[PAUL K]

Anyone know what Don is talking about?

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Anyone know what Don is talking about?

Not sure, But why would anyone of us not believe in what Don is doing ?
But Don is going to make a RAII head ? Nice.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

Not sure, But why would anyone of us not believe in what Don is doing ?
But Don is going to make a RAII head ? Nice.

Maybe because his stated valve sizes and offsets won't work with the vast majority of existing pistons?


He just posted that a stock RAIV head flows 200 CFM on the intake side and 180 on the exhaust.. You going to question that or roll with it?

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

McCarthy's published data from 1991 HPP magazine test was
@.700 lift = 200cfm intake / 165 exhaust on a pair of 1970 #614 IV's

Wallace's site has footnote to use correction factor of 1.37 for 28" of water.
That would be around 275cfm intake and 225cfm exh

Usually I see people say 220-230 cfm intake approximate on IV's
No idea who is right

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

Also from McCarthy test
@.500 lift = 200cfm intake and 150cfm exhaust.


PY member just did a faithful stock spec type rebuild on a 70 IV for a real IV TA resto.
Made 398 HP on a dyno through manifolds.
The 200cfm number doesn't seem too far off on a 400hp engine.
with a cup of coffee and a donut.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Baron Von Zeppelin

Also from McCarthy test
@.500 lift = 200cfm intake and 150cfm exhaust.


PY member just did a faithful stock spec type rebuild on a 70 IV for a real IV TA resto.
Made 398 HP on a dyno through manifolds.
The 200cfm number doesn't seem too far off on a 400hp engine.
with a cup of coffee and a donut.

Pete's numbers were consistently accurate printed in HPP. He did us all a huge favor. The specified numbers are difficult to compare to any other flow tests due to an issue with the equipment.

Pete's numbers 200/150 show a 75% intake to exhaust ratio. That pretty close to other stock RAIV flow tests.

Don's 200/180 shows a 90% I/E ratio ..... Something is askew with Don's numbers..... It raises a flag. Not saying they're not accurate but for some reason the intake flow is extremely low, or the exhaust high. More information is needed.

398 HP seems like legitimate numbers. Your 200 CFM number is most likely coming from total flow through the induction system. That usually needs to be considered on a street build since the the port is usually not the most restricted part of the intake tract.

SuperFlow offers this equation to estimate power; induction system total CFM @ 28" x .598 x .43 x the number of cylinders. If you plug in your 200 CFM number I think your close to the 398 number.... With headers he'd probably be right there.


PONTIAC'STTFMF's!!!

[Steve C.]

"My head flows more rats than your head"

A tid bit for interest, and one that relates to Paul's comment....

" The specified numbers are difficult to compare to any other flow tests due to an issue with the equipment."

The issue was a mouse nest, or rats nest depending on the story, that was inside Jerry Goodale's flow bench at the time of Pete's cylinder head testing.
Unknown at the time it affected the flow numbers. That said, If the nest was in there for the duration, then the numbers were at least relative to each other.


.

[Steve C.]

http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcdchg.php

Airflow Conversion Chart
https://centuryperformance.com/tech-...version-chart/


"All testing was done at 12 inches Hg, and airflow figures were taken at valve lift increments of .100 up to .600 inch (higher in some instances)"

http://www.wallaceracing.com/ultimat...oogle_vignette



.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Maybe because his stated valve sizes and offsets won't work with the vast majority of existing pistons?


He just posted that a stock RAIV head flows 200 CFM on the intake side and 180 on the exhaust.. You going to question that or roll with it?

It does all seem to be a little strange.
Plenty of Pontiac folk have balked at just buying round port headers to run E heads so there is reason think many more will have a problem with pistons. Much bigger deal.
Pontiac guys do not have a reputation for throwing money around.

[b-man]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Anyone know what Don is talking about?

Maybe he should come on here and answer legitimate concerns about if the valve spacing, location and diameter will affect the ability of potential buyers to bolt them into an already built shortblock with common off the shelf Ross or whatever brand popular flattop forged pistons. That’s probably half of his potential customers right there.

Basing his opinions about the PY forum members comments and opinions on his new offerings using information from second or third hand sources and then criticizing the PY forum community for expressing their opinions and concerns might not be the best approach.

