minimal cross-sectional area. Let me figure what it is currently

Mike,
Glad to see you missed me.

Still quick with the keyboard diarrhea but slow with the Math. No wonder you do not like physics.

Still looking for where I stored your dyno sheet. Is this it?

Engine_Size_=__566.534_ci

Dyno_Barometric_Pressure_=_28.61_-_Dyno_Vapor_Pressure_=_0.3064_-_Dyno_Air_Temperature_=_70.0

_________________________________Fuel___________Un Corr__UnCorr_UnCorr_Correct___A/F
__RPM___Horse__Torque___BMEP____lb/hr_____BSFC______HP__Torque___BMEP__Factor__Ratio_ ___SCFM____VE%
_7800__1130.7___761.4__202.7___384.77____.3760__10 23.3___689.0__183.4__1.1050__12.50__1050.1___88.5
_7900__1138.2___756.7__201.4___394.96____.3830__10 31.2___685.6__182.5__1.1037__12.50__1077.9___89.7
_8000__1145.9___752.3__200.2___400.01____.3860__10 36.3___680.3__181.1__1.1058__12.50__1091.7___89.7
_8100__1151.8___746.8__198.8___406.54____.3900__10 42.4___675.9__179.9__1.1049__12.50__1109.6___90.0
_8200__1155.5___740.1__197.0___409.33____.3920__10 44.2___668.8__178.0__1.1066__12.50__1117.2___89.5
_8300__1157.3___732.3__194.9___413.59____.3960__10 44.4___660.9__175.9__1.1081__12.50__1128.8___89.4
_8400__1160.0___725.3__193.1___420.73____.4020__10 46.6___654.4__174.2__1.1083__12.50__1148.3___89.8
_8500__1156.6___714.7__190.2___424.48____.4070__10 42.9___644.4__171.5__1.1090__12.50__1158.5___89.6
_8600__1151.9___703.5__187.2___423.38____.4090__10 35.2___632.2__168.3__1.1128__12.50__1155.5___88.3
_8700__1143.3___690.2__183.7___418.73____.4080__10 26.3___619.6__164.9__1.1140__12.50__1142.8___86.3
AVG:
_8250__1149.1___732.3__194.9___409.65____.3949__10 37.3___661.1__176.0__________12.50__1118.1___89.1
MIN:
_7800__1130.7___690.2__183.7___384.77____.3760__10 23.3___619.6__164.9__________12.50__1050.1___86.3
MAX:
_8700__1160.0___761.4__202.7___424.48____.4090__10 46.6___689.0__183.4__________12.50__1158.5___90.0

Average_based_on_=_10_points

Have a Good Day!

Stan

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Glad to see you missed me.

Still quick with the keyboard diarrhea but slow with the Math. No wonder you do not like physics.

Still looking for where I stored your dyno sheet. Is this it?

Engine_Size_=__566.534_ci

Dyno_Barometric_Pressure_=_28.61_-_Dyno_Vapor_Pressure_=_0.3064_-_Dyno_Air_Temperature_=_70.0

_________________________________Fuel___________Un Corr__UnCorr_UnCorr_Correct___A/F
__RPM___Horse__Torque___BMEP____lb/hr_____BSFC______HP__Torque___BMEP__Factor__Ratio_ ___SCFM____VE%
_7800__1130.7___761.4__202.7___384.77____.3760__10 23.3___689.0__183.4__1.1050__12.50__1050.1___88.5
_7900__1138.2___756.7__201.4___394.96____.3830__10 31.2___685.6__182.5__1.1037__12.50__1077.9___89.7
_8000__1145.9___752.3__200.2___400.01____.3860__10 36.3___680.3__181.1__1.1058__12.50__1091.7___89.7
_8100__1151.8___746.8__198.8___406.54____.3900__10 42.4___675.9__179.9__1.1049__12.50__1109.6___90.0
_8200__1155.5___740.1__197.0___409.33____.3920__10 44.2___668.8__178.0__1.1066__12.50__1117.2___89.5
_8300__1157.3___732.3__194.9___413.59____.3960__10 44.4___660.9__175.9__1.1081__12.50__1128.8___89.4
_8400__1160.0___725.3__193.1___420.73____.4020__10 46.6___654.4__174.2__1.1083__12.50__1148.3___89.8
_8500__1156.6___714.7__190.2___424.48____.4070__10 42.9___644.4__171.5__1.1090__12.50__1158.5___89.6
_8600__1151.9___703.5__187.2___423.38____.4090__10 35.2___632.2__168.3__1.1128__12.50__1155.5___88.3
_8700__1143.3___690.2__183.7___418.73____.4080__10 26.3___619.6__164.9__1.1140__12.50__1142.8___86.3
AVG:
_8250__1149.1___732.3__194.9___409.65____.3949__10 37.3___661.1__176.0__________12.50__1118.1___89.1
MIN:
_7800__1130.7___690.2__183.7___384.77____.3760__10 23.3___619.6__164.9__________12.50__1050.1___86.3
MAX:
_8700__1160.0___761.4__202.7___424.48____.4090__10 46.6___689.0__183.4__________12.50__1158.5___90.0

Average_based_on_=_10_points

Have a Good Day!