My only criticism was they’re not going to look enough like a factory head for those who are looking for heads that closely match the look of OEM Pontiac heads. Not saying they’re not a good product in any way.

People who were hopeful that they’d look like real RAII or RAIV heads or whatever D-port flavor they’re interested in aren’t ever going to get what they’ve been wishing for. It’s easy to understand that nobody is going to the expense to make different molds for each particular head, there’s no profit in that clearly.

You have guys here thinking somehow that they’d have to be priced substantially below the current aluminum offerings from KRE or Edelbrock. Ain’t gonna happen guys, simple economics. So there goes that pool of potential customers who weren’t the target to begin with.

Again I’m sure they’ll be a well engineered part and an asset to the hobby.

Just because people have legitimate questions and concerns or share their opinions good or bad about a new product doesn’t make them haters.

[J.C.you]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Anyone know what Don is talking about?

I believe it’s the valve placement deal and nit picking like old women.

Give the guy some credit, he’s already brought two heads to the Pontiac market with success.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by J.C.you

I believe it’s the valve placement deal and nit picking like old women.

Give the guy some credit, he’s already brought two heads to the Pontiac market with success.

Thanks JC .... Not sure it's nit picking or if that makes one a hater. I'd bet he makes changes and designs the heads so they'll work with production pistons.

If he does, do the old ladies get royalty checks .... Or just a "thank you"

[J.C.you]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Thanks JC .... Not sure it's nit picking or if that makes one a hater. I'd bet he makes changes and designs the heads so they'll work with production pistons.

If he does, do the old ladies get royalty checks .... Or just a "thank you"

Define “production pistons “ are you talking about oem stock pistons?

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by J.C.you

Define “production pistons “ are you talking about oem stock pistons?

Any "shelf" style piston such as Icon, TRW, Sealed Power, Keith Black, Auto-Tec, DSS, Wiseco, Diamond, CP Bullet, JBP/Ross.

A good number of these pistons will not allow the use of a 1.77 valve in an Edelbrock RPM head or Kaufman Hi-port. They're designed for factory valve spacing and 2.11/1.77 valves. Some of them might accept a 2.20 valve but things are going get real close when one uses a 2.19 valve and starts moving it around.


I posted a picture of what had to be removed from a valve pocket on an aftermarket piston designed for a Edelbrock head using a 2.1250 valve. It shows the amount of material needed to allow for a 2.18 valve offset .050.
.

[J.C.you]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Any "shelf" style piston such as Icon, TRW, Sealed Power, Keith Black, Auto-Tec, DSS, Wiseco, Diamond, CP Bullet, JBP/Ross.

A good number of these pistons will not allow the use of a 1.77 valve in an Edelbrock RPM head or Kaufman Hi-port. They're designed for factory valve spacing and 2.11/1.77 valves. Some of them might accept a 2.20 valve but things are going get real close when one uses a 2.19 valve and starts moving it around.


I posted a picture of what had to be removed from a valve pocket on an aftermarket piston designed for a Edelbrock head using a 2.1250 valve. It shows the amount of material needed to allow for a 2.18 valve offset .050.
.

It’s called hot rodding 101. Nit picking in my opinion. That type stuff is minor. Cleaning up a valve pocket.
If I wanted a set of faux pas aluminum 48s for instance to get 75-100 more hp out of my combo making a 2 gram cut on a valve relief wouldn’t nix my decision to buy the aluminum 48s. It’s not like having to install new pistons and rebalance.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by J.C.you

It’s called hot rodding 101. Nit picking in my opinion. That type stuff is minor. Cleaning up a valve pocket.
If I wanted a set of faux pas aluminum 48s for instance to get 75-100 more hp out of my combo making a 2 gram cut on a valve relief wouldn’t nix my decision to buy the aluminum 48s. It’s not like having to install new pistons and rebalance.

Good to know how you feel. I think most potential buyers of these heads would prefer a direct bolt on. My opinion, the more resistance it takes to complete a project lessons the chance of the project getting done. You end up with a shop full of stalled projects and have very few achievements to hang ones hat on.

I'm still betting this "nit picking" gets Don to make changes to his original plans and the heads are produced as a bolt on.

Hopefully some others will share their opinions and thoughts whether they'd prefer a bolt on head or something that makes ten more horsepower and requires piston modifications.