Stan

No that is not it cubic inches wrong. I'm pretty sure the rest of it is too

So fool. Tell me all about those coatings and I'll much horsepower they're worth again. So it should be really easy for you to explain to all of us dummies

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

No that is not it cubic inches wrong. I'm pretty sure the rest of it is too

So fool. Tell me all about those coatings and I'll much horsepower they're worth again. So it should be really easy for you to explain to all of us dummies

Mike,
Maybe I should have addressed that questions to John, he seems to know more about your dyno sheets than you do.

I would not have placed you in that group, but now that you have placed yourself there who am I to argue with you.

Stan

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Maybe I should have addressed that questions to John, he seems to know more about your dyno sheets than you do.

I would not have placed you in that group, but now that you have placed yourself there who am I to argue with you.

Stan

Lol. Listen up phuctard. You go trolling around the internet coping and pasting all kinds of crap and you think that makes you a genius. You are anything but. You think you have mastered physics yet have accomplished NOTHING but a bromance with another calculator queer. You have never faced the fact that your ideas are only that. The truth is you are obssesed with being precieved as a genius because your intellect is not up to your own standards. FACT

John may well know more about my sheets than i think he does. But he does not care about anything I do and therefore puts almost no thought in it outside the displays about him not caring.

I'm sure you both think we just keep making more power because we are lucky and have no clue at all how or what to do and just make some knee jerk choice and get lucky over and over.....right? Because johns engine builder skewed my Dyno results to try and make me look better? Or him worse? Really???? You guys think uncle tony would do that???? Thats the dumbest thing ive ever heard out of.

Yea we are just knuckle draggers that get lucky. Never thought of physics. Hell we can't even pronounce it. Besides we hated gym class.....Right

We made 1067, 1137,1172, and more than that by about the same improvement. And will improve again. All luck and stretching dynos though.

RIGHT?????

[JSPONT]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Everything has to follow the laws of physics. What happens is sometimes people try to use the wrong laws.

While I do look at the 400 cfm a little funny. The word small is what really gets my attention. Care to share the MCSA.

Stan

Stan, there is the law of physics, but the problem is when you take and intake and head with different textures, add it to a pump(engine) add a carb and fuel then air, swirl, spark, combustion chambers....... it would be impossible to really nail down exactly what is going on. With a flow bench you can watch air flow, add a wet flow bench then you realize there are so many factors involved it is mind boggling. Valve angles, valve shapes matter.
Physics will get you close but nothing like real world testing. Just like the texture issue in intake runners and heads, might not mean as much as you think when you add fuel to the air flow.
Don't get me wrong, Physics always give a good base, real world gets these top guys to the top.

[johnta1]

Forget the 'physics'.

Report the real world data.

For example, in your post you act like the textured heads won't work.

Any real world data?
(one way or the other)

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by JSPONT

Stan, there is the law of physics, but the problem is when you take and intake and head with different textures, add it to a pump(engine) add a carb and fuel then air, swirl, spark, combustion chambers....... it would be impossible to really nail down exactly what is going on. With a flow bench you can watch air flow, add a wet flow bench then you realize there are so many factors involved it is mind boggling. Valve angles, valve shapes matter.
Physics will get you close but nothing like real world testing. Just like the texture issue in intake runners and heads, might not mean as much as you think when you add fuel to the air flow.
Don't get me wrong, Physics always give a good base, real world gets these top guys to the top.

The laws of physics show them self in many ways. Next time you talk with your local air flow expert. Ask him if he has ever changed a ports design because it did not sound right?

Stan

[Half-Inch Stud]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

The laws of physics show them self in many ways. Next time you talk with your local air flow expert. Ask him if he has ever changed a ports design because it did not sound right? Stan

Well seems we've gone on in a proper direction.

[JSPONT]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

The laws of physics show them self in many ways. Next time you talk with your local air flow expert. Ask him if he has ever changed a ports design because it did not sound right?

Stan

Stan the guy I am referring to has raised ceilings, port angles, filled combustion chambers, taken cc away, changed shapes took 18 degree heads make them 10 degree all in the name of testing and seeing what these changes do. He finds out what works and what does not, even how texture effects intakes, and heads..

Sitting behind a keyboard and guessing or getting close does not count, only in horseshoes and hand grenades.

I might have him join the Pontiac community and shake things up a bit. I don't think he would bother thought. He does hands on stuff 12 hrs per day.

[JSPONT]

By the way I am done with this because I just noticed the thread title. Lets bring it back on track, sorry